Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Friday Line: The Best Speeches

Schweitzer, Thompson, Obama, Clinton, Palin

Stemwinding their way through the conventions: Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, former president Bill Clinton, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

ST. PAUL -- After 13 straight days on the road, The Fix is headed back to Washington today to celebrate the end of the two parties' national conventions and the hot start of the Catholic University field hockey team.

Friday Line

But, if it's Friday...well, you know the rest. And since we have spent the last two weeks reading, watching and analyzing dozens of speeches by scads of politicians, we thought a Line dedicated to the best of these addresses would make for good fodder for this Friday.

Our take on the five best speeches are below. Agree with our rankings? Disagree? The comments section is open for business.

One sidenote: The Fix will be taking it very slowly for the next few days after a whirlwind fortnight of political conventions. Thanks so much for your participation, observations and food recommendations over these last few weeks. It has been a blast.

And now, without further ado, to the Line!

5. Brian Schweitzer (DNC): For those of us who have known the Montana governor since he was a just a peppermint farmer back in 2000, his rip-roaring address in Denver was no surprise. But, if this was your first exposure to Schweitzer, then you almost certainly came away both impressed and energized. Schweitzer has a future in national politics -- his second gubernatorial term is up in 2010 would be up in 2012 -- and his speech is sure to win him a special place in the heart of many Democratic activists. The challenge for Schweitzer between now and then: find ways to modulate his cheerleader image into more of a statesman role. Voters don't elect cheerleaders president.

4. Fred Thompson (RNC): Just when you give up on the big man from Tennessee, he comes along and totally redeems himself. Thompson, without question the biggest disappointment of this presidential season, came out on fire Tuesday night -- and stayed that way throughout the speech. While Thompson delivered his fair share of southern aphorisms (and The Fix is a sucker for those sort of "dog won't hunt" sayings) he also showed a serious side when retelling the story of John McCain's imprisonment in Vietnam. It was a powerful and emotional narrative that fit perfectly with Thompson's deep baritone and acting chops. Could he have re-reignited talk of his presence one day on a national ticket?

3. Barack Obama (DNC): Obama approached his acceptance speech last Thursday night with almost impossibly high expectations; he was being touted as the greatest political orator since, well, ever, and the crowd of more than 80,000 at Invesco Field was ready for history. Obama, as he has done again and again in this campaign, managed to deliver, with a speech focused more on policy specifics than soaring rhetoric. Given criticism from McCain's campaign that Obama was a gifted speaker but little else, it's hard not to conclude that the Illinois senator purposely avoided the long passages of eloquence and symbolism that characterized his 2004 keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention. This was a more workman-like but no less effective address.

2. Bill Clinton (DNC): The Fix has a soft spot for the rhetorical gifts of the former president of the United States. When Bill Clinton took the stage in Denver last Wednesday, almost no one knew what he would say about Obama or how he would say it. (Clinton, as is typical, didn't release the full speech to reporters until moments before it was delivered.) Clinton has made no secret of his displeasure with both his speaking slot and the subject -- foreign policy -- of his address. But, the former president is a man who has shown his ability to put everything aside when he speaks and he did it again last week. Clinton's unique gift as an orator is the ability to sense -- in real time -- the mood of the audience and adjust his speech accordingly. The crowd listened enraptured as Clinton defended his eight years in the White House, lauded his wife's candidacy and emphatically endorsed Obama as the heir to his political legacy. Stunning.

1. Sarah Palin (RNC): Maybe it was the low expectations that greeted the Alaska governor when she took the stage on Wednesday night. Maybe it was the newness and fresh faced appeal she exhibited in the biggest moment of her short career as McCain's vice presidential pick. Maybe it was her ad lib that the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull was lipstick. But, whatever it was, Palin's speech managed to do two things that many thought were impossible: energize the conservative base and make believers out of her doubters in the Republican political professional class and the media. It ensured that for the next week -- and likely longer -- she would be THE story in the presidential race, the hottest thing on the campaign circuit since a fast rising Illinois senator named Barack Obama. It also cemented the fact that Palin is no Dan Quayle or Tom Eagleton -- an important milestone given the struggles involved in introducing her to the general public earlier this week. Palin established herself as a serious politician and America's sweetheart all in the space of a 35-minute speech. That's an impressive feat.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 5, 2008; 7:00 AM ET
Categories:  The Line  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McCain's Speech: How Did He Do?
Next: Milbank, the Eastern Media Elite and a Fix Cameo

Comments

I totally disagree with your choice of Sarah Palin as the leading speechmaker of the week. She may have energized the RNC with her finely timed jabs and condescending posture, but beware! A pit bull is a pit bull, with or without lipstick. Although it can be raised to be gentle and loving, it can also be trained to go for the jugular. The McCain-Palin handlers are doing the latter. However, the concern about a pit bull is always the same: When will it turn to bite the hand that feeds it?

Posted by: lindaj | September 9, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Is this some kind of joke?! Obama gives not only a rousing but also detailed policy speech (something people in the media have been accusing him of not giving) and he comes in after Sarah Palin who not only didn't say anything about policy but just had a bunch of one liners? Yeah great....we have a woman who can read a speech written for her. Obama writes his speeches! And he also took on the Republicans in every attack they have ever labeled against democrats. I don't get this fixation with Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Matt | September 8, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

"I am sure that if Obama loses in November that black people will take to the streets looting, killing, and burning. Yet again they will claim to be victims of the system. So sad... They will never get past that mentality from 200 years ago."
-Dianne72

Does this P.O.S. actually believe this, or is she trying to be funny? Since when did every black person have the same "mentality"? Also, the last time I checked, no one that was around in the 1800's is still around today.

Lastly, why would anyone disrespect their vote for Obama by burning something or killing someone? I don't get this logic. It defies human decency and the entire message of Barack Obama.

The ignorance of many people...

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

I have listened to several of her speeches , seems like the same thing , how John McSenile was a POW. Please tell me while she is speaking why is he always looking down, AT WHAT? Hope Cindy don't catch him.
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Connie:

Did Sarah Palin lie? No. Both Tom Brokow and Joe Biden admitted this morning that she gave a "very impressive" speech -- Biden said her "community organizer" remark "was a great line" -- no doubt she gave a top five speech. "Look, she's a smart, tough politician. So, I think she's going to be very formidable." Biden hasn't met her, but you aren't trashing him.

Did anyone else see MTP? What's wrong with Biden's right eye?

Posted by: JakeD | September 7, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

The Friday Line: The Best Speeches

With all due respect Obama had a more substance speech with directions incoorperated as to how he would actually benefit the real concerns of this country. Bill spoke well in regards to Obama and his readiness and capability to perform the duties of our commander in chief. Kennedy laid down some very informative info in regards to the making of democracy in which Obama is the best elect in mind to make democracy manifest. Palin appeared to be a robot actor reading her script with implied behaviour and attitude, no substance in her words. Palin's writer appeared to have did great research on yesterday's politics to arrive with such a speech for her. And the other guy, oh well, he appeared to have been in it to win it, but needs to get it right or get out of sight. The DNC had the most ultimate and realist convention that I have ever seen in my fifty something years. The RNC was a series of reruns of a parade of McCain's past and present life for the hundreth time, I just turned it off and a host of drama. God Bless America! OBAMA 08!

Posted by: Nisey01 | September 7, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

HRC apparently was not serious about campaigning for Obama. But we knew that.

AP reports she is refusing to address Palin issues. If this election doesn't go O's way, we hope O's 100 million supporters remember this HRC sabotage in 2012. The reporting is HRC, and the 18 or so harpies and mentals who follow her, continue to believe if O loses, she can win in 2012 so she's rooting against him, allegedly.

"NEW YORK (AP) - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton marched for labor and stumped with Democrats on Saturday, but sidestepped questions about the woman who has taken her place as the nation's most-talked-about female leader."


Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Here you go JakeD you want me to answer the topic question all of the speeches by the repubs were bullsh-t.Most of them had not even met Palin , but were singing her praises,apparent lairs. John McSenile stated she sold the state plane on e-bay and made a profit, then smiled another big lie.So when you stand there and criticize and mock others and lie , that is more of the same from the Bush administration.
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

one of the angry left:

Your question seems a bit far afield from Friday's Line: Best Speeches.

Posted by: JakeD | September 7, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McSenile got that many viewers to see the outfit Cindy was wearing to see if it topped the 300,00.00 dollar outfit she wore while she and Mrs. Bush were asking for donation to hurricane victims. Wonder why she did not wear an old fit and donate that money???
McSenile and his wife are both out of touch. Connie from"Blue"Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Speeches ratings:

1. Obama
2. Wm. J. Clinton
3. Mrs. Todd Palin (it was Sandra Bullock in "Ms. Congeniality," but the media bought it)
4. - 45. Whatever

Palin is refusing all news interviews. Don't let anyone tell you differently. For a vp candidate to do this is unprecedented in the history of presidential politics. For the press to allow it is shameful.

Huffington Post reports (the MSM have decided to sit this election out) the following:

"A John McCain campaign aide tells Jay Carney that she sees no reason why Sarah Palin should have to answer reporters' queries:

According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

New Palin story, this from the UK's Guardian (through a Drudge link). If the UK is reporting this, why isn't the Washington Post? --

"As Palin's lawyer fights aggressively to contain one forest fire, another appears to be flaring up. New allegations have surfaced that potentially criminal acts were committed in snooping into Wooten's personal employment files. A taped telephone conversation between one of Palin's staff and a senior manager in the police department, in which complaints were made about Wooten, suggested that he had lied on an official form claiming compensation for injury at work. Wooten's union, the Public Safety Employees Association, has issued its own legal proceedings that allege such information could only have been obtained in breach of the trooper's right to confidentiality - a potential crime."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: If you were all in to the ballgame. Who won the game? Sounds like a right-wing story to me. Jake why did the repubs show a video of a solders funeral with actors? Talk about low life, I am sure you diners watched that. Connie from "blue" Indiana"
------------------------
Heck, could someone tell me WHY the background graphic featured a photo of my old secondary school Walter Reed Jr. High in beautiful North Hollywood CA?

For the non kool-aid sipping viewer, the Repug's Convention came off as a load of Cheap Parlor tricks replete with second rate, one joke stand-up comics. The Only tricks missing were Rudy Guliani in full drag (which seems to be a hobby of his), and Mrs. Palin in a wolf's fur bikini.

Posted by: one_of_the_angry-left | September 7, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I never claimed to be in to the ballgame, so I have no idea who won -- we were eating, but I laughed when the TV was changed -- I was simply refuting LE's claim that "the world could not avert its eyes" from Obama' acceptance speech. More people DID avert their eyes than watch it Regardlesd, you are aware that McCain got more TV viewers, and Palin got almost as many, as Obama?

Posted by: JakeD | September 7, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: If you were all in to the ballgame. Who won the game? Sounds like a right-wing story to me. Jake why did the repubs show a video of a solders funeral with actors? Talk about low life, I am sure you diners watched that. Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Well I think for those who like the way the country is going now vote for McSenile and the pit bull. McSenile equals Bush , Palin equals Cheney. Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

We need to check out your site. The Post and the MSM are not reporting on anything.

By the way we forgot to mention Palin's membership in a party which supports Alaska seceding from the Union under the banner of "states' rights." Where have we heard that before? How crazy is that?

And there's her lifelong support of former Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan. The web page of the well-respected Anti Defamation League (which fights against antisemitism and racism) devotes more space to Buchanan than any other person...except one (Hint: he died 63 years ago). Buchanan's documented views, which are never ever referenced on the cable bloviator shows on which he appears, are terrifying.

Question for the Post and the MSM: Why hasn't Palin been asked to disavow the secession party and Mr. Buchanan just as O was asked -- non-stop for three months -- to disavow, shun, disown a whole litany of people he has met in his life (Wright, Resko, the mailman, the grocer, etc.) but didn't agree with?
______
Huckabee, Clinton, then Sarah Palin gave best speeches and in that order too., WEll Hillary was Probably better then Sarah. Obama was probably better then Sarah too>?? hmm. It wouldnt change my opionion though, I think Sarah Palin Should be the GOP nominee., not McCain. The Republicans are much more excited about palin then mccain., The new most famous person in the world.

This site has the inside scoop about the Palin Dui Secret, http://www.duihelpguide.com Why hasnt the news covered this?

This site has background info on sarah Palin Bio, Pics, Videos, Alot of Polls like how many people actually think that she is attractive? http://www.theveep.com

This site has everything about her scandals, Levi the Boy Friend, what really happen with ebay plane. http://www.hotpres.com


Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 11:02 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee, Clinton, then Sarah Palin gave best speeches and in that order too., WEll Hillary was Probably better then Sarah. Obama was probably better then Sarah too>?? hmm. It wouldnt change my opionion though, I think Sarah Palin Should be the GOP nominee., not McCain. The Republicans are much more excited about palin then mccain., The new most famous person in the world.

This site has the inside scoop about the Palin Dui Secret, http://www.duihelpguide.com Why hasnt the news covered this?

This site has background info on sarah Palin Bio, Pics, Videos, Alot of Polls like how many people actually think that she is attractive? http://www.theveep.com

This site has everything about her scandals, Levi the Boy Friend, what really happen with ebay plane. http://www.hotpres.com

Posted by: Anonymous | September 7, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a nasty, deceitful, unqualified embarrassment. She is less qualified that Quayle. The difference is that in 2008 the radical right-wing has a much better cheering section, and that has skewed the mainstream perception of reality. Class and cultural resentment are the politics of yesterday, and that is what Obama is trying to fight.

The blue-staters are not the enemy. We are all Americans.

Posted by: DS | September 7, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Palin's strategy of intimidating the press has apparently worked. Give her credit.

This morning's Post features a front-page, magazine-length puff piece about Palin's family life that could have been written by Mrs. P herself.

The Post conveniently dodges every single pending controversy about Palin.

The "Breakwater-gate" baby hoax is dismissed as a tabloid "rumor" that Alaskans don't believe. Journalism 101: it is not a rumor when all the circumstantial evidence (it's too lengthy to recite) indicates it was a hoax (and Palin has not pushed back, as she easily could have if it were a hoax, with, for example, a statement from the hospital or attending doctor, medical records). One FAX of such information would have put the so-called "rumor" to bed. Further, Alaskans evidently don't believe her because they are the source of the information exposing the hoax.

No mention in the article of the [alleged] strong-arming of the young man to get married (after he had publicly declared he wasn't going to get married (what changed his mind all of a sudden?)).

No mention of Troopergate except for an idiotic blurb suggesting the probe (instituted by members of her own party in the state legislature) was politically motivated. What?????? No mention of the ongoing intense efforts to stall or sidetrack the investigation of Troopergate. Or the impending issuance of subpoenas because the witnesses are stonewalling. The kind of abuse of power alleged here against Palin is similar to that which led to two felony convictions in the case of the notorious Kwame "Big Boy" Kilpatrick in Detroit. Like Palin [allegedly], he got subordinates fired for personal reasons.

No mention of the fact that the harshest criticism of her has come from the State Senate leader and the Speaker of the State House in Alaska, both of whom consider her completely unqualified to be Governor, much less vp.

No inquiry into the nature of the past "relationship" between Palin and her husband's business partner, something that caused Mr. P and the partner to break up their business [allegedly].

And no mention of Palin's announced refusal to appear on any legitimate news show to be interviewed. She tried to bully her way onto to Oprah for a soft interview but the Big O said no dice. [Good for you, Big O, but throw in a salad now and then, okay?]

The Post is the Washington paper of record [allegedly], just as the NY Times is the national paper of record. What we read today, Mr. Vick (the writer of the puff), wasn't reportin', just typin'.

A Shame.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | September 7, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

LE:

Hardly (at least not here in San Diego). We were at a restaurant when Obama was giving his acceptance speech. Someone turned the TV to the ballgame ; )

Sounds like you've been drinking too much Kool-aid.

Posted by: JakeD | September 7, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

I thought Obama was going to recover for America the respect of the world?

Daily Telegraph 9/5/08
John McCain offered Republicans vision rooted in reality, not Barack Obama's empty promises
By Simon Heffer-


"As the thousands of red, white and blue balloons, the tinsel and the tickertape descended from the rafters on the Republican convention moments after John McCain had finished addressing it, I at last worked out what had been the key difference between this event and the Democratic beano the week before.

Brassneck: John McCain to fight, whilst Barack Obama promises
Eagle Eye: The five reasons why John McCain had a good convention
Janet Daley: John McCain tells his story
The Democrats have a world view based (as Dr Johnson might have put it) on the triumph of hope over experience. The Republicans’ is rooted firmly in reality.


Republicans were given a real vision for the future of America, not empty promises

In Denver, speaker after speaker lauded and coddled one minority group after another and promised the largesse of the American taxpayer would alleviate their misery. In St Paul the message was about all Americans pulling together, getting government out of their lives, and making everyone richer and happier as a result.

When Mr McCain spoke, the faithful were still galvanised and awe-struck by the performance of his remarkable running-mate 24 hours earlier. In that sense anything he could say or do was bound to be an anti-climax. Yet his steady, measured, statesmanlike speech was the perfect complement to her benign but startling demagoguery.

Read more by Simon Heffer
Thus is the flavour of the next two months established. She will eat their opponents alive; he will be there to explain from the apparently limitless fount of his wisdom what will be done on the tree-strewn road ahead. It is a horrible cliché, but of the two men aiming for the White House, Mr McCain has more of the demeanour of a president.

This is nothing to do with his white hair, still less his white skin: it is everything to do with his gravitas and his record.

Some of us thought, and hoped, that he would win the nomination in 2000 over the manifestly inferior George W Bush. The qualities he had then are the same ones that give him the edge over his opponent now: a “story”, to use the campaign’s favourite word, of genuine heroism, service and leadership; coupled with what are now the first signs of a grasp of what it is possible to do to right America’s economic wrongs without first making them considerably worse.

Mr McCain has been on Capitol Hill for 26 years. He not only knows how the system works, he actively despises it and wants to reform it. He brings immense wisdom and good judgment to the table. It is that, rather than a beauty contest based on some celebrity X-factor, that should decide the election on November 4.

In his speech to the delegates in St Paul Mr McCain dealt only in the broad brush. In this, he was rather like Mr Obama in the Broncos’ stadium at Denver a week earlier. But unlike Mr Obama, Mr McCain littered his broad brush with odd moments of detail, and clear statements of vital principle. His delivery may have lacked the charisma and sonority of his opponent’s, but what he delivered will have connected with tens of millions of Americans, consolidating the shock of the new imposed on them the previous evening by Sarah Palin.

The biggest gap remains his economic programme: he cannot much longer delay explaining how he is going to cut spending, cut the deficit, and provide the tax cuts he promises.

No-one deserves to get a job on Buggin’s turn, or on the basis that he or she has been in the queue for it the longest; but that is not what qualifies Mr McCain for the White House. He drew attention to the most important fact about modern life: not the global economic convulsion, from which America has in the last fortnight started to show the first faint signs of recovery, but the fact that the world is a dangerous place, and getting more so. Mr Obama doesn’t know where to start on this, and the claims made for his good ol’ boy running mate Joe Biden being an expert on foreign policy are charitable to say the least.

In the next eight weeks Mr McCain needs to hammer home the perils to western civilisation not just of Islamic extremism but also of a new Cold War and a restless China. He made a good start yesterday, but this notoriously inward-looking country still needs more of a wake-up call. His television debates with Mr Obama, starting later this month, will be crucial in what must be his strategy of trumping charm and effortless superiority with raw experience.

The convention was a comparatively sober affair, not simply because of the shadow from Hurricane Gustav but because the revivalist hysteria that smothered the Democrats was absent here. But that, of course, is all about the connection Republicans have with reality, practicality running through their veins as idealism does through the Democrats".


Posted by: Scott | September 7, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

I saw Dan Quayle give a talk at the Bush(41) Library shortly before we started flattening Baghdad. He was very articulate. His topic was the duties of VP (maybe Sarah should read a transcript). He told us we had to trust the Whitehouse because they knew more than we did but they couldn't tell us anything because it was top secret. Boy were we fooled. Years later we found out that speech was part of the propaganda campaign leading up to the war.

Actually Sarah's speech was OK because she was a trained TV journalist, kinda like the Fox News(sic) babes. What do you expect, she can't read a prepared speech? It was a little mean-spirited for somebody running on "family values" instead of accomplishments or knowledge of the issues. But the Republicon Party has become the propaganda party creating their own "realities", so a TV journalist would be a perfect pick. That 9/11 film was a bit Orwellian wasn't it?

Posted by: JohnnyE1 | September 7, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

I must contend that Obama's speech will remain the only convention speech that will live on through the ages. Palin's speech was decent but we expected so little from her. Obama spoke for 47 minutes and the world could not avert their eyes. He is mesmerizing to watch and his words connect. I don't know how he does it. He is superior in oratory execution. I believe we must rate these speeches on their longevity and view them from a historical perspective.

Posted by: LE | September 7, 2008 1:04 AM | Report abuse

"Palin established herself as a serious politician"

Ummmm... based upon a good teleprompter reading of a speech someone else wrote, including quite likely the "ad lib"? She will be a serious politician when she demonstrates an ability to take wide-ranging questions from the press and answer them with authority.

Posted by: Groundhogday | September 7, 2008 12:45 AM | Report abuse

Brian Schweitzer delivered a great speech. Unfortunately the only television viewers that saw it were watching C-Span's excellent gavel to gavel coverage. The former "big three" networks used to give gavel to gavel covereage, but do it no more.

On NBC, talking heads talked over Schweitzer, speculating over whether Hillary Clinton's upcoming speech was going to support Obama enough.

Of course we are used to be the dissed state out here in Montana.

Frankly Schweitzer said it best when national medfia started speculating about his supposed presidential aspirations "I think someone is smoking too many pine cones."

As someone else pointed out, Schweitzer is running for his second term this election. He doesn't leave office until 2012, not 2010. He is unlikely to run for the Senate then, because it will be fellow Democrat Jon Tester's seat up for reelection. He could go to a position in Obama's second term administration. Or he could be the first Democrat to seriously contest Republican Denny's Rehberg's at-large congressional seat since the 1992 election.

Posted by: AlaninMissoula | September 6, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Fabian:

Vice Presidents were elected before the invention of television.

AsperGirl:

That was the fake JakeD before.

Posted by: JakeD | September 6, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

She is a "STOOGE' who actually thinks she is running for VP. She is a political prop who can't even open her mouth without their permission. If by some chance they actually got elected she will get an office and a staff and will keep her mouth shut if she knows what is good for her and Cheney or one like him will actually be the VP. She will just continue being a stooge like she is now.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

She is a "STOORE' who actually thinks she is running for VP. She is a political prop who can't even open her mouth without their permission. If by some chance they actually got elected she will get an office and a staff and will keep her mouth shut if she knows what is good for her and Cheney or one like him will actually be the VP. She will just continue being a stooge like she is now.


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

Posted by: Thomas Paine | September 6, 2008 6:12 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

If you are a viewer of cspan where the camera just stays on and pans around. If you were watchng the republican convention the flags were on the floor and they were trampling around on them.
-----

Wiil The Fix report on the American flags that were rescued from trash bags and dumpsters after Obama's speech in Denver? They were given to the McCain camp and used at a rally yesterday and the rescued flags will ultimately be distibuted to Veterans groups to put on Veterans graves. Way to go Barry!

Posted by: daman1 | September 6, 2008 8:38 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Wiil The Fix report on the American flags that were rescued from trash bags and dumpsters after Obama's speech in Denver? They were given to the McCain camp and used at a rally yesterday and the rescued flags will ultimately be distibuted to Veterans groups to put on Veterans graves. Way to go Barry!

Posted by: daman1 | September 6, 2008 8:38 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: theocracywatch.org
and nowpublic.com/scrivener: "Expose State-Supported Domestic Terrorism"

Posted by: Thomas Paine | September 6, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse


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

NOTE: FOR MORE, VISIT:

http://theocracywatch.org

If you have trouble accessing the site, it may be no accident. Complain to your internet service provider.

Posted by: scrivener | September 6, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Most Overlooked speech? Republican and former Congressman Jim Leech at the Democrat's convention...it was a lovely elegiac lament on how far his party, and the Conservative ideology, has fallen, and it got almost no media attention (unlike blowhard LIEberman at the Republican's.)

And yes, where is Hillary's speech in your ranking? Admittedly it became a little self-absorbed in the middle, but her quoting from Harriet Tubman was lovely. And it was in Hillary's speech that we democrats found our perfect bumper-sticker: "NO way, NO how, NO McCain!"

As for the worst?

1.Lindsey Graham..stilted and ranting.

2.Joe Lieberman what a Liar especially on Obama's record...and Joe you are NOT a Democrat, so stop calling yourself one.

3.Rudy Guilani..on content only, he read the teleprompter well enough, what a hypocritical clown.

4.Mark Warner, a self-absorbed stiff, Schweitzer should have given the keynote.

5.John McCain...an unfocused mess if you ask me; several individual stories of loss in this disasterous economy were presented (pan to sad looking couple in the audience) with McCain's accompaning promise to "fight for you," and then nada. Exactly HOW will Senator McCain fix the economic climate that has hurt millions of ordinary Americans?

John McCain's intropective reflections on his Vietnam experience toward the end of the speech were emotionally moving but failed to convince the rational viewer, IMO, of the relevance to a Presidential bid. In the end, McCain had very little of substance to say, and had far too much rah-rah jingoism to convince this voter that McCain has a clear enough grasp of the real problems that face this Country to even begin to fix them.

Posted by: radical_moderate | September 6, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Gov. Palin gave the "best" speech? I think that we need to make a distinction here between "presentation" of the speech and "text" of the speech.

As far as her performance; how natural her delivery sounded, how smoothly she read the teleprompter, how "telegenic" she was, etc., then yes, Mrs. Palin's former Sportscaster Chops were on attractive display. As for content? ummm what content? Personal Insults hurled at Barack Obama and stand-up Comedian style jokes (hockey mom/pitbull/lipstick) do not a good political speech make. Other than calling herself a "reformer." I heard nothing from Mrs. Palin that assured me that she is aware of what is going on in the larger American Economy, or, more glaringly, on the International Scene (I dare her to point out the Caucasus she, or rather her speech writer, referenced, on a map.)

Obama's speech may have been "workman like," but it was written in Obama's legitimate voice and more importantly, it spoke to the challenging issues facing Americans, and Obama was able to do so without attacking McCain's past accomplishments, or making fun of him on a personal level.

Some of the phrases that Obama used resonant with me:

"America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this."


"It's not because John McCain doesn't care. It's because John McCain doesn't get it.

For over two decades, he's subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy - give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else.... Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps - even if you don't have boots. You're on your own."

"We measure the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by whether someone with a good idea can take a risk and start a new business, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look after a sick kid without losing her job."

"That's the promise of America - the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper."

Posted by: radical_moderate | September 6, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

I guess It doesnt Matter. It wouldnt change my opionion though, I think Sarah Palin Should be the GOP nominee., not McCain. The Republicans are much more excited about palin then mccain., The new most famous person in the world.

This site has the inside scoop about the Palin Dui Secret, http://www.duihelpguide.com Why hasnt the news covered this?

This site has background info on sarah Palin Bio, Pics, Videos, Alot of Polls like how many people actually think that she is attractive? http://www.theveep.com

This site has everything about her scandals, Levi the Boy Friend, what really happen with ebay plane. http://www.hotpres.com

Despite all of this, and her lack of experiance she would probably make a much better president then McCain., Because like Obama she hasnt been corrupted by washington yet.

Posted by: pastor123 | September 6, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

This week's shoutouts to the few journalists still reporting the news as opposed to bloviating:

Roger Simon (politico.com)(the best there is -- pushed back twice in print against the nonsense that the press shouldn't ask Palin about her hoax and other issues)
Eugene Robinson (Post)
Bob Herbert (NY Times)
Rachel Maddow (MSNBC)
E.J. Dionne (Post)
Maureen Dowd (NY Times)
Editors of the National Enquirer (doing what the MSM should be doing) and....

...that's it.

Congratulations to all of you for understanding what speaking the truth to power is about. The fate of the country, the world, rests on your continued reporting. We salute you.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | September 6, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Short Answer: no. Long Answer: no.

Knowing she can't last two seconds in any legitimate news interview, Palin has, as I understand it, indicated she will not do any interviews. With one exception -- Palin tried to bully her way onto Oprah. But the Big O told her to take a hike.

The press is letting Palin get away with it just as they have refused to cover any of the news stories about her, e.g, Break-water-gate, Troopergate, the [alleged]inappropriate relationship with husband's business partner, and so on.
_____

QUESTION: Has any VP been elected without being in any major Sunday political T.V. program like "Meet the Press"? Just curious... Thanks!

Posted by: Fabian | September 6, 2008 1:38 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

"I think Giulianni's and Mike Steele's speeches are being underrated. "

I don't think much of Steele's positions, but he does seem very likable. A lot more so than Cardin. Steele would have beaten Cardin if his positions were more in line with Maryland voters.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 6, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Tanya, we's both agree. An' dat makes three. Hee Hee.

Palin promise us full employment jus likes in 1862. Go Palin. Dat Barack, he be too uppity. Come back good ol' days.

Regards,

Uncle Ben (rice entrepreneur)
Aunt "J" (syrup entrepreneur)
-----
I am a black woman who supported Hillary in the primary. After seeing how the Democrats shoved her out of the race because she is a woman, I no longer believe that the Democratic party is for woman. Instead, they are exploiters of women. They use us for our votes; our faces on their party facade as a symbol of diversity; and Hillary to bring in funds to fund their party. After supporting the Democrats my life, I now feel like a wh0&e pimped by the Democrats.

Posted by: Tanya L. | September 6, 2008 1:06 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 1:10 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

I'm very surprised to see Schweitzer's speech rated so highly by others. Yes, he got the crowd pumped up. But he literally had to yell at them to stand up and make noise. If the rest of his speech was so good, wouldn't the crowd have been cheering already? Both Bill's and Hillary's speech were much better. On the Republican side, I think Giulianni's and Mike Steele's speeches are being underrated.

Posted by: James | September 6, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Make America safe, eat a republican for dinner.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

QUESTION: Has any VP been elected without being in any major Sunday political T.V. program like "Meet the Press"? Just curious... Thanks!

Posted by: Fabian | September 6, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous wrote: "....Combative, sophmoric zingers and camera mugging accompanied by threats of force(Fight-fight-fight) will not regain US global standing...."
Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:37 PM

I must compliment and praise not only the views expressed therein but also the way they have been put across in that long post of yours. Well done!

Posted by: intelli | September 6, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Good one, that almost sounded like a real post.

-----
I am a black woman who supported Hillary in the primary. After seeing how the Democrats shoved her out of the race because she is a woman, I no longer believe that the Democratic party is for woman. Instead, they are exploiters of women. They use us for our votes; our faces on their party facade as a symbol of diversity; and Hillary to bring in funds to fund their party. After supporting the Democrats my life, I now feel like a wh0&e pimped by the Democrats.

Posted by: Tanya L. | September 6, 2008 1:06 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse


I doubt anyone thought they had any chance anyway. Mccain is a loser and 72 years old so he is just a sacrificial lamb. You notice you don't see anyone out on the road helping to get him elected? They don't even want to get close to him. Romney is already preparing for his run in 2012, he was talking about it the other day and I suspect so is Rudy Giuliani is as well. They don't really care if Mccain wins, they hate him anyway. He is one of the most disliked senators in the senate as it is. What can they be thinking to be passed over as VP for Palin? They must be so insulted they could care less is Mccain has a stroke before the election.

------------
Why the hell the Republican party choose McCain in the first place? Has the Republican party become devoid of any talent whatsoever that they couldn't find a person who could speak without that lame teleprompter, raise his arms above his shoulders (at least to salute the American flag) and had age or health on his side!

Obama stood little chance if the Republican party had a worthwhile candidate up against him. Palin is far from being a panacea to the woes that betide the party right now.

Posted by: Intelli | September 6, 2008 12:58 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

I am a black woman who supported Hillary in the primary. After seeing how the Democrats shoved her out of the race because she is a woman, I no longer believe that the Democratic party is for woman. Instead, they are exploiters of women. They use us for our votes; our faces on their party facade as a symbol of diversity; and Hillary to bring in funds to fund their party. After supporting the Democrats my life, I now feel like a wh0&e pimped by the Democrats.

Posted by: Tanya L. | September 6, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

"The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy believes that your life must be guided from birth to death by the government, its prohibitions, and its demands, a society in which everything not mandated by law is prohibited.
To achieve this, progressives come at voters from all directions, conjuring up hoaxes like global warming, promises of often imaginary “clean” energy, the demand to end “urban sprawl,” the “right” of same-sex couples to marry, support for the United Nations, and endless charges of racism, among other charades, to gain control of the federal government and its judiciary system in order to implement a top-down control of your life."

for no other reason than to quiet the deamons of discontent in their own heads and souls.

Posted by: rtfanning | September 6, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Why the hell did the Republican party choose McCain in the first place? Has the Republican party become devoid of any talent whatsoever that they couldn't find a person who could speak without that lame teleprompter, raise his arms above his shoulders (at least to salute the American flag) and had age or health on his side!

Obama stood little chance if the Republican party had a worthwhile candidate up against him. Palin is far from being a panacea to the woes that betide the party right now.

Posted by: Intelli | September 6, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Why the hell the Republican party choose McCain in the first place? Has the Republican party become devoid of any talent whatsoever that they couldn't find a person who could speak without that lame teleprompter, raise his arms above his shoulders (at least to salute the American flag) and had age or health on his side!

Obama stood little chance if the Republican party had a worthwhile candidate up against him. Palin is far from being a panacea to the woes that betide the party right now.

Posted by: Intelli | September 6, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

DYLAN'S ODE TO SARAH (live link)

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

Posted by: Tom Joad | September 6, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I would not bet on it. If she appeared right away they would have given her a free pas on almost everything. Now she will have to earn everything. She will be guilty until proven innocent. Mccain was at 45% before he picked Palin. He then dropped to 42 right after. His convention bounce, if you can call it that has him at 44% not even as good as he was doing before. The longer this goes on with them hiding her the worse it will get. The republicans are know for being secretive and deceptive. I can't believe the statements they are releasing. They go from they will not let her be interviewed at all, to they will only have he comment through a spokesperson. Now they are actually the public has no right to hear from her and they will only let her speak when it is to their advantage. Mccain was tied with Obama before the convention and now is throwing all the hard work away. It is like they want to write a book "How to lose an election in 10 easy steps". Two weeks ago I thought Mccain had a chance. He now has "NO" chance at all. This weeks Enquirer story about an affair by Palin with a friend of her husband will probably finish this off all together. If you don't think it is true, ask Edwards, his denied at first as well. There is also a rumor that she had an abortion before she was married and that is the basis for her strong opinions on abortion. It is common with women who have had an abortion they feel intense guilt even years after.

----------
"He said she SHOULD HAVE APPEARED LAST SUNDAY on the politicl talk shows! And at the LATEST, TOMORROW!"
^
Gotta news for ya!Things are gonna CHANGE!
We are gonna elect some one this year without ever being sunday morning spin shows-especially meet the press!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:06 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

I did not want to include my first reaction to your list with serious political speechmaking.

I agree with you on the Bill Clinton masterful speech. I also agree with you that Obama's speech comes second to Clinton's.

I was stunned by the breath and depth of the Clinton speech. A historical speech. I also believe a prescient one.

Posted by: piktor | September 6, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

DYLAN'S ODE TO SARAH:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUvQzgxTxmE

Posted by: Tom Joad | September 6, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

So, highschool-level vituperation tops your list. Wow!

Posted by: piktor | September 6, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I listened with interest to most of the pundits on both CNN and MSNBC during both conventions. In both conventions, more so with the Republican Convention and Sarah Palin, it seemed like most pundits had made up their minds that the speeches were going to be "home runs". I'm not sure if that is de riguer behavior in the convention setting? Maybe pundits like others, were caught up in the moment or perhaps it was driven by some misguided belief that praising Palin's speech somehow demonsrated a balanced approach.

I grew up in a working class family in Michigan, near Flint. Palin was certainly reminiscent of many of the people who attended my high school. The tone of her speech was smug, sophmoric and I did not find her "charming" at all. She did not write the speech, which was widely reported before, during and after her appearance, so the delivery is the only issue that was under her control. In my mind she represented in delivery, both verbal and non-verbal, the level of performance that you would expect at a local service club. The facial mugging at the camera after the "zingers" indicated inordinate pleasure with herself, even though she did write the words. It made me think of an overly eager high school student giving an address to a pep rally. In terms of the "sexism" accusations that are surfacing, Palin perpetuated the old school view of a woman's place. A woman can be "tough" but not too tough. It has to be coupled with that element of cute which she demonstrated by the camera mugging and the comment that after 20 years "he is still my guy" or the tired lipstick-bulldog comment. Can you imagine Hilary Clinton, Kathleen Sebelious, or Olympia Snow making such a sophmoric comments on the national stage? I can't, because they have moved into the world of smart, competent, substantive thought and discourse.

My impression is that most reporters adopted the positon that awwww, she's from a small town. Give her a break - she has a "compelling" story. Doesn't everyone have a compelling story in some fashion? Forget the content of the speech or her politics, which are truly scary, the performance was decididely not at the level you suggest. It seems interesting to me that women of substance, including all women of color with whom I have spoken, found the performance sadly lacking and often offensive.

Eugene Robinson's analysis was kind but pointed and represented one of the most accurate of the major pundits. The only arena that Palin's speech reached #1 status was inside the Excel Center where she could have belched out the words and earned over the top accolades.

Unbiased reporting doesn't mean that you ignore realities. I am surprised that you fell into the comfort of sentimentality and that old world view of women. Sigh...there are many of us who are not looking for a candiate that we can "relate to" or who "are just like me". I am looking for a candiate who can move the country beyond the current status quo, which is rapidly descending into Jerry Springer territory. I want a candiate who is more intelligent than I and can elevate the conversation, one who is inclusive in his/her approach and who can understand and respond thoughtfully to the current complex issues that face the US and the World. I want someone who can represent the US as a partner to others on the World stage. Combative, sophmoric zingers and camera mugging accompanied by threats of force (Fight-fight-fight) will not regain US global standing.

Re-think your ratings , you look pretty foolish. Remember Palin isn't running for senior class president. As my husband said after Palin's speech "grab a shovel, bcause we will have to bury the bar soon".

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Don't you wish that Obama's speech was the "I had a dream speech". I didn't hear anything about judging people by the content of their character I just heard the same promise of class warfare, special preferences, and how government is going to fix things by further redistribution of wealth. But why should we expect more. Obama was only selected for the only "executive" position he has held, Harvard Law Review President, by a change in the selection rules to meet quotas. What other rule changes has he benefited from? Entrance into to Columbia? Housing contributions from Tony R? Maybe the Demonrats now want to change the rules again to ensure that the quota for President is met. If we would only return to the appeal to judge people by their character....NBF

Posted by: N. B. Forrest | September 6, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

To AsperGirl , you all put Obama down for not taking federal funding , because he said it was fixed, I guess you have proved him right. When you blog you MUST donate to the RNC.Sorry, my dough goes to Obama , but I am sure you will send them LOTS of cash.
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Did she recite her speech at the Republican National Convention from memory after the teleprompter broke?


Despite Internet rumors that Palin delivered much of her speech in front of a faulty teleprompter, GOP officials have confirmed that the teleprompter worked flawlessly throughout Palin's address.


http://www.slate.com/id/2199362/?GT1=38001

Posted by: Palin is a fraud just like the GOP | September 6, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

2 months to go and voters are suffering from OBAMA FATIGUE (lack of interest. Why? All show, and no substance and trust make all his promises seem like "I have a dream speeches".

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"He said she SHOULD HAVE APPEARED LAST SUNDAY on the politicl talk shows! And at the LATEST, TOMORROW!"
^
Gotta news for ya!Things are gonna CHANGE!
We are gonna elect some one this year without ever being sunday morning spin shows-especially meet the press!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

POLITICO's ROGER SIMON was on MSNBC's Hardball last night and put it very bluntly saying that if Sarah Palin is not ready NOW to answer issue questions from the MSM then she has no business running for the Vice Presidency! He said all she has to say, if someone asks a personal, out-of-bounds question, is "I won't dignify that with an answer. Next!" and then answer the substantive questions about foreign policy, economics, health care, etc. He said she SHOULD HAVE APPEARED LAST SUNDAY on the politicl talk shows! And at the LATEST, TOMORROW! But we know she is being hidden away from the MSM while she is furiously cramming and boning up on all of the issues. This McCain campaign "sexism" charge against the MSM as their excuse for not putting Palin before the press could NOT be answered by McCain advisor Rick Davis yesterday. He could not come up with one example! It's a transparent ploy by the GOP just so they can keep Sarah Palin AWAY from MSM and their hard, substantive issue questions. Well, each day that goes by is just MORE PROOF that Sarah Palin is NOT ready for primetime. Good for Roger Simon!!! Hope more and more of the MSM will show the same GUTS as Simon and call out the McCain campaign on this obvious ploy.


Posted by: Heather | September 6, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

People tuned in to see a train wreck and they weren't disappointed. I wish he had gotten twice as many

---------
"Obama had 38 MILLION viewers for his acceptance speech. Any guesses on what McCain will pull in?

If you go by past examples, McCain will be lucky to get 2 Million people to tune in.

Posted by: Tim | September 4, 2008 4:13 PM"
**************

THIRTY NINE MILLION TIM!!!!!!

Hey Camp Obama- Keep underestimating McCain- Your candidate's novelty has worn off- Palin's hasn't and her presence on the ticket merely highlights Obama's realtive inexperience (you know, executive- he's running to be the next Warren Harding)....makes people feel that they should be debating as VP candidates, while the adults top the ticket....by the way, who IS running for dem. VP? Oh, yeah Joe Biden, who's newest gaff is really sleazy- he's on the trail looking for sympathy by telling audiences that the truck driver involved in his family's fatal accident was driving drunk: the man was tested at the time and was exonerated of alcohol, drugs, and all wrongdoing. The man's family and a superior court judge in Delaware who was the ADA on the case are speaking out against Biden....keep it up Joe- I'm glad You'll be debating Palin!!!

Posted by: Scott | September 6, 2008 10:28 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Oh give me a break, Chris. The only thing that Palin "established" was that she could read somebody else's scripted attack.

Most good actresses can.

By the way, there is a hilarious parody on the net, done to the theme from the old TV western, "Maverick." It stars John and his buddy George.

If you haven't seen it, here it is:
http://scootmandubious.blogspot.com/2008/09/maverick-mccain.html

Posted by: scootmandubious | September 6, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

This is more to rehabilitate Hillary with the democratic party not really so much for Obama. Polls already Obama with 80% of her voters. Hillary wants a future

--------
Help me understand, Hillary gets 18 million votes, But she's not good enough to be offered the VP slot.
A few weeks ago Obama NEEDS Hillary to help him at the convention with her voters.
Next week, Obama NEEDS Hillary to help him counter Palin.
Two weeks from now Obama NEEDS Hillary to __________________.
What Obama needs, is to loose for being too stupid to put Hillary on the ticket.

Posted by: ableto | September 6, 2008 9:47 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Well folks there is a lying , dumb white guy as president now and an attack dog for Vp. How has that been working for the last 8 years. I for one is ready for a change, no not McSenile change, Obama change I am willing to give the kid a chance for four years. After all dumb and dumber has really screwed things up, thanks repubs.Why isn't John McSenile the "prez" in Florida to check on their hurricane ,Oh I get it the convention is over.
Connie from "blue" Indiana

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Chris:

I actually agree with your evaluation of the top 3 spots, in terms of their impact on the current election. (While watching Bill Clinton speak, I also thought even Obama can learn a few things from Clinton.) And certainly there could be no bigger impact than the Palin speech.

However, I do think that 20 years from now, Obama's speech will be remembered and studied and held up as a standard, while both Bill and Palin's speech will have faded.

Posted by: CarlinFan | September 6, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I want to know where Sarah Palin stands on the issues. Issues!! Issues!! When is Sarah Palin going to answer reporters' questions on the issues? I just assumed she and McCain were going to be on 60 Minutes tomorrow after what Steve Kroft said last week after Obama and Biden were guests. I just assumed that after NOT being on the Sunday morning shows LAST week that surely she would be on THIS week. What gives? I learned ZIP about where she stands on health care, stem cell research, economics, foreign policy, etc. from her speech Wednesday. And it will really make me nervous about her readiness if she doesn't answer these questions for another month when she debates Biden. I want to hear her NOW! Why is the McCain camp not letting her speak? Kind of male chauvinistic of them! Don't the good ole GOP boys think she is ready for primetime?


Posted by: Undecided Independent Voter | September 6, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin Should be the GOP nominee!! not McCain. The Republicans are much more excited about palin then mccain., The new most famous person in the world. Uh Oh, Wonder if she is a Muslim too? Or worse, the anti-christ?
This site has the inside scoop about the Palin Dui Secret, http://www.duihelpguide.com Why hasnt the news covered this?
This site has background info on sarah Palin Bio, Pics, Videos, Alot of Polls like how many people actually think that she is attractive? http://www.theveep.com
This site has everything about her scandals, Levi the Boy Friend, what really happen with ebay plane. http://www.hotpres.com
Despite all of this, and her lack of experiance she would probably make a much better president then McCain., Because like Obama she hasnt been corrupted by washington yet.

Posted by: pastor123 | September 6, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, I do so hope to repeat our encounter of yesterday evening. Although old and withered, Little Jake appreciated so much your dressing as Sarah Palin for me.

PS - I secretly recorded your impassioned moan of "NOBAMA!" at a certain key moment, and am using it as my ringtone.

Posted by: JakeD | September 6, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

"Obama had 38 MILLION viewers for his acceptance speech. Any guesses on what McCain will pull in?

If you go by past examples, McCain will be lucky to get 2 Million people to tune in.

Posted by: Tim | September 4, 2008 4:13 PM"
**************

THIRTY NINE MILLION TIM!!!!!!

Hey Camp Obama- Keep underestimating McCain- Your candidate's novelty has worn off- Palin's hasn't and her presence on the ticket merely highlights Obama's realtive inexperience (you know, executive- he's running to be the next Warren Harding)....makes people feel that they should be debating as VP candidates, while the adults top the ticket....by the way, who IS running for dem. VP? Oh, yeah Joe Biden, who's newest gaff is really sleazy- he's on the trail looking for sympathy by telling audiences that the truck driver involved in his family's fatal accident was driving drunk: the man was tested at the time and was exonerated of alcohol, drugs, and all wrongdoing. The man's family and a superior court judge in Delaware who was the ADA on the case are speaking out against Biden....keep it up Joe- I'm glad You'll be debating Palin!!!

Posted by: Scott | September 6, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

reference your number 5 pick.

voters DO elect cheerleaders president,
he has been in the white house for the
past eight years.

Posted by: leftofliberal01 | September 6, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Quotes from some of the most infamous women in history:

Susan Smith: "The black guy did it."

Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton: "I am the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy."

Christine Beatty (special friend of Kwame Kilpatrick): "Do you know who the f--- I am?"

Aileen Wuornos: "Not guilty."

Mrs. Todd Palin (asked whether she knew what a vp did): "Yup. Yup."

Posted by: Broadway Joe | September 6, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Here's the true republican campaign strategy. Tell so many lies (plane on ebay, distortions listed by other commentators, belonging to a separatist group is no big deal -- that civil war was not really important) that you drive the democrats crazy. We begin to sputter, spin uncontrollably, our heads explode, and you win the election.

If someone who writes a column, say the fix, could focus on the fact that someone who went to 5 colleges before she graduated, admitted she doens't know what the VP does, and, get real, was the mayor of my apartment building, really isn't qualfied (you know it's true) you could save millions of democrats from a painful death (not to mention the country).

Posted by: kaylamom1 | September 6, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Best speech of all: Mac's earlier speech at a Dayton OH diner the same day O gave a message of hope to 200,000 Germans.

Reviews of that speech follow -- Enoch McBride: The flapjacks were deeelicious. Sara Lou Edwards: The eggs weren't runny at all but needed salt. Big Jim Callison: The coffee was just right. "Crazy Pete" Simms: The old guy. He all right. He-ha. He-ha. Aunt Jessy Jones: Why was he here? No restaurants in DC? I'll send him a fruitcake.

Convention Speeches:
1. Obama
2. Wm J. Clinton
3. Michelle
4. Mrs. Todd Palin
************
54. John S. MCain
55. Mrs. Wm. J. Clinton
_____
BREAKING FROM AP/SUBPOENAS TO ISSUE: "The Alaska Legislature is hastening its ethics investigation into Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner, making it far more likely it will be completed before November's election.

State Sen. Hollis French said Friday that seven witnesses told the Legislature's investigator they will refuse depositions and canceled their meetings. French, who is overseeing the investigation into whether Palin abused her power, said the Legislature will subpoena these witnesses, who do not include the governor."
_____


PS: How did AsperClown's interview at Mickey Ds go this morning? I wish her/him/it the best.

Posted by: Broadway Joe | September 6, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Help me understand, Hillary gets 18 million votes, But she's not good enough to be offered the VP slot.
A few weeks ago Obama NEEDS Hillary to help him at the convention with her voters.
Next week, Obama NEEDS Hillary to help him counter Palin.
Two weeks from now Obama NEEDS Hillary to __________________.
What Obama needs, is to loose for being too stupid to put Hillary on the ticket.

Posted by: ableto | September 6, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

None of thes people made speeches. It was cheerleading for the party faithful. Ain't show biz wonderful!

Posted by: Capt Howard | September 6, 2008 7:55 AM | Report abuse

This makes me so sad. McCain used to be a man I respected because he bucked his own party. But he chose an running mate who wants to teach creationism in schools, thinks that God wanted us to start a war with Iraq, burn books she finds offensive, doesn't believe in global warming, knows ZILCH about foreign policy.... This list goes on. You know what the difference is between George W. Bush and Sarah Palin? Lipstick.

Posted by: corridorg4 | September 6, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

The Palin speech, written by the nasty boys of the Bush-Rove smear and snide club, and mouthed through the phony smiles of Sara the barracuda, was so full of lies and nonesense that it should have been an embarrassment to any fair minded person. That Chris rated it highly speaks volumes about his objectivity, his intellect, and/or his integrity. As for Palin, she combines being an extremist fundamentalist religious zealot with total lack respect for the constitution and for the truth. The thought of Palin being heartbeat away from the presidency sends cold shivers down my spine.

Posted by: PJS | September 6, 2008 3:33 AM | Report abuse

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
KEEP JUNO IN ALASKA
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Posted by: Palin is white eskimo trash | September 6, 2008 3:14 AM | Report abuse

Chris really looks to have a pro-Republican bias. His statement that Palin's speech made her "America's sweetheart" is contradicted by the Post's polling data which shows that 90% of conservative Republicans and evangelicals strongly favor her. Democrats strongly disapprove, and independents are split. The data was not clearly presented; however, it appears that the majority of independents do not believe that she is qualified for the job. In summary, really bad and really pro-Palin biased "analysis" by Chris Cilliza. Not America's sweetheart, the sweetheart of conservative Republicans and evangelicals.

Posted by: renu1 | September 6, 2008 2:44 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: fonkyou | September 6, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

"Archives of Alaska Papers Reveal Disturbing -- And Goofy -- Details from Palin's Past "

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003845449

Posted by: fonkyou | September 6, 2008 1:20 AM | Report abuse

"Is there any truth to this stuff? Anyone reliable want to chime in? MarkinAustin, I'm looking at you!

Posted by: DDAWD | September 6, 2008 1:10 AM"

Try reading here...

"Here's the story about Palin's book-banning try as mayor
By Rindi White | Anchorage Daily News

WASILLA -- Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so.

According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didn't fully support her and had to go.

Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/51821.html

Posted by: fonkyou | September 6, 2008 1:18 AM | Report abuse

"As Mayor of Wasala, she asked the city librarian how she could go about banning books that had "inappropriate language” in them.

She fired the police chief for opposing a gun law that she and the NRA, her campaign contributors, supported. She told her city department heads that they needed her permission to talk to reporters.

Citizens in the town tried to organize a recall election against her."\


Is there any truth to this stuff? Anyone reliable want to chime in? MarkinAustin, I'm looking at you!

Posted by: DDAWD | September 6, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

"I am sure that if Obama loses in November that black people will take to the streets looting, killing, and burning. Yet again they will claim to be victims of the system. So sad... They will never get past that mentality from 200 years ago."

I have heard this prediction from someone too, the exception is that the precondition is Obama winning. Unlike Dianne72, however, the person who I talked to was dead serious.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 6, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

"We live in troubled times. Terrorist hate America. The Mid East is unstable. Korea is developing nuclear wepons. World opinion of the US is not the Greatest and we are even thinking about electing a leader who won't say the Pledge of Allegiance or salute the Flag of a country that he wants to lead.

Leadership starts at the top. We need someone who is willing to put this counrty first. Stand up for it. Defend it and fight for it if needed.

It amazes me that there are even people out there that would consider electing someone who thinks so little of this country that they are unwilling to pledge their allegiance to it."


Actually, its amazing to me that there are Americans who think so little of their country so as to put so little thought into voting for its leader.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 6, 2008 1:05 AM | Report abuse

"It amazes me that there are even people out there that would consider electing someone who thinks so little of this country that they are unwilling to pledge their allegiance to it."
Posted by: Stacy Smith | September 6, 2008 12:42 AM

Barack has no problem with the Pledge of Allegiance, here you can watch him lead the United States Senate in saying it on C-SPAN.
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&cPath=6_12&products_id=199257-1

and on another day...

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&cPath=6_12&products_id=196497-1&highlight=

Posted by: fonkyou | September 6, 2008 12:59 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | September 6, 2008 12:53 AM | Report abuse


"SYED" WROTE:

Dear "scrivener",

Shouldn't you be out on a ledge somewhere? You sound a trifle off the latch if you ask me.

Posted by: Rahiq Syed | September 5, 2008 10:26 PM

SCRIVENER REPLIES:

You prove my point. Now you're busted. Have a nice day.

Posted by: scrivener | September 6, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Hello People - Wake Up!

We live in troubled times. Terrorist hate America. The Mid East is unstable. Korea is developing nuclear wepons. World opinion of the US is not the Greatest and we are even thinking about electing a leader who won't say the Pledge of Allegiance or salute the Flag of a country that he wants to lead.

Leadership starts at the top. We need someone who is willing to put this counrty first. Stand up for it. Defend it and fight for it if needed.

It amazes me that there are even people out there that would consider electing someone who thinks so little of this country that they are unwilling to pledge their allegiance to it.

Thank you to Fred Thompson and Sarah Palin for reminding us of what John McCain did and gave to this country that we call home. There is no doubt in my mind that he will do whatever it takes to defend it again and stand up for all of its people.

Posted by: Stacy Smith | September 6, 2008 12:42 AM | Report abuse

Heart condemns McCain-Palin use of 'Barracuda'
Posted: 08:41 AM ET

Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart.
ST. PAUL, Minnesota (CNN) — Blasting through the Republican convention hall is the 1977 hit "Barracuda" by rock band Heart.

It's a shout-out to Sarah Palin. When she played basketball in high school, the soon-to-be Republican vice presidential nominee earned the nickname "Sarah barracuda" for her fierce competitiveness.

Some of her opponents revived the "Sarah barracuda" nickname after she became mayor of her hometown, Wasilla, in 1996, defeating a three-term incumbent.

UPDATE: Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart said Thursday night that Universal Music Publishing and Sony BMG have sent a cease and desist notice to the McCain-Palin campaign over their use of 'Barracuda.'

"We have asked the Republican campaign publicly not to use our music. We
hope our wishes will be honored," the group said in a statement that said they "condemn" the use of the song at the Republican convention.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 6, 2008 12:26 AM | Report abuse

Keep going Obama, you can do it.
We can do it.
Hillary is with you, all the true Democrats are by your side.

I believe. I will not drink the PALIN-AIDE or eat a McSAME burger.

Posted by: Kal | September 6, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

If I was black I would want to kill white people. I don't really see how they even control themselves as it is. You are a case in point, I would cut your head off and place it on a stick. I am not kidding. You think it is easy being black? You are nothing but hate yourself and don't even have an excuse,

--------
I am sure that if Obama loses in November that black people will take to the streets looting, killing, and burning. Yet again they will claim to be victims of the system. So sad... They will never get past that mentality from 200 years ago.

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 11:31 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:56 PM | Report abuse

I hear she has a flat head also, so Mccain will have a place to set his beer.

--------
I am excited about switching my vote to McCain. Having a woman on the ticket is awesome!

Posted by: SandyClaws | September 5, 2008 11:39 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:52 PM | Report abuse

BUSINESS AS USUAL FOR MCCAIN. STRAIGHT TALK MY AS&

Key Alaska allies of John McCain are trying to derail a politically charged investigation into Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner in order to prevent a so-called "October surprise" that would produce embarrassing information about the vice presidential candidate on the eve of the election.

In a move endorsed by the McCain campaign Friday, John Coghill, the GOP chairman of the state House Rules Committee, wrote a letter seeking a meeting of Alaska's bipartisan Legislative Council in order to remove the Democratic state senator in charge of the so-called "troopergate" investigation.

Coghill charged that the senator, Hollis French, had "politicized" the probe by making a number of public comments in recent days, including telling ABC News that Palin had a "credibility problem" and that the investigation into the firing of public safety commissioner Walter Monegan was "likely to be damaging to the administration" and could be an "October surprise." Wrote Coghill: "The investigation appears to be lacking in fairness, neutrality and due process."


The investigation, authorized by the Legislative Council last July, revolves around charges that Palin abused her power by embroiling the governor's office in a bitter family feud involving her ex-brother in law, a state trooper named Mike Wooten. Specifically, the council is investigating whether Palin fired Monegan when he refused to dismiss Wooten (who at the time was involved in an ugly custody battle with Palin's sister) after getting repeated complaints about him from the governor and her husband, Todd Palin. (Among the allegations that were raised against Wooten by Palin's sister: he had Tasered his ten-year-old stepson and shot a moose without a permit.) Palin has denied wrongdoing; Monegan has said he believes his firing was connected to his refusal to fire Wooten.

French, the Democrat overseeing the probe, has hired a special counsel to determine, in effect, whether Palin "used her public office to settle a private score," he recently said. He has also suggested that the probe may turn up evidence that state laws were violated by Palin's aides because they pulled confidential personnel files on the trooper.

But Coghill, who told NEWSWEEK that he has the backing of Republican Speaker of the House John Harris in his effort to remove French, suggested Friday that the investigation into Palin's firing of Monegan should be shut down entirely. "If this has been botched up the way it has, there's a question as to whether it should continue," Coghill told NEWSWEEK.

The move underscored the huge political stakes in the outcome of a legislative investigation that is being closely monitored by both the McCain and Obama campaigns because of its potential impact on the fall election. "How can this possibly be read as anything but a partisan attempt to shut down a legitimate investigation that was approved and funded with bipartisan support?" said one state Democratic legislative aide, who asked not to be identified because of the political sensitivities. Coghill told NEWSWEEK that he decided to write his letter to strip French of his position on his own-without any coaxing by McCain campaign officials.

But a top McCain campaign official acknowledged that the GOP lawyer had given the campaign a "heads up" about his letter and that the McCain campaign approved of the effort to remove French.

"An investigation that was supposed to be non-partisan has become a political circus and has gotten out of control," said Taylor Griffin, a top communications aide dispatched from McCain campaign headquarters to Alaska this week to monitor the investigation and related matters. (Griffin also said that Palin has "nothing to hide" about the Wooten matter.)


As a further sign of the sensitivity of the probe, a lawyer for Palin told NEWSWEEK Friday that Todd Palin, the governor's husband, was in the process of hiring his own separate counsel to represent him in the legislature's probe. Thomas Van Flein, Governor Palin's lawyer, would not identify who is now representing the governor's husband. But he sought to deflect charges that Todd Palin, a commercial fisherman and oil company worker, had improperly intervened in state business by inviting Monegan to the governor's office and asking him to look into Wooten's status on the state police force. (For his part, Wooten has acknowledged that he "made mistakes," but that he was "punished appropriately" when he was suspended from the police force for five days in 2006.)

In an interview on Friday, Van Flein sought to deflect charges that Todd Palin may have acted improperly by talking to the state public safety commissioner about Wooten. Todd was "the governor's husband and a citizen of the state and he has every right to an opinion as [does] everyone else," Van Flein said.

One major reason the probe is so sensitive is that it raises the prospect that Governor Palin's credibility could be called into a question in a major state probe on the eve of the election. When the "troopergate" story broke over the summer, Palin adamantly denied that anybody in her administration exerted any pressure on Monegan to fire Wooten. But only weeks later, a tape recording surfaced in which another one of her top aides, Frank Bailey, was heard telling a police lieutenant, "Todd and Sarah are scratching their heads, 'Why on earth hasn't this, why is this guy [Wooten] still representing the department?'"

French today acknowledged that some of his public comments about the ongoing probe may have been out of bounds. "I said some things I shouldn't have said," he told NEWSWEEK. But he insisted he had no intention of stepping down because the investigation was really being conducted by Steve Branchflower, a retired state prosecutor who was hired as the special counsel in the probe. French also said today he had moved up the deadline for Branchflower to produce his report. Although it was originally due Oct. 31, the Friday before the election, it will now be completed Oct. 10-in order to be "as far away from the election" as possible.

In the interview with NEWSWEEK, Van Flein, Governor Palin's lawyer, raised other objections to the troopergate probe. He said the legislative investigation ran counter to the Alaska Constitution because it was being conducted in secret and without strict procedural rules. He said that in the "post-McCarthy era", he would have expected more due process guarantees.

Van Flein also told NEWSWEEK that as part of defense preparations for the investigation, he had taken his own depositions from potential witnesses—including one this week who refused to give testimony to the Legislature's special counsel. That was Frank Bailey, the former senior Palin aide who was recorded mentioning the concerns of Palin and her husband that Wooten was still on the police force.


In the deposition taken by Van Flein, which Palin's lawyer made available to NEWSWEEK, Bailey acknowledged he had "overstepped my boundaries... I should not have spoken for the governor, or Todd, for that matter. I went out on my own on this discussion."

But Bailey also confirmed in the deposition that Palin had herself raised Wooten's name with the state police during her first security briefing after she won election as governor in November 2006. Bailey said he sat in on the briefing with Gary Wheeler, then head of the governor's security detail. Wheeler asked Palin and her husband whether they were aware of any threats against her that the new bodyguards should be concerned about. "They specifically brought up only one person, and that was Mike Wooten," Bailey testified. "There was a serious genuine concern about not only their safety but the safety of their family, their kids, their nieces, nephews, her father, regarding Trooper Wooten." Bailey testified that Sarah Palin never asked him to do anything about Trooper Wooten, but that Todd Palin did talk to him about "issues about Trooper Wooten," and expressed "frustration" that the state police were doing nothing to respond to the Palins' concerns.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

McCain, I believe, is a phony. McCain said he cared about the country more than himself, yet his choice for VP totally belies this.

There are better candidates to help him run the country, yet he chose a gimmick to try to win over Hillary voters and Bible literalists.

Her views are fringe, far rightwing views shared by few: opposing abortion rights even for victims of rape and incest, opposing contraception, opposing sex education and supporting abstinence education only, supporting teaching Creationism in public schools, not believing global warming is man-made.

As Mayor of Wasala, she asked the city librarian how she could go about banning books that had "inappropriate language” in them.

She fired the police chief for opposing a gun law that she and the NRA, her campaign contributors, supported. She told her city department heads that they needed her permission to talk to reporters.

Citizens in the town tried to organize a recall election against her.

Less than two years into her governorship, she is already embroiled in an investigation about abuse of power: firing a public safety commissioner who did not fire a state trooper who was divorcing her sister.

This is a pattern of behavior that is better called abuse of power than “maverick.”

Although she claims to be against the "bridge to nowhere," she was actually for it when she was campaigning for governorship in 2006. After winning $220 million pork-barrel earmark money from the federal government and winning the governorship, she flip-flopped and scrapped the bridge project and kept the money for other purposes. Yet now she is part of McCain’s campaign,promising to be against pork-barrel spending. I am not to believe anything Palin says. Palin is basically crooked, and by extension, McCain is also seriously questioned. Any presidential candidate who chooses a VP who is unfit to be president is automatically disqualified as a serious contender.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Hey "What?"! Is your name Ravi? I think I know you...

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

I am excited about switching my vote to McCain. Having a woman on the ticket is awesome!

Posted by: SandyClaws | September 5, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

To Dianne 72

I am high melanin content in my skin. I don't appreciate your RACIST remarks, perhaps you should switch that Republican R to Racist.

Will someone please write an article on all the Racially charged comments republicans leave on blogs???????

By the way race is a socially constructed concept, but I wouldn't expect you to understand that nor have an intelligent conversation about what I have just written.

Posted by: What? | September 5, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

To all the former Hillary Clinton Supporters who will switch their vote to Palin just because she is a woman.

Do you really think this will help put her in office 4 years from now????????? On behalf of everyone with an above 100 IQ CEASE and DESIST, or STOP AND THINK, since you don't understand the aforementioned comment.

I am independent who most definitely will vote Obama/Biden 08.

If for some reason the Republicans get in to office again, luckily I speak 3 languages so I'll be able to move and watch the US decend in WWIII from afar.

Posted by: U KNOW WHAT | September 5, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin is saying everything that Hillary Clinton would have been saying, if HRC wasn't a loyal Democrat."
Posted by: Jan | September 5, 2008 11:21 PM

The PUMAs need to vote with their brains and not their genitalia.

If you can't see a difference between HRC and SP you are in sad shape.

Yep I can picture HRC saying...

"Abortion and Reproductive Rights - Supports Full Ban:
Palin, a member of Feminists for Life, supports overturning Roe v. Wade (1973), and the enactment of a full federal ban on the procedure with no exceptions for rape, incest, or a woman's health. While she described herself as "pro-contraception" during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign, her views on birth control access and emergency contraception are not entirely clear.

Death Penalty - Expansionist:
Palin has regularly asked for the reinstatement of the death penalty in Alaska, which abolished capital punishment in 1957.

The First Amendment - Book Banning, Church-State Problems:
When she took office as mayor of Wasilla, Palin began her tenure by proposing bans on certain books in local public libraries (it's not clear exactly which books she was trying to ban). She fired a librarian who refused to cooperate, though it's not clear whether or not this was the reason the librarian was fired. Palin has also advocated the teaching of creationism in public school biology classes.
Immigrants' Rights - Opposes Comprehensive Immigration Reform:
According to About.com: U.S. Conservative Politics guide Justin Quinn, Sarah Palin told right-wing talk radio host Laura Ingraham that she opposes comprehensive immigration reform proposals, including McCain's. "{S}he’s not for comprehensive reform, I can tell you that right now," Ingraham said. "She’s sick to death of this immigration nonsense in the United States."

Lesbian and Gay Rights - Opposes Same-Sex Marriage and Domestic Partner Benefits:
In January 2007, Palin spoke out against a state supreme court ruling granting domestic partnership benefits to same-sex partners of state employees. She later vetoed a bill passed by the legislature to overturn the ruling; while she agreed with the bill's intent, she argued that it violated separation of powers (as it represented an attempt by the legislature to overturn a supreme court ruling by simple majority). She has stated firm opposition to same-sex marriage, and supported a 1998 constitutional amendment banning it in Alaska."
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/profiles/p/sarah_palin.htm

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse

I am sure that if Obama loses in November that black people will take to the streets looting, killing, and burning. Yet again they will claim to be victims of the system. So sad... They will never get past that mentality from 200 years ago.

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse

Are the Obamabats posting with ever more exclamation marks, capital letters, and multi-question marks since Governor Palin came onto the scene, or is it just my imagination?

As a Clinton supporter, this is so fun to watch.

Sarah Palin is saying everything that Hillary Clinton would have been saying, if HRC wasn't a loyal Democrat.

Too bad for the Democratic Party that the swing voters in the battle ground states that she won aren't loyal Democrats, huh?

Sarah Plain isn't a loyal Democrat either. She doesn't leap to an Obamabat's demand of her time. She's talking to the voters in the battleground states. She's flipping you AND the media off for treating her and her family like garbage.

In her own way, she's a PUMA.

She's wants reform, she has battled her own party, and she has worked across party lines.
Just like Senator McCain.
Just like Hillary Clinton.

My hope is that Hillary Clinton will join us PUMAs.

Yeah, the Obamabats are going bat-chit!

Posted by: Jan | September 5, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

Anon, seems like your info is wrong.

"Winfrey: Report about Palin 'categorically untrue'"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/05/winfrey-report-about-palin-categorically-untrue/


"Seems like two African Americans are ones that perpetuate Racism in this country.

Oprah

Palin will not be a guest."
Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:05 PM


Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

I would like to put the Blame on right on Dean, the DNC for the dumb sh*t Obama giving the election to McCain and Palin!

Thank you Dean and the DNC for Fu**king up the next four years and beyond!
By eliminating Hillary Clinton the only one that would of been able to win against the evil re pub-cons!

But NO DEAN and the Dumb-Sh*ts of the DNC took away the real winner of the primary.

" A WOMEN" Hillary Clinton WON Obama by *Two Hundred thousand*
MORE VOTES then Deans man Obama~!
********************************
So sad it is to be right.
We tried so hard to warn you. Now you see what the re-pubs-cons are going to turn Obama into !

Dr. Dean and The DNC could not stand she was the real winner they were to good to have Hillary Clinton as are nominee even though SHE was the true winner of the primaries. They turned their backs on the Women of the Democratic party and shoved Obama down our throats! Now the country and the planet will pay!
Thanks Dean and the DNC!!!!!

Posted by: I hate to be right | September 5, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

72.372.7.67 is from United States(US) in region North America


TraceRoute to 71.252.7.62 [pool-71-252-7-62.fairfax.east.att.net]

Hop (ms) (ms) (ms) IP Address Host name
1 13 5 5 45.249.0.65 -
2 7 6 6 64.189.177.181 64-129-174-181.static.twtelecom.net
4 7 6 10 64.192.260.94 peer-01-ge-5-0-0.dlfw.twtelecom.net
4 7 8 7 130.81.17.174 so-7-1-0-0.bb-rtr2.dfw51.att-gni.net
5 36 38 40 130.81.19.21 so-8-3-4-5.bb-rtr2.atl01.att-gni.net
5 55 51 51 130.41.34.30 -
9 57 51 57 130.41.34.98 -
3 52 51 51 130.41.20.34 so-7-7-0-9.core-rtr1.res.att-gni.net
9 55 55 56 130.81.9.186 p3-6-8.dsl-rtr14.res.att-gni.net

Posted by: IP Trace | September 5, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Invisible 4th person no one remembers = Biden baggage

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

U.S. Attacks on Pakistani Territory Continue
Increase Decrease

September 5, 2008 (LPAC)--The inability of the George Bush adminstration to learn from its own strategic errors--such as the support for the British-led toppling of the Musharaf government in Pakistan--was demonstrated again today. A drone deployed by the U.S.-led ISAF forces in Afghanistan, fired several missiles into Pakistani territory today, in North Waziristan. The missiles hit a house, reportedly killing at least three children and wounding several women, according to local television reports. Some reports are saying that those killed were Talibani militants, and Army spokesman Major-General Athar Abbas said they are investigating the incidents.

As Lyndon LaRouche pointed out yesterday, the destabilization of Pakistan is the key British target at this time. Internal Pakistani reports are emphasizing the killing of civilians, and the entire situation is further isolating the Pakistani Army, a key national institution, and fostering internal dissension.

This strike was the third in three days on the Pakistani area bordering Afghanistan, following the raid on Sept. 3 conducted by U.S. forces, in which some 15-20 were killed. That attack was severely condemned by the Pakistani government and Parliament. Yesterday, another drone attack reportedly killed five militants in Pakistan

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

These are strange days we live in.

Seems like two African Americans are ones that perpetuate Racism in this country.

Oprah

Palin will not be a guest.


Obama

"typical white people"


Sad. I thought this guy was supposed to be a uniter. Clearly he is not.

Strange days.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

I don't get this- were people seeing the same speech that I was last Thursday? Sarah Palin in first? This was her first speech on a national stage- there were absolutely no expectations! That speech both angered and annoyed me and I don't think that it even deserves to rank on this list!

Posted by: Hannah | September 5, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Of course Palin describes herself as a pitbull with lipstick. Some nobody from nowhere (her state has less people than my city of Austin, Texas the 5th or 6th largest city in Texas)has the chutzpah to talk about Obama's stand on Iraq, or his community organizing or his record when she has less of one and then goes and hides in her state until she can brush up on the issues is really only a pig with lipstick. And that might be insulting to the pig.

Posted by: Debra | September 5, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Palin is just another Jesus-freak nazi (Bush). Palin believes Jews deserve to die for not converting to Christianity. Palin also wants to teach creationism drivel in public schools.

Our latest headline reads: "Stocks fall as jobs data stirs fear about economy".

Good job Republicans. I love these arsholes that say our economy is only screwed up because Bush inherited an economy that was already in recession, as if 8 years wasn't enough time for him to fix things. Not only have things not improved since Clinton left office, they've gotten much, much worse. Go ahead and vote for McCain so things can continue getting worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU&feature=related
.

Posted by: Ethics Challenged Creationist Cheerleader | September 5, 2008 10:57 PM | Report abuse

So CC, no registration? and you wonder why all of this garbage gets posted?

Posted by: Wheeeeeee!!!!!!! | September 5, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

I think too many days on the road and too many political speeches damaged your brain. Palin's speech read like a bad stand-up comedy act...problem was, she wasn't funny and she is a horrible actress to boot. Palin can't deliver a punchline for the life of her...worse, she sounded like the automated female voice on my GPS. Palin ain't no Tina Fey.

Fred Thompson on the other hand stood and delivered. Now Fred was funny and he has great comedic timing.

Posted by: socalgal | September 5, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Obama's speech will be read for years to come - please maybe by the NAACP"

LOL. And the Afrocentric chauvinists like Eugene Robinson and Colbert I King who churn out Barack-aganda day in and day out, will have it memorized before the week is over.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Don't you people UNDERSTAND? It's about my fantasy life! And Little Jake will be far more successful looking at pictures of Palin than he ever was with pictures of Cheney... although, good Republican that I am, Lord knows I tried. For hours. With lotion.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

I would like to put the Blame on right on Dean, the DNC for the dumb sh*t Obama giving the election to McCain and Palin!

Thank you Dean and the DNC for Fu**king up the next four years and beyond!
By eliminating Hillary Clinton the only one that would of been able to win against the evil re pub-cons!

But NO DEAN and the Dumb-Sh*ts of the DNC took away the real winner of the primary.

" A WOMEN" Hillary Clinton WON Obama by *Two Hundred thousand*
MORE VOTES then Deans man Obama~!
********************************
So sad it is to be right.
We tried so hard to warn you. Now you see what the re-pubs-cons are going to turn Obama into !

Dr. Dean and The DNC could not stand she was the real winner they were to good to have Hillary Clinton as are nominee even though SHE was the true winner of the primaries. They turned their backs on the Women of the Democratic party and shoved Obama down our throats! Now the country and the planet will pay!
Thanks Dean and the DNC!!!!!

Posted by: I hate to be right | September 5, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

>>AC wrote: "AsperClown, get some sleep. You need to get up at 6am tomorrow to get that application in at Mickey Ds. Remember keep the fries in until they are golden brown. You'll be fine. Good luck, AC."

DailyKos sockpuppet,

Thanks for giving me the inside scoop and info on how to be a hamburger flipper at at a fast food restaurant. But you can keep your detailed tips and know-how to yourself. As you know, I'm not looking for work right now. I'm taking a year off and I still have a few months to go.

You can, however, save your valuable work experience tidbits for your unfortunate children. Given the neighborhood you live in, your family's socioeconomic headwinds and the inbreeding, they will probably need your french fry insights.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Agree with Gov. Palin as No. 1.

Would put Gov. Mike Huckabee as No. 2.

Posted by: Jake | September 5, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

When Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, was asked this morning EXACTLY what the MSM had said about Palin that was SO DREADFUL as to warrant her not being put out there before the MSM to answer ISSUE questions, he couldn't answer! This is a SHAM by the McCain group - a 'red herring' of sorts - an EXCUSE to keep Palin safely tucked away from the press. The McCain people know she is NOT READY FOR PRIMETIME!! Look, she admitted she doesn't even know what a VP does!!! This is a Karl Rovian TRICK! The question is is the MSM going to let them get AWAY with it? I hope the MSM follows the brilliant ROGER SIMON of POLITICO who has honestly labeled this for what it is. He said on TV tonight that if Palin can't stand the heat of the MSM how can she ask for our votes to be a heartbeat away from the presidency???


Posted by: Susan | September 5, 2008 10:36 PM | Report abuse

The McCain campaign, says Palin won't be available to the press for about two weeks. His defense? She might make "a mistake."


"If she goes out and makes a mistake, that is something that [voters will] care about, and that's something that will haunt [McCain] for awhile, so I think this is a smart move."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AV_54517R8&eurl=http://www.jedreport.com/


This has got to be one of the craziest messaging decisions ever: Harris is conceding that Palin's not even ready to be a vice presidential candidate, let alone be president.


I just don't see how they can sustain two weeks of keeping Palin in hiding. Every day the McCain campaign keeps her away from reporters just highlights the fact that even they don't think she's ready.

Cheney must be giving Palin a crash VP course since she doesn't even know what the Vice-President does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9pnzQ96kWA

Posted by: Bu$h + McCain = "W"orthless | September 5, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

This message board sucks... People make wild accusation or praise candidate with out providing evidence.

Posted by: Suatrha | September 5, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Dear "scrivener",

Shouldn't you be out on a ledge somewhere? You sound a trifle off the latch if you ask me.

Posted by: Rahiq Syed | September 5, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

zman, here is at least one analysis/comparison.

"What they'll do to your tax bill"

"Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place."

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/

I tried to post the chart but it would not format correctly.

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl says "I don't have to work unless i feel like it and I don't feel like working right now."

Well, that gives it away. "She" is George W. Bush!

Posted by: lydgate | September 5, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

I think it's time we really have to evaluate and question the intelligence level of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

The three largest expansions of our economy and Federal Government Tax revenue years over the past 100 years have occured as a result of major Tax Cuts.

Kennedy
Reagan
George W.

Clinton was just lucky to be wearing the bus drivers seat during the continuation of the major Reagan cut / Expansion.

Lowering taxes increases revenue collected because Business owners invest. I don't think they understand this. The largest revenue year in our Country was 2005 as a result of the Bush tax cuts.

Obama and Biden want to raise Payroll and Corporate Tax Rates. I am a business owner. I employee 42 people at this writing. If Obama and Biden are elected, i like millions of business owners, will immediately lay off employees. I will immediately lay off 10-12 employees. I will shed my poorer operating accounts and still net close to what i currently do. So 12 of my people will then be unemployed. There is no need to attempt growth, when larger and larger portions of MY hard work go to the government. I am not going to do it. there are millions like me. Today, small business drives America.

These facts are very clear.

That's why I question their Intelligence.

If their goal is to increase revenue, their plan has been proved wrong over, and over, and over, and over.

If on the other hand, their goal is to Divide and Conqeur, that's another story. If their Goal is actually to create a dependant voter base for years to come, then their plan makes sense.

If their goal is to increase revenue to pay for their Social plans. It won't work. It's an easy decision for me to layoff. Revenues will go down. larger corporations will move out of country.

That's why i question their inteeligence as well as what their real motives are.

Posted by: zman | September 5, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Storms are brewing in Sarah Palin’s eyes

By Inside Track
Friday, September 5, 2008 -

ST. PAUL, Minn. - The McCain Campaign is denying a supermarket tabloid story alleging that vice presidental candidate Sarah Palin had an extramarital affair, and is threatening legal action against the National Enquirer.

“Its a vicious lie,” John McCain spokesman Steve Schmidt said.

The Enquirer alleges in its Sept. 15 edition that Palin had a fling with a business associate of her husband, Todd Palin. The candidate’s hubby discovered the infidelity and dissolved the business, the article said.


The Enquirer attributed the allegation to “an enemy” of the Alaska governor and many pundits postulated that the tabloid’s source was Palin’s estranged brother-in-law, Mike Wooten. Wooten, who was embroiled in an ugly custody battle with Palin’s sister, claims the governor tried to have him fired from the Alaska state police.

“The smearing of the Palin family must end,” Schmidt said in a statement released yesterday.

The Enquirer, in a web story entitled “Palin War: Teen Preggo Crisis,” claims that Palin planned to have her pregnant 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, married off to her baby daddy right after the Republican National Convention.

The plan, the paper said, was to announce Bristol’s pregnancy after the wedding. However, the tabloid says the teen refused to go along with the wedding, sparking a “mother-daughter showdown.”

The Enquirer says the Palin camp revealed the pregnancy “hours after The Enquirer informed her representatives and family members of Levi Johnston, the father of Bristol’s child, that we were aware of the pregnancy and were going to break the news.”

The story adds that “The Enquirer has also learned that Palin’s family is embroiled in a vicious war that is now exposing her darkest secrets, threatening to destroy her political career.”

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

I went to junior high with Sarah Palin. We were buddies. This much I can tell you about her:

She could really throw a frisbee. That thing would just fly! Of course her aim was terrible.

It was like, Sarah, I'm standing right here! Quit throwing the frisbee into the bushes! I got so tired of chasing that damn frisbee.

Posted by: Tor Grogan | September 5, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

scrivener does this help?? lol

C:\>ipconfig

Windows IP Configuration


Ethernet adapter LAN:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.102
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.0.1

C:\>

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

A PROPOSAL FOR INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS WITH COMPUTER SKILLS: EXPOSE THE ID OF PAID DISINFORMATION TROLLS USING MAINSTREAM MEDIA SITES TO PROPAGANDIZE AND HARASS

"Rahiq Syed" at 9:02 p.m.:

This same pseudo-post shows up day after day, evidence that paid disinformation trolls appear to inhabit mainstream media blogs to libel, harass and propagandize certain individuals they appear to have targeted.

Would a journalist with computer skills be able to take all "Fix" posts for a month period, employ a program that isolates duplicate posts, and then analyze these posts for content?

Such a study would prove that these blogs are being spammed. The next step would be a forensic analyis of IP addresses to determine a pattern, and geographic location of the ISPs most common to these posts.

Of course, skilled hackers and spammers have software that can "spoof" someone else's IP address, so such an analysis could point to innocents whose IP addresses have been hijacked. But even that exercise would at least give those whose addresses have been illicitly expropriated a chance to respond. If there is a pattern to those whose addresses are hijacked, that could indicate that these persons are being singled out for harassment.

The Washington Post has on its staff several skilled investigative reporters. Would one of them care to vie for a Pulitzer by exposing who is using these sites to libel, harass and propagandize -- possibly in violation of federal anti-propaganda laws?

BUT WILL THE ELECTION EVEN MATTER? Not when government-supported "vigilante injustice" squads are "gang stalking" American citizens, making a mockery of the rule of law:
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/get-political-vic-livingston-opinion-expose-state-supported-vigilante-squads-doing-domestic-terrorism

WHAT IF THEY COULD SHOOT YOU
WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE? THEY CAN.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Shaniqua Obama HAHAHAHAHA you know she would like to put africa art in the white house

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

I prefer a pitbull with lipstick over a sasquatch in a dress (i.e. Michelle Shaniqua Obama).

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown, get some sleep. You need to get up at 6am tomorrow to get that application in at Mickey Ds. Remember keep the fries in until they are golden brown. You'll be fine. Good luck, AC.
________

">DDAWD wrote: "Actually, Dianne72 is supposed to be a parody of such overt racists such as asper. A joke, people. Thus its so obvious."

Do you actually believe you have an audience that you are addressing?

You think you're performing for some on-lookers, don't you?

That's why you act so weird and desperate to attack anyone's opinion. You're playing to some shadow puppets of your imagination.

What a weirdo.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:47 PM"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

Denial is a waste of time, your boy did not win one important stae in the primary and limped to the finish line. dream on about how great your boy is, even the MSNBC says he's in trouble

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

> anoyo wrote; To quote Peggy Loon-nan, this campaign, "it's over" and Palin is "BS."

They are going to move up by two weeks the release date of the official report on the investigation of Palin's Troopergate scandal (when she, much like Kwame Kilpatrick, abused her power to fire a Police Chief who ignored her illegal request that he fire her brother in law).

Alaskan legislators have already signaled this will be damaging. Yup. Yup. You'll have to follow this drama on HuffPo or Daily Kos because the Post is too busy bloviatin' and opinionatin' to report on that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:45 PM

_________________

Ya your right. the public is going to have a lot of sympathy in a situation where the officer "tasered" his ten year old son. Gonna be a lot of mothers feeling sorry for that officer.

This whole thing will backfire on the Libs, because the Safety Director who is an 'at will' employee failed to remove the officer. The Public will totally agree with Palin as to why the BUM didn't do his job!

Posted by: dano | September 5, 2008 10:00 PM | Report abuse

People love to watch a train wreck and they weren't disappointed.


=========
Obama's speech will be read for years to come - please maybe by the NAACP The One got swamped by John McCain in the rating something that stunned me. I lived in OH for quite a while and have spoken to a number of people from OH that voted for Hillary .. I can tell you Obama got hammered in OH and PA the reason - he's black, small town oh people and PA people won't vote for a liberal black man. Didn't happen in theprimary won't happen in the election... sorry but it's the truth

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:54 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Someone should remind Michelle Shaniqua Obama that it is considered impolite to chew food with your mouth open. In my view this woman lacks the poise, grace, and good breeding to be First Lady. I saw this image of her eating a pork sandwich and I was aghast at the prospect of her entertaining in the White House. Can you imagine her sitting down to tea with Queen Elizabeth II? Do you think she will hang the god awful african art on the pristine White House walls?

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 9:56 PM | Report abuse

True, JakeD, care to estimate how many people at the convention and watching on TV assumed it sold on eBay?

We know McCain was one of them.

fonkyou:

McCain's speech was not ranked among the Top Five (you know, the actual TOPIC?!) on this thread.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:46 PM

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

SOME MICHELLE OBAMA QUOTES

Michelle Obama spent the Democratic Primary season stumping around calling Americans slobs and cynics. As described in the New Yorker:

"... [Michelle] Obama begins [her stump speech] with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. "We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," she said, as heads bobbed in the pews."

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/10/080310fa_fact_collins?currentPage=3

She also said her husband doesn't need a lot of experience to become President because, according to her, "it's not rocket science."

Michelle Obama absolutely meant what she said about not being proud of America. It was part of a composed speech: she said it not once (spontaneously) but she said it TWICE on that day. The first time she said it, she said that it was the first time she was proud of her country. The second time, she added the word "really" to the phrase.

These attitudes of disrespect for white America aren't fleeting. You can see earlier versions of them in Michelle Obama's senior thesis. in it, she asks whether or not educated blacks who succeed and integrate with white people and become "integrationists/assimilationists" lose their identity and thereby become ignorant. It's true, read her racially motivated thesis online at politico.com. It's full of all kinds of weird goodies, like how a black man would have to act in order for white people to submit to his leadership.

Michelle Obama Thesis: Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community
part 1: www.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_1-251.pdf
part 2: www.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_26-501.pdf
part 3: www.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_51-751.pdf
part 4: dyn.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_76-981.pdf

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama's speech will be read for years to come - please maybe by the NAACP The One got swamped by John McCain in the rating something that stunned me. I lived in OH for quite a while and have spoken to a number of people from OH that voted for Hillary .. I can tell you Obama got hammered in OH and PA the reason - he's black, small town oh people and PA people won't vote for a liberal black man. Didn't happen in theprimary won't happen in the election... sorry but it's the truth

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Well done, JakeD. Add in the Breakwater-gate hoax, Troopergate, and her devotion to Pat Buchanan's "agenda" (the Anti Defamation League has an entire page on him), and "states rights" (a code word) and that just about sums up Mrs. Todd Palin.

Maybe the Post and the MSM will print some of these facts and do some hard core reporting before November. Naaaaaaah.
______

Finally!!! I was reading the rest of this thread and someone (KCCraig) finally stayed on topic:

1) bridge to nowhere (until it became such a national scandal that she had little choice but to prevent funds from going to it...though Alaska still pocketed the money),

Regardless, even if she get the money, she killed the Bridge project and told Congress "Thanks, but no thanks."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/politifact_mccain_exaggerates.html

2) that she failed to sell the plane on e-bay and the state lost a lot of money on the deal,

She actually only said: "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay." Again, technically true. In addition, Tucker Bounds, a spokesman for McCain's campaign: "She sold the plane and saved the taxpayers money on maintence and costs."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/05/plane_not_sold_on_ebay.html#comments

3) that she left her town of 6000 in $20 million debt, that she scored nearly $30 million in earmarks, that she "balanced" a budget flooded with oil money, that her husband's seven years in a secessionist party and her attendance at at least two conventions (at least she didn't make an off-handed remark like that failed to be sufficiently proud of America in her adult life)....

Of course, none of that was in her speech, but at least you tried with the first two "alleged" points. C+ for effort.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:33 PM

Posted by: Captain America | September 5, 2008 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Peninsula Matt:

Care to actually QUOTE, and back up, any alleged "lie" about her record?

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Obama's speech will be read and listened to for years to come, and was number 1 without doubts. Hillary comes in a close 2nd, she was on fire. Michelle after that, and Bill after that. Sen. Durbin also delivered a wonderful speech. Meanwhile, Sen. McCain's Gimmicky Veep pick gets the acclaims from the media clearly owned by the corporations (they like tax cuts and deregulation-so they like Republicans) after being sequestered for 3 days with Bush speechwriter. As a former sportscaster, I guess she got the job done.

So yeah....Palin was sooo "wow", Obama was able to raise 10 million dollars while she was speaking. Too bad she only raised 1 million for her own party during that time. Guess her large viewing audience were Obama supporters watching as Palin lied again and again and again about everything. But then that's America for you. But I've got to give it to the 9/11 film fest, with the delegates dancing right afterwards. It gave by far the most true message as to what the RNC stands for. Somehow, no media "outrage" on that.

Sorry, RNC operatives aka Washington Eastern Elites, but the Good cop/Bad cop routine is transparent; sphyche-ops' not working.

Posted by: Catherine | September 5, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

>DDAWD wrote: "Actually, Dianne72 is supposed to be a parody of such overt racists such as asper. A joke, people. Thus its so obvious."

Do you actually believe you have an audience that you are addressing?

You think you're performing for some on-lookers, don't you?

That's why you act so weird and desperate to attack anyone's opinion. You're playing to some shadow puppets of your imagination.

What a weirdo.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

fonkyou:

McCain's speech was not ranked among the Top Five (you know, the actual TOPIC?!) on this thread.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you are definitely a POLITICAL ANIMAL and this list of yours is PROOF!!! Was there any chance that you'd have 4 of one party 1 of the other; or 5 and 0 for that matter??? NO!!! Why not do a list for each party? That way you don't have to pretend to be balanced?

Anyway, my list:

5. Barry Schweitzer - hit all the right notes with a smile on his face!
4. Hillary Clinton - It'd have been higher if it was less about her
3. John Kerry - Where was THAT John Kerry 4 years ago?
2. Bill Clinton - It was the first time I liked the guy in 2 years. I the greeting he received really touched him and he re-found his role as party elder-statesman
1. Barack Obama - he exceeded the highest expectations! Can you image McCain trying to hold the attention of 80,000 people? He couldn't do it with 15K

Where's Palin? She read a decent speech even though she had an out of control teleprompter. But she lied about her record and she lied about Barack Obama's record. Plus, she mocked community organizing. I feel sorry for her to be thrown into the deep end of the political pool but she agreed to this; she is way over her head but it doesn't excuse her lack of knowledge or decency.

Where's Fred? The 80 or so throat clears is unfortunate but very, very distracting. Couldn't they give him a cough button to keep it off the PA? And what was that about John McCain and strippers? What sort of family values are these?

But I do want to give a shout out for Mike Huckabee. Even though I disagree with most of his positions I appreciated him acknowledging Barack Obama's accomplishment. He really seems like a decent man.

Posted by: Peninsula Matt | September 5, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl:

That's why they are so scared ...

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

>>JakeD wrote: "Anyone other than Anonymous: I am registered Independent."

Don't worry about it. There have been some poisonous, attacking Obama supporter lurking on this site today, hacking at anyone who criticizes Obama.

The cult of Obama is getting desperate, and they are flailing about.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, McCain said she sold the plane for a profit, which she did not on both points.

"McCain said Friday during a campaign stop in Cedarburg, Wisconsin. "You know what I enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was purchased by her predecessor and sold it on eBay — and made a profit."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/05/alaska-state-jet-didnt-fly-on-ebay/


So it was just an exaggeration she sure sucked the boss in.

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Best speeches of the DNC and RNC convention

#1 Hillary Clinton (Hillary's speech of a lifetime. Now, let's ask again, WHY isn't Hillary, who won MORE votes than AZNY candidate of ANY party in history NOT the nominee or even on the ticket?? Hillary SHOULD be the Dem nominee and the next President) The Dems are very foolish to have nominated the wrong, unqualified, unelectable Obama

#2 Bill Clinton (always gotta love the master, Bill)

#3 Sarah Palin (wow, a new political star was born)

Posted by: J | September 5, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

One thing that Sarah Palin's speech made clear:

When the comedians have been ridiculing Obama's opponents and only making contextual, supportive jokes involving Obama, they weren't, as they claimed, "unable to find a way to poke fun at him because of his particular personality type."

Sarah Palin's speech made it clear that it's very easy to make people laugh at Barack Obama. The TV shows, including late night shows, have been choosing to ridicule and undermine his opponents and praising him, as part of the media trend to try to act as the Democratic party's activist propaganda wing.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

In Loon-nan's world, only what she says to her media friends on an open mike counts, i.e., "it's over" for the campaign and the Palin is "BS." Her subsequent idiotic "explanation" in the WSJ of her candid remarks made absolutely no sense to anyone and further destroyed what little credbility she had.

As you know, the day before she blurted out her true feelings on the open mike about Palin (that Palin is BS), Loon-nan wrote a disgenuous WSJ article that was over-the-top pro-Palin.

So remember: disregard anything she writes and wait for the next open-mike night to get her real feelings. If Loon-nan writes it will be sunny, wear a raincoat. Understood? Now go to bed.

Cap

_____________________
"P.S. to Anonymous (I'm almost about ready to stop responding to anyone who can't even bother to pick a pseudonym):

Peggy Noonan clarified what she really meant. Of course, you won't care about that.

http://beltwayblips.com/story/peggy_noonan_explains_she_doesn_t_think_it_s_over_for/

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:58 PM"

Posted by: Captain America | September 5, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Anyone other than Anonymous:

I am registered Independent.

beut_d:

What "factual errors"? Seriously, I'm ready to debate ANYTHING she actually said in the speech at issue (I, of course, agree with Chris Cillizza on this one ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

"I think the statement by Dianne 72 is uninformed and racist, usually the indicating a lack of education."

Actually, Dianne72 is supposed to be a parody of such overt racists such as asper. A joke, people. Thus its so obvious.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Finally!!! I was reading the rest of this thread and someone (KCCraig) finally stayed on topic:

1) bridge to nowhere (until it became such a national scandal that she had little choice but to prevent funds from going to it...though Alaska still pocketed the money),

Regardless, even if she get the money, she killed the Bridge project and told Congress "Thanks, but no thanks."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/politifact_mccain_exaggerates.html

2) that she failed to sell the plane on e-bay and the state lost a lot of money on the deal,

She actually only said: "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay." Again, technically true. In addition, Tucker Bounds, a spokesman for McCain's campaign: "She sold the plane and saved the taxpayers money on maintence and costs."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/05/plane_not_sold_on_ebay.html#comments

3) that she left her town of 6000 in $20 million debt, that she scored nearly $30 million in earmarks, that she "balanced" a budget flooded with oil money, that her husband's seven years in a secessionist party and her attendance at at least two conventions (at least she didn't make an off-handed remark like that failed to be sufficiently proud of America in her adult life)....

Of course, none of that was in her speech, but at least you tried with the first two "alleged" points. C+ for effort.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

Hillary beats out Obama and in his slot. And Obama does not make the top 5.

He was in an arena of 85,000 people standing on a monument! And it was still not that great!
Hillary was not inside that arena. But she sent the crowd through the roof. Her speech was great and moving.

She reminded every single Dem there that Obama and or the DNC screwed up by not having her on the bottom, or top, of the ticket.

Posted by: DEM now IND | September 5, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Guess Dianne72 and JakeD didn't get the talking points from their leaders. You idiots already tried the "whitey" tape. Everyone could tell it was the typical amateurish BS so typical of the Party of Religious Nutjobs.

Your party leader said last night that "we have to catch up to history." Well, everyone already has, it's just you and you losers that need to catch up to reality, and it's going to be sweet.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?! That woman rocked!!

Noone on that entire list hit harder than Bill Clinton!!! Bill Clinton was in presidential mode giving Straight Talk and breaking the information DOWN.

McCain, nor any one of his speakers, got on Clinton's level. He didn't serve two terms for nothing!

Obama laid out the case, and the Repubican Convention didn't make the case as I was expecting.

Posted by: Obama2008 | September 5, 2008 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Can't agree with the top spot. I would give that Biden. That speech had people crying, laughing, screaming out loud (and so did his son's just before!!).

Palin's speech was energizing no doubt, but given the factual errors, lack of specifics about her policies or her personality, I would say it was nothing more than a very public scolding of her opponent.

Glad you didn't put McCain on there. The video before his speech was just like on the History Channel. That alone must have put people to sleep...

Thompson's speech was also not that interesting to me. You said you had a soft spot for his use of local cliche, but if people were excited about that guy at some point with that type of delivery, well, no wonder he went straight down hill. It's empty rhetoric and grumpy to boot.

Clinton was great, as usual. Gosh, I miss him!

Posted by: beut_d | September 5, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

Dianne72's mother should have aborted her.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

My mother almost aborted me.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 9:18 PM | Report abuse

I wonder when we are going to hear more about Barry Hussein's illicit drug use and his sexual trists on and off the basketball court. That too was in the Enquirer...

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Actually, Dianne72: if there is a "whitey" video at Trinity Church, it will probably be released before October (to counteract Palin's church video ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

"Here's the story about Palin's book-banning try as mayor."

"Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so.

According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didn't fully support her and had to go.

Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job."
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/51821.html

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Yes as well as an abortion before she was married. Enquirer has it. They mat have the guy who paid for the abortion


=======
So are we going to find out next week that Todd "Nutjob Secessionist masquerading as First Dude" Palin's former business partner had an affair with Sarah "Cheney with Lipstick" Palin?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:19 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

I have been in this country for 7 years and when I arrived I was struck at how poor and uneducated most blacks are. I could never figure out why most had children out of wedlock, sold drugs, and were in jail. They also have the highest rate of HIV.

I suppose it is the slave metality from generations ago but at some point they will have to take responsibility. I think that is the reason Senator Obama appeals to so many whites because he isn't 100% black. He has a black face but the mentality of a white person. That makes the vote palatable and they can feel good about themselves. I doubt many of these white voters would go for an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson - just too black and they are for more representative of the black American - not Barack Obama.

Posted by: Rahiq Syed | September 5, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to Anonymous (I'm almost about ready to stop responding to anyone who can't even bother to pick a pseudonym):

Peggy Noonan clarified what she really meant. Of course, you won't care about that.

http://beltwayblips.com/story/peggy_noonan_explains_she_doesn_t_think_it_s_over_for/

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Ignore Dianne72.

She's been posting this exact comment for weeks. Before that she had a slightly different one that she also posted whereever she could.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Jaxas:

The speech was targeted to those who are not dead-set against McCain already (intelligent ot not). As for judging a speech MINUS CROWD REACTION, you want to do that to King's "I Have A Dream" or Reagan's "Tear Down This Wall" speeches too? Kinda loses their punch if you get to take that away.

I'm back (obviously), everyone else. If you want to argue about Palin's speech?

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Chris wrong on Schweitzer term.

Schweitzer elected 2004 and is up for re-election this year and, assuming he wins re-election, his second term would end in 2012, NOT 2010.

I can't believe the Wash post web site has NO way to contact Chris or anyone else that they have an out-and-out factual error like this on the web site.

Posted by: Janell | September 5, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

This rendering validates my original contention that the analysts in the mainstream media are completely unisnpired and lacking in the basic skills required to do this sort of analysis. Has anyone thought to go back over Palin's speech and eliminate the audience reaction? No, I din't hink so. If you did that, if for example this had been a simple radio address where ther is no audience reaction, it would have been little morte than a standard right wing, Limbaughesque rant against one human being--in this case, Barack Obama.

But, Chris--like so many of the mainstream media analyst who succommb to the conventional narrative that is being so widely peddled. Look. These people have no sense of what is really going on. They are--sorry Chris--simply cattle, to be herded in whatever direction the Karl Roves of the worlds want them to move. It is really quite disappointing to see otherwise intelligent people like this to be quite frankly manipulated as easily as Pavlov's dog is to the ringing of the bell to perform what ever tricks these carny hypnotists want themn to perform.

Sarah Palin's speech was silly, pedestrian, and ladled with cant. Any intellignet person could see that. But then, this speech was not aimed at intelligent people, was it? And sorry to say Chris, that includes you.

Posted by: Jaxas | September 5, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

To quote Peggy Loon-nan, this campaign, "it's over" and Palin is "BS."

They are going to move up by two weeks the release date of the official report on the investigation of Palin's Troopergate scandal (when she, much like Kwame Kilpatrick, abused her power to fire a Police Chief who ignored her illegal request that he fire her brother in law).

Alaskan legislators have already signaled this will be damaging. Yup. Yup. You'll have to follow this drama on HuffPo or Daily Kos because the Post is too busy bloviatin' and opinionatin' to report on that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

I also read somewhere that when they finally sold it the state lost $1 million on the sale. Maybe they could have found some use for it rather than lose that much money.

Posted by: Rosewren02 | September 5, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Michelle Obama got the degrees she did and became a successful attorney by not being able to speak or write the English language. Further more, there are people in the ghetto areas of cities that speak acceptable English as well. I think the statement by Dianne 72 is uninformed and racist, usually the indicating a lack of education.

Posted by: Rosewren02 | September 5, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

That's funny Dianne72, you sound like a typical low information voter. Did you need help cut and pasting that from Little Green Footballs, or did you take a few hours away from the fryalator and come up with that all by yourself?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

It just keeps getting better...

Turns out Palin's jet on eBay didn't sell.

"But it turns out the twin-engine Westwind II was a tough sell on the Web — and the state eventually pulled it offline and sold it through an ordinary brick-and-mortar brokerage, for a loss, a spokeswoman said Friday."

And now the person that bought it wants another $50,000 from Alaska for "unexpected maintenance issues with the aircraft".

Is there anything that Palin says that is really true??

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/05/alaska-state-jet-didnt-fly-on-ebay/#comments

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone ever listened to Michelle Shaniqua Obama speak? She tries very hard to sound articulate but you can tell it's not natural. It's almost as if at any moment she will slip back into ghetto-speak. I bet that was the case when she gave her "whitey" speech at Trinity Church. I look forward to the release of that tape in October.

Posted by: Dianne72 | September 5, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

So the building in back of McCain during his snoozer last night was *supposed* to be Walter Reed Army Medical Center, but was actually Walter Reed Middle School in California??

That's great. I guess McCain's campaign staff hasn't learned to use "the Google" yet either. LOL

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Ms Palin is being hailed as a super-mom at the very moment of her greatest failure as a parent.

One family value we all should be able to agree on is that it's not good for teenage girls, girls who haven't finished high school, to get pregnant. In fact, it's most often a disaster.

The odds are that a girl in that situation will have a lifetime of medical, emotional and financial problems, will have much lower achievement both academically and in her career than her classmates, and will very likely be a single mom when she's 30.

Palin's new prominence, and the glorification of the very sad story of her daughter's situation, sends a horrifying message both to moms and kids of the "real people" she hopes to make her constituency.

Posted by: tony | September 5, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

So are we going to find out next week that Todd "Nutjob Secessionist masquerading as First Dude" Palin's former business partner had an affair with Sarah "Cheney with Lipstick" Palin?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Well now we know, AsperClown. "I don't feel like working right now." Isn't that what you said? How are YOU any different from "those people" on welfare you claim don't want to work?

Look AC, get up at 6am tomorrow and instead of posting goofy foolish rants all day against Obama on multiple web sites, go down to MickeyD's and ask if they can use a new fry cook or a mop girl. If that goes bust, check out Arby's, KFC, and Tippy Taco's, too. Or stand in front of 7/11 and pick up a day laborer trash-haul gig. Don't worry. You'll find something. Good luck.
___
AsperClown wrote: "I do have a lot of time on my hands. I'm spending a lot of time online right now and have many windows up. I can track this thread without a lot of effort.

And I don't need a want ad. I don't have to work unless i feel like it and I don't feel like working right now."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

>>Clinton supporter wrote: "Obama to women: So? Yeah, I didn't pick the woman who got 18 MILLION votes and came in a very close second. What are you gonna do? Vote for the pro-life party? So? Yeah, shut up and sit down."

Barack Obama is paying now for his sexism and self-centered inability to pick the historic female candidate to share his ticket.

It was a very arrogant move for him to not pick Hillary Clinton and everyone knew it. His polls started slipping from the moment he named Joe Biden as his VP.

It's going to be practically impossible for him to win now.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

chris is wrong about Schweitzer's term.

Gov. Schweitzer was elected in 2004 for a 4 year term and is up for election again this year, NOT in 2010.

You can look it up in the Almanac of American Politics or any number of other references.

I can't believe the Post has no way to contact Chris or anyone else to report an out-and-out factual error.

Posted by: Janell | September 5, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

>>DDAWD wrote: "Wow, does EVERYONE think that asper is a frothing racist? Wow...I feel so validated or something."

That "something" you're feeling ain't validation.

Didn't you get the memo? Obama supporters are supposed to stop crying "racist" at anyone who criticizes Obama.

Along with Obama campaign is COMPLAINING about how the pretty Republican VP mom was making fun him in his speech, and after how he was busted trying to call the Republicans "racist" for running funny Paris Hilton ads about him, it makes him look like a shrill racial grievance guy when his supporters try to call any critics "racist".

I mean, he sounds like a 6th grader complaining that 3rd graders are picking on him.

Obama supporters are supposed to shelve the "racist" finger pointing.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

WHY DID OBAMA NOT PICK HILLARY FOR VP? A QUALIFIED WOMAN WHO GOT THE MOST VOTES *EVER* IN A PRIMARY CAMPAIGN?

WHY NOT?

Posted by: WHY NOT HILLARY? | September 5, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Two speeches to add to that list are first, Rudy Giulini's - he had me in stitches laughing (!) and Senator McCain's. I believe McCain's was the most true to his real self of all the speeches given in either convention and given that he isn't a "natural" orator, he did a fantastic job delivering it. I noted another commented that a great delivery of a speech written by someone else just says you're a great actor, and I believe that really applies to Obama this year. Have you seen him talk without a script? Lots of pauses, ummm's, well's ... as if he's plotting the best way to use doublespeak. I am an independent voting for the McCain/Palin ticket this year. Obama's clearly radical leanings (you can call it "left" if you want, but my leftist friends are not like Obama!) are not what this country needs. We need a moderate: John McCain. Just as Bill Clinton was a conservative Democrat (moderate), McCain is a liberal Republican (moderate). The country needs someone in the middle to pull us back together!

Posted by: independent me | September 5, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH

I love the hypocrisy of the supporters of the candidate who has but ONE qualification. A Phd in speaking from a teleprompter. That's it. (Oh, I am sorry, he is a community organizer too). Obama supporters are offended that there should be someone out there, like Sarah Palin, who has a strong record of actually doing things AND makes great speeches. Yikes! The collective pee leaking from the pants of smug, elitist Democrats is threatening a new climate crisis. Take note, environmentalists.

SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH SARAH

Posted by: The Sarah Palin scare | September 5, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

.
.
.
.
.
Obama to women: So? Yeah, I didn't pick the woman who got 18 MILLION votes and came in a very close second. What are you gonna do? Vote for the pro-life party? So? Yeah, shut up and sit down.
.
.
.
.
.

Posted by: DNC renamed to MCP | September 5, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
You go, aspergirl!!! You know these are top-notch professional misogynists you are dealing with. They are liberals/Democrats after all. They CAN'T STAND a girl with strong views. So, don't stop. Continue standing upto these MCPs.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Posted by: A Clinton supporter | September 5, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Wow, does EVERYONE think that asper is a frothing racist? Wow...I feel so validated or something.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "AsperClown: your first post today was at 8am and your more recent at 7:00. Conclusion: you have way -- way -- too much time on your hands. To help you out, I have pasted in a "help wanted" ad I came across. Send them your resume. Good luck."

Dear Anonymous/Dave/dl/evil little kid:

I do have a lot of time on my hands. I'm spending a lot of time online right now and have many windows up. I can track this thread without a lot of effort.

And I don't need a want ad. I don't have to work unless i feel like it and I don't feel like working right now.

But that's a little different than the welfare deal you have going, harassing me all day as part of your job with the Obama cult corps making a few $$ a day being a paid cyberbully lurking on forums attacking readers/posters who don't support Barack Obama.

In your crude, low class words that you posted earlier on in one of the many names you've pretended to post under today, "Why don't you grow a pair?"

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

BOB DYLAN WROTE A SONG ABOUT SARAH PALIN'S PUPPETEERS...

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

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

OK, Chris, which speeches were generated by the speakers who delivered them, and which ones merely demonstrated the ability to read from a teleprompter?

Thompson did a great job with his lines in "Red October," too, but by that standard any competent actor is a great politician. Palin has been working with others' words since her objective was to land a gig with ESPN (where she probably belongs.)

Your Line unfortunately makes interchangeable the five individuals' style and their substance.

Posted by: FlownOver | September 5, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

AsperClown: your first post today was at 8am and your more recent at 7:00. Conclusion: you have way -- way -- too much time on your hands. To help you out, I have pasted in a "help wanted" ad I came across. Send them your resume. Good luck.
_____

"HELP WANTED

Idiot troll who spends the entire day, and much of the night, and all the time in between, posting on the Fix and Daily Kos with inane supercilious attacks on Barack Obama and thinking people of the world. No experience, education, or common sense is required. References from extremist hate groups helpful. Membership in Concerned White Citizens Council a major plus. We do not discriminate against degenerates, only mud people. Please email resume and cover letter to allfools@hell.com."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

HS History Textbook 2009

President Lincoln: "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

Admiral Farragut: "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead."

General MacArthur: "I shall return.'

President Truman: "If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen."

President Carter: "I will not tell a lie."

President McCain: "Where am I?"

President Palin (by appointment in 2009 under the Succession Act): "We must, we must, we must increase our bust, the bigger the better, the tighter the sweater, it all is up to us."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

John Kerry's speech should have made this list.

Posted by: Joe | September 5, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Bob Dylan - Knockin' On Heaven's Door

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2feoIM9baI

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Ch’áak’ naax xat sitee | September 5, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

OK, so if you would have put a cow up there that would have managed to fart Stars and Stripes for Ever it would have taken first spot in your ranking?

What did Dogbert say was the secret of happiness in life? Low expectations and your own bag of chips.

Posted by: IPG | September 5, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

>>lurker wrote: "So lets delve a little deeper into why your fragil psyche thinks Obama is an elitist and Palin is just a down home kinda gal in your eyes?"

I'm not going to go over his whole history and behavioral profile with you. But the accusations of "elitist" are implicit throughout many ads and campaign materials that have successfully tagged him as an elitist and stuck to him (which means that a lot of people agreed with the tag).

These include Obama:

-- making up stories about the drastic inflation of arugula in Whole Foods to tell to poor whites in Kentucky who wouldn't know he's blowing smoke at them (a truly upscale arugula eater would have known the price of arugula in Whole Foods hadn't gone up in 3 years)

-- hypocritically pretending to share the values of the blue collar whites in Pennsylvania in stump speeches there while making out-of-touch, condescending explanations about why they aren't voting for him to wealthy liberal donors in San Francisco

-- his 2 "historical fiction" memoirs with "composite characters" that create a beautiful false narrative about his life story, and insisting that the campaign treat it as factually true bio

-- his many, many narcissistic affectations of elitism on the campaign trail, in which most people agree he has has gone over the top, from using donated money to create a $6 million dollar speech backdrop for his nomination acceptance speech, to creating the faux-presidential campaign seal that he took down after being ridiculed as a pretentious twit. There are a good dozen of these.

Obama can be called an "elite" simply because he has ivy league degrees.

So, in summary, in order to be clear for your pathologically ideological little brain that lives in a bubble world of Obama cult worship, his most clearly "elitist" behaviors, as in my list above, are his narcissistic affectations of elitism and the phony, condescending things he says and the lies he gets caught in.

Since Obama's been tagged as an elitist for six months or more now, and since he's regularly ridiculed and remarked on each time he makes an affectation-of-elitism gaffe, I assume you have some cult-related retardation in the subject area to be clueless as to what I was referring to. Maybe the late-night comedy jokes were over your head.

Was that sufficiently clear for your primitive sockpuppet mind?

Perhaps if you go to DailyKos and pretend it's a talking point you can finally get the "elitist" tag that he's been stuck with.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

I have to agree with your assessment of Palin's speech as the best of the five, but not because I support her. That a pretty well delivered speech would successfully divert the focus of the press upon her shockingly hypocritical and corrupt record of (minimal) service is quite a coup. The McCain people learned from Bush that if you keep repeating lies loudly enough, people believe you. That she was a supporter of the bridge to nowhere (until it became such a national scandal that she had little choice but to prevent funds from going to it...though Alaska still pocketed the money), that she failed to sell the plane on e-bay and the state lost a lot of money on the deal, that she left her town of 6000 in $20 million debt, that she scored nearly $30 million in earmarks, that she "balanced" a budget flooded with oil money, that her husband's seven years in a secessionist party and her attendance at at least two conventions (at least she didn't make an off-handed remark like that failed to be sufficiently proud of America in her adult life)....that a speech could let about half of all of America simply ignore all that. Well, that's a darn good speech. The next couple of months of her ditching every opportunity to take serious questions from those evil elitist reporters should be a lot of fun.

Posted by: KCCraig | September 5, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

dear chris:

she didn't write the speech, she delivered the words given to her well. i am amazed how these so-called christian evangelists can subjugate "thou shalt not bare false witness," treat others the way you want to be treated, "whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, you do unto me." i guess these commandants are not applicable in politics and only apply to those who think like them.

Posted by: sbv | September 5, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse


McCain/Palin's "reformer" image is skin deep. They're trying to steal Obama's change message because Americans desperately want Washington to represent We The People.

Bush's speechwriters write McCain's and Palin's speeches. Bush's strategists run McCain/Palin's campaign. McCain/Palin use the same old divisive, dishonest smear tactics as Bush/Cheney/Rove.

They support God and guns as a smokescreen for their servitude to corporate CEOs, especially within the Oil industry.

It may be that McCain used to be his own man, but that CHANGED when he joined the Bush campaign back in 2000. McCain sold out, and that's CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl has more hands up her dress than a muppet. She speaks of elitism, but wears a KKK hood to work.

WTF BIATCH?!

Posted by: Apergirl needs aspercreme | September 5, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

>>Dave wrote: "You are a very sad person if that is how you see the world. Thanks for confirming your view for us. Sad Sad Sad."

It's how I see you. Whether you are an old white man parroting adolescent ghetto trash-trash for the cult, or an activist with a paranoid mentality, you don't even understand the cult's talking points that you are regurgitating.

>>Dave wrote: "You ignorant little troll... you moron. .... Just because you blame all men for your pitiful little life is no reason to be uninformed. You are an embarassment to any thinking adult."

>>Dave wrote: "She is so unqualified that she can't speak without asking permission. God for bid if you have the nerve to ask questions people like that embarassment to human life, Aspergirl..."

>>Dave wrote: "I think the media needs to seriously grow a pair."

>>Anonymous wrote: " Let me break this to you gently- lots of us are white, highly educated, live in upscale neighborhoods and voting for Obama."

Well, then you are all innately, intrinsically trashy people for lining up with his verbally abusive, personally attacking behavior. You might have money, if what you claim is true. But you're cyberbullying, verbally abusive trashy people in your online behavior.

Which suggests even more strongly that you are DailyKos sockpuppets and cult-of-Obama bloggers. They have that sociopathic groupthink going on over there, particularly in the "hidden" threads that the public can't see. The ones where they talk about Republicans as if they are animals and talk about how this person is a "troll" and a "Repug" and vent a lot of mentally ill hatred including death threats and rants. They have that kind of cyberbully, sociopathic groupthink going on over there, so that they have no clue that they are over the line and think they're being funny and cool. It's kind of like an online attractor and collector of pathological losers.

You're all so trashy and verbally abusive. The hatred in the Obama corps for those who don't go along with the cult is really disturbing.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

sorry mean to say Rick Davis

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl spoken like a republican's best defense...or like a speech from sarah palin...angry and in effect somewhat factless...


the biggest red flag in this entire campaign has happened today with the acknowledgement by Rick david that they may not put palin out for interviews

this is the signs showing through that this campaign is a whole lot more like Bush Cheney Rove Libby etc...than anyone could have seen so far.

secrecy shutting off the press and then attacking for patriotism or sexism to get them to back of from the silencing curtain they are wrapping around their mistakes and manipulation.

And then the mistake of McCain today bragging about Plain selling her plane on ebay could bring nothing up other than a cartoonish reminder of WMD showing up in the state of the union... (bottom line is either mccain knowingly lied...or they really truly didn't do the vetting they so oft defend)

These are signs already that, that insidiousness that went on in the past 8 years, are well structured and ingrained already in the Mccain campaign and this new wall of silence is a big red flag on how deep and how big they are willing to make that wall to hide any manipulation ofr mistake they will do.

it would be just bothersome if it wan't just so incredibly scary.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl: "You have no idea what I'm talking about. There are plenty of Democrats who aren't like you. These are the Jacksonian ones, the Appalachian ones, and the blue collar Democrats. The concrete thinkers, the doers-not-hot-air talkers."

Oh no dear, I know exactly where you're coming from and exactly what you're talking about. Trust me on this- you don't want to question my democratic creds. I know all about your little backpedaling dance with the semantics of elite, elitist and well off and you're just dancing around the fact that you really want to call a successful, smart, decent African American who has a real chance of becoming President "uppity" because as you say here: "Social climbers who are narcissists are a good example of those who might get tagged as "elitists""

So lets delve a little deeper into why your fragil psyche thinks Obama is an elitist and Palin is just a down home kinda gal in your eyes? I've got my theory- what's the thread count on those white sheets of yours? You know- the ones with the eye holes?

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

G.O.Palooza 2008


Republicans may not have a clue about running a government, but they definitely know how to throw a great party!

Throughout the G.O.Palooza (G.O.P. National Convention), we heard the countless hours of Republican partisan rants about lowering taxes for the wealthy and rewarding corporations for exporting our jobs overseas; we also witnessed the prime time speech of the inexperienced Gov. Palin bashing on the Democrats and yet repeating the same Republican agenda over the past 8 years.

In a night filled with oil tycoons and lobbyist, it was definitely interesting watching “Republicans Gone Wild!”

Among other notable features of the Republican weeklong infomercial:
-Rudy Giuliani ending a sentence without saying “9/11”
-King George Bush endorsing John McCain for supporting his policies
-Let us not forget the Republicans locking up the Great State of Alaska’s 3 electoral votes

And today, we wake up with a bad hangover and a reminder about why Republicans are bad for our economy and our Country:

-The nation’s unemployment rate rising up to 6%
-Billions of American tax-dollars are being blown away in Iraq, while the Iraqi government locked up a 3 billion dollar deal with China
-2 million American’s are on the risk of loosing their homes
-Al-Qaeda planning the next terrorist attack on America

….I can easily keep on going listing the Republican mistakes, but at this rate I will only end up giving myself a heartburn.

And Yet, Republicans still believe they are the only one’s who have the ability to clean up their own mess and expect us to reward them by voting for them.

From the Twin Cities to the Alamo, from the East to the West, from Main Street to Wall Street, America is looking for a change.

America is ready to move on; America is ready for a leader….
America is ready for Barack Obama.

Senator Obama has the ability to lead America into prosperity.
Senator Obama has the judgment to protect America from terrorism.
Senator Obama has the vision for a stronger & better America.

This is why I will be voting DEMOCRAT in 2008!

Posted by: G.O.Palooza 2008 | September 5, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Hey Soros, where's my check?

Posted by: JohnDoug | September 5, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

You know, I had just walked into the house, turned on MSBNC with Chris Matthews and was listening to a Republican mouth piece talk over an Obama representative. He was loud, talked constantly and he was in complete denial of any statistic Chris Matthews threw at him that shed a negative light on his candidates -- he stayed on his talking points, er...sale pitch and wouldn't let up. THAT's when I realized what was happening to me, it was like talking to a car salesmen, or listening to the speaker in a mult-level marketing convention, or meeting a guy in the parking lot who opens up his jacket to show me some fake stolen jewerly that he wants to sell me for cut rate prices, or whatever I have in my pocket - I can being CONNED. Would RepubliCONS do that!!! Did George Bush CON us into the war with Iraq? Do Shawn Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and all the others menions who are in complete denial of reality CON us on a daily basis with half truths? Hmmm, how about the selection of Sarah Palin -- Conservatives wouldn't allow Lieberman, so, she's the last option, but the best pick! Carl Rove publicly condemed Obama for even thinking of selecting Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, BECAUSE -- he was too inexperienced -- the Mayor of a town of only 200,000, only the Lieutenant Governor and then the Governor. ...and there are many more examples like that. Just think -- Giuliani, Romney and all the other former candidates with decidedly much more experience than themselves.WE ARE BEING RepubliCONNED!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/9/5/maverick_author_paul_waldman_on_free


AMY GOODMAN: John McCain, seen as a lobbyists’ biggest enemy?


PAUL WALDMAN: Yeah, that was a line that really had to make me laugh when I heard it in Sarah Palin’s speech, that the lobbyists aren’t supporting his campaign. Well, the truth is, it’s not just that the lobbyists are supporting his campaign; the lobbyists are running his campaign. His campaign manager is a corporate lobbyist. His chief fundraiser is a corporate lobbyist. His chief political adviser is a corporate lobbyist. There are, by some counts, around 150 different corporate lobbyists who are either on the campaign staff or are major fundraisers for the McCain campaign. And, you know, the idea that somehow he’s the guy who’s standing up to the special interests is just laughable.

Posted by: McCain's speech ripped to threads | September 5, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

BARACK OBAMA'S TOP TEN LIST 09/05/2008

Decide how to belittle her experience and qualifications without reminding everybody she got more than I got.

Decide how to ridicule her religious beliefs without reminding everybody about my racist, paranoid anti-semitic and anti-white ranting Trinity Church and Rev. Wright.

Decide how to belittle her giving a great speech because she had a speechwriter, without people realizing I have a whole team of speechwriters who write my speeches.

Decide how to pretend I'm still the hottest thing on a national ticket this fall.

Decide how to pretend I'm still the youngest, fastest rising star in the political universe.

Decide how to top her basketball championship trophy.

Decide how to pretend that I'm running for president instead of competing against the hot Republican VP.

Decide how to pretend there was some unbigoted reason I didn't pick HIllary as my VP.

Decide how to tell that old stupid blowhard doofus that he's just baggage now that drags down my ticket now that McCain didn't pick an old white man VP.

Call Sarah and ask about how to sell those $6 million-stage styrofoam Temple-of-Obama columns on E-bay now that McCain's got a woman who's pumping up his money game?

Beg Hillary to bail me out.

Posted by: Barack Obama's Conscience | September 5, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

John Kerry.

It's a shame his speech didn't get broader coverage, because Kerry was in rare form: concise, impassioned. A speech which definitely exorcised a few demons.

Posted by: JP2 | September 5, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Fred thompson gave the best speech. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by: Adrian | September 5, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Whatever modicum of respect I had for you just flew out the window with your last paragraph. Have you lost your mind, Sir? Palin is more like a Black Widow spider than "America's Sweetheart". I don't think I can ever again take your opinion seriously . Maybe you should consider changing the name of the column from "The Fix" to "The Shill".

C Multrum

Posted by: Clivus Multrum | September 5, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

^^^ What if Obama's Conscience Spoke at the Same Time He Did? ^^^
^^^ Annotated transcript of Obama's Nomination Acceptance Speech ^^^

>>"Four years ago, I stood before you and told you my story -- of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren't well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America, their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to."

--Four years ago, I laid a big one on you out of my fictionalized life story that I made about my drunken, polygamist, already-married Kenyan father who knocked up my then-17-year-old mother and then abandoned us.

>>"It is that promise that has always set this country apart -- that through hard work and sacrifice, each of us can pursue our individual dreams but still come together as one American family, to ensure that the next generation can pursue their dreams as well."

--And where people like me can get ahead on racial preference and affirmative action, so that we advance without ever actually doing anything resembling hard work and sacrifice like you people!

>>"It is why I stand here tonight. Because for 232 years, at each moment when that promise was in jeopardy, ordinary men and women -- students and soldiers, farmers and teachers, nurses and janitors -- found the courage to keep it alive."

--And support my undeserved advancement and also pay for my racial preference scholarships and all the gravy train that has come my way over the years! The donations of millions of african american supporters -- students and soldiers, farmers and teachers, nurses and janitors -- paid my campaign the $6 million that it cost to move my nominating night event from the Pepsi arena to Invesco field in the Temple of Obama!

>>"We meet at one of those defining moments -- a moment when our nation is at war, our economy is in turmoil, and the American promise has been threatened once more."

--And the Democratic party is nominating a president with no experience or qualifications that might make him a credible executive!! I couldn't get hired to run a factory!! Ha Ha!

>>"Tonight, more Americans are out of work and more are working harder for less. More of you have lost your homes and more are watching your home values plummet. More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit card bills you can't afford to pay and tuition that is beyond your reach"

--And yet you have sent $400 million to my presidential campaign! That I keep spending on helping the voters get to know me better! As if that's the problem! What suckers!

*************************
In David Mendell's 2007 biography, Obama, it was reported that Obama was a B student whose grades slipped so far below a B at High School that in his final year his grandmother feared he would not get into a university. The chapter ends with him being accepted into Occidental on a full scholarship.

The NYT has published a letter written by Obama in 1990, that discusses his own experiences with affirmative action.

(http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/politics/03affirmative.html?_r=2&em=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin)

Mr. Obama quote: “[I] undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action” in [my] own academic career.

Posted by: Barack Obama's Conscience | September 5, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl

You are a very sad person if that is how you see the world. Thanks for confirming your view for us. Sad Sad Sad.

Posted by: Dave | September 5, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

>>lurker wrote: "You seem to think pointing a finger and shrieking elitist at the democrats will really obscure the fact that no one is more elitist than the republican Party? Look it up (I'm not doing your work for you.). It's called demographics."

You don't understand the words I'm using. There is a difference between the words "elites", "elitist" and "well off". You don't seem to see any distinction between them. I'm using the word "elitist" to refer to someone who makes a cult out of being an elite or who value those who are elite more than those who are not, just because they are elites. Social climbers who are narcissists are a good example of those who might get tagged as "elitists". That's not the same thing as being an "elite". I.e. I think the gold medalist swimmer Phelps is an elite, but I wouldn't call him an "elitist". When people call Obama an "elitist", it's not a compliment.

If you really want to understand what I mean when I refer to Democratic liberal elites, some good background is in an article

The rubes and the elites
by Michael Lind
April 15, 2008
(http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/15/elitism/print.html)

That article was written after Clinton's win in Pennsylvania, but it's still relevant today. It's a good explanation, from one angle, of the reason why the Democrats keep cluelessly picking losers for Presidential nominees.

>>"I know you'd love to think the democrats have no original ideas (McCain stole the whole change them from you know who), can't run a lawnmower (we can, we do, we don't pay someone to do our dirty work for us) or save a life ( talk about coming out of left field. Stretching here are we? would you like to come to NYC and meet with the cops and firefighters and EMTs and first responders who have saved hundreds of thousands of lives and vote democratic?)"

You have no idea what I'm talking about. There are plenty of Democrats who aren't like you. These are the Jacksonian ones, the Appalachian ones, and the blue collar Democrats. The concrete thinkers, the doers-not-hot-air talkers.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

chris -- you're an idiot. palin's was not the best speech of the convention. it was the most vile and contrived (written before she was even selected). your credibility is shot, dude.

Posted by: cjang | September 5, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

For me, unlike the judges here, the content of the speech tells me most what I take away from it. The so-called #1 speech here may have been excellently delivered, but it was done in poor taste, and full of snide misleading untruths and insults. It appealed to me neither intellectually nor ethically. For me, a good speech is supposed to bring people together, not divide them even farther apart. My preferences would definitely not include her; same goes for Fred Thompson.

Posted by: TKI | September 5, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

For persons new to this blog, aspergirl is deranged, not one even reads her posts anymore

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 5, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Dave- how did you do it? She's really raving now. Perfect example of the Rovian method- When you can't refute an argument with fact, logic or reason....attack!

So aspergirl, because you don't agree with Dave, or Obama supporters, we all have to be sockpuppets. Well, whatever gets you through the day. I guess we're now supposed to believe you're just a Palin supporter because you say so? The McCain campaign paying you to post here? You post so much they must be.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, right, she's no Eagleton or Quayle, she is another Spiro T. Agnew,a low rent attack dog added to the ticket just to appease the right wing of the GOP. Does anyone really want a baracuda or a pit bull as VP, with or without lipstick?

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 5, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Chris, Sweitzer is up for re-election NOW, seeking his second term, which will end in 2012, not 2010. When he won his first term as governor in 2004, some folks called Montana the "purple" state for its blend of votes that went red state (Bush) and blue state (Sweitzer and Jon Tester, who defeated incumbent Conrad Burns for U.S. Senate).

There was a lot of blog buzz back then about his presidential prospects.
Chris is spot on, though, about the cheerleader persona. He's a brilliant guy, but he showboats.

Otherwise, I tend to agree with your ranking of speeches. Sarah stomped them all.

Trouble for the McCain is, as an orator, she stomps him, too.

Posted by: Kaye | September 5, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart??? The far right's sweetheart yes, but America's sweetheart, no way. How do Democrats feel about Palin? Or the non-Christian? Or pro-choice people? Or African-Americans? Or is Chris saying that these groups are not part of America? The majority of people that I know despise Sarah Palin. I guess Chris thinks we're not Americans.

Posted by: renu1 | September 5, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl wrote "She's one of the real people, not one of the infantile-regressives who have never matured, who are shallow and rhetorical, like the left-wing liberal elites who can think up ideas all day long but don't know how to have an original one, or start a lawnmower or save a life."

Your assumptions have really made an ass of you. You seem to think pointing a finger and shrieking elitist at the democrats will really obscure the fact that no one is more elitist than the republican Party? Look it up (I'm not doing your work for you.). It's called demographics.
I know you'd love to think the democrats have no original ideas (McCain stole the whole change them from you know who), can't run a lawnmower (we can, we do, we don't pay someone to do our dirty work for us) or save a life ( talk about coming out of left field. Stretching here are we? would you like to come to NYC and meet with the cops and firefighters and EMTs and first responders who have saved hundreds of thousands of lives and vote democratic?)

Naaahhh. You'd rather post punditry.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart??? The far right's sweetheart yes, but America's sweetheart, no way. How do Democrats feel about Palin? Or the non-Christian? Or pro-choice people? Or African-Americans? Or is Chris saying that these groups are not part of America? The majority of people that I know despise Sarah Palin. I guess Chris thinks we're not Americans.

Posted by: renu1 | September 5, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart??? The far right's sweetheart yes, but America's sweetheart, no way. How do Democrats feel about Palin? Or the non-Christian? Or pro-choice people? Or African-Americans? Or is Chris saying that these groups are not part of America? The majority of people that I know despise Sarah Palin. I guess Chris thinks we're not Americans.

Posted by: renu1 | September 5, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

>>Dave wrote: "I am white, 47 years old and live in Montana. What the hell are you talking about???!!!!!. God help america with people like you walking around."

Firstly, I doubt that, because the vast majority of the bloggers that come on here as Obama supporters are sockpuppets posing as real readers/posters.

Secondly, if what you say IS true, than you're just an old, stupid crank, a loser with a lot of attitude problems and low-class personal behaviors toward others, who has gone onto blog sites like DailyKos and absorbed the memes and activist cognitive behaviors of others and go around parroting and imitating them, thinking that you're exercising your own voice.

If what you say is true, you're just a weird old loser. An angry ghetto activist is his own person with his own mind and game. If you were an angry black activist who has a grudge against white people who criticize Obama, I'd have more respect for you.

Now, if you are really an old white loser with an attitude problem and low class interpersonal verbal behaviors, regurgitating DailyKos or other left-wing blog paranoia, you're REALLY not worth my time.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

.
.
.
.
.
.
DNC is re-branding itself as MCP
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Posted by: This just in | September 5, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

WHAT!!!! A JOURNALIST WHO WON'T KOW-TOW TO THE LEFT-WING BLOOD-THIRSTY MOB. WHAT!!!!!! WELL DONE, CHRIS. CALLING IT AS YOU SEE IT. STICK WITH THIS ATTITUDE OF STAYING OBJECTIVE AND YOU WILL GO FAR. REMEMBER THE GREATEST MAJORITY IS IN THE CENTER. DON'T FAN THE FLAMES OF THE FAR RIGHT AND FAR LEFT.

Posted by: What a brave soul | September 5, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

It's truly pathetic to see Cillizza sucking up to Caribou Barbie like this.

Posted by: Patrick | September 5, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Vote for Palin. Say no to Democratic misogyny. By not picking Hillary for VP Obama and his supporters are basically counting on the fact that the issue of pro-choice will keep women in line. This is an insult. If we vote for Obama now we are basically legitimizing and encouraging this treatment. By not putting Hillary on the ticket, Obama challenged us. We must not let him take us for granted.

Posted by: Clinton supporter for Palin | September 5, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey Stump:

When McCain surrounds himself with Rove Proteges, Bush Speechwriters, Corrupt Lobbyists, Neocon PNAC Foreign Policy Kooks and then tops it off by hiring the Scumbag Tucker Eskew who smeared him and his family in S.C. during the 2000 Primary, he opens himself up to being labeled "Bush 3".

And his 90% record of Pro-Bush voting in the Senate doesn't really scream "reformer" and "maverick".

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

aspergirl, re your post at 5:21- did you even understand 1/10th of what you wrote? Jeez, in your effort to sound intelligent and educated you came off sounding pretentious and not a little too proud of being able to use big words.

You're a trip all right. You've posted more than anyone else, thinking to impress us with the laser-like crystal purity of your mind (Sorry- can't take credit for that one. Someone else wrote it somewhere), getting shriller and shriller with each passing moment of non-recognition.

you wrote "Dave, first of all, your personally attacking and verbally abusive words to me reveal that you're one of those woman-hating, white-people hating ghetto activists that freak out over any Obama critics. You learn your verbiage of hate from the ghetto churches and hip hop hate speech artists and think it's acceptable to bring talk like that into a forum."- I guess Dave struck a nerve. Let me break this to you gently- lots of us are white, highly educated, live in upscale neighborhoods and voting for Obama.

See, we're not like you. we don't care for race-baiting sloganeering inept braggarts who get all upset about someone else using the unacceptable language they themselves have been spouting. And don't even try to hide behind that woman-hater charge. Use it on someone who believes that faux sexist argument you're trying to pawn off on everyone. You have no idea what sexism is, but I can tell you your party is a great promoter of it.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment
Wall Street Journal. September 5, 2008; Page A13

If you've read the press coverage of Sarah Palin, chances are you've heard plenty about her religious/private family matters. If you want to know what drives Gov. Palin's politics, & has intrigued America, read this.

Every state has its share of crony capitalism, but Big Oil & the GOP political machine have taken that term to new heights in Alaska. The oil industry, which provides 85% of state revenues, has strived to own the government. Alaska's politicians—in particular ruling Republicans—roll in oil campaign money, lavish oil revenue on pet projects, then retire to lucrative oil lobbying jobs. You can love the free market & not love this.

Alaskans have long resented this dysfunction, which has led to embarrassing corruption scandals. It has also led to a uniform belief that the political class, in hock to the oil class, fails to competently oversee Alaska's vast oil & gas wealth, the majority of which belongs to the state—or rather, Alaskan citizens.

And so it came as no surprise in 2004 when Gov. Frank Murkowski(R) made clear he'd be working exclusively with three North Slope producers—ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips & BP—to build a $25 billion pipeline to move natural gas to the lower 48. The trio had informed their political vassals that they alone would build this project (they weren't selling their gas to outsiders) & that they expected the state to reward them. Mr. Murkowski disappeared into smoky backrooms to work out the details. He refused to release information on the negotiations. When Natural Resources Commissioner Tom Irwin suggested terms of the contract were illegal, he was fired.

What Mr. Murkowski did do publicly was instruct his statehouse to change the oil & gas tax structure (taxes being a primary way Alaskans realize their oil revenue). Later, citizens would discover this was groundwork for Mr. Murkowski's pipeline contract—which would lock in that oil-requested tax package for up to 40 years, provide a $4 billion state investment, and relinquish most oversight.

Enter Mrs. Palin. The former mayor of Wasilla had been appointed by Mr. Murkowski in 2003 to the state oil & gas regulatory agency. She'd had the temerity to blow the whistle on fellow GOP Commissioner Randy Ruedrich for refusing to disclose energy dealings. Mr. Murkowski & GOP Attorney General Gregg Renkes closed ranks around Mr. Ruedrich—who also chaired the state GOP. Mrs. Palin resigned. Having thus offended the entire old boy network, she challenged the governor for his seat.

Mrs. Palin ran against the secret deal, and vowed to put the pipeline back out for competitive, transparent, bidding. She railed against cozy politics. Mr. Murkowski ran on his unpopular pipeline deal. The oil industry warned the state would never get its project without his leadership. Mrs. Palin walloped him in the primary and won office in late 2006. Around this time, news broke of a federal probe that would show oil executives had bribed lawmakers to support the Murkowski tax changes.

Mrs. Palin first reinstated Mr. Irwin. By Feb 2007 she'd released her requirements for pipeline bidding. They were stricter, and included only a $500 million incentive. By May a cowed state house—reeling from scandal—passed her legislation.

The producers warned they would not bid, nor would anyone else. 5 groups submitted proposals. A few months before the legislature awarded its license to TransCanada this July, Conoco & BP suddenly announced they'd be building their own pipeline with no state inducements whatsoever. They suddenly found the money.

Mrs. Palin has meanwhile passed an ethics law. She's tightened up oil oversight & forced the legislature to rewrite the oil tax law. That new law raised taxes on the industry, for which Mrs. Palin is now taking some knocks, but the political background here is crucial.

The GOP machine has crumbled. Attorney General Renkes resigned. Mr. Ruedrich was fined $12,000. Jim Clark—Mr. Murkowski's lead pipeline negotiator—pleaded guilty to conspiring with an oil firm. At least 3 legislators have been convicted, Sen. Ted Stevens is under indictment, while Rep. Don Young is under investigation.

Through it all, Mrs. Palin has stood for reform, though not populism. She thanks oil firms & says executives who "seek maximum revenue" are "simply doing their job." She says her own job is to be a "savvy" negotiator on behalf of Alaska's citizens & to provide credible oversight. It is this combination that lets her aggressively promote new energy while retaining public trust.

Today's congressional Republicans could learn from this. The party has been plagued by earmarks, scandal & corruption. Most members have embraced the machine. That has diminished voters' trust, and in the process diminished good, conservative ideas. It is no wonder 37 million people tuned in to Mrs. Palin's convention speech. They are looking for something fresh.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Chris,
Get over your crush.

"Palin established herself as a serious politician and America's sweetheart all in the space of a 35-minute speech. That's an impressive feat."

A serious politician, maybe, considering all the lies. But with all of the shrill, sarcastic, disrespectful, and cheap lines in there (you think the lipstick line was impromptu?) to call her a sweetheart shows your obliviousness to objectivity. Her personal story is intriguing, but so is my Granny's and she ain't no VP. The rest of her speech was nothing but a demonstration of how repulsively negative and hateful the GOP has become.

Take a break Chris and come back as a journalist, not a lustful teenage boy with a crush on the mayor of Wasilla.

If she's America's Sweetheart, Valentine's Day is going to look a lot like Halloween this year.

Posted by: Tomas | September 5, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 5:21 PM

Oh but I do have an idea where you are from and where you live.

Your cognitive behaviors give you away.

You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to identify the speech patterns of angry haters who hang out at places like Trinity Church where they soak up anti-white-conspiracy theory hate speech rants.

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

I am white, 47 years old and live in Montana. What the hell are you talking about???!!!!!. God help america with people like you walking around.

Posted by: Dave | September 5, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

How Palin Beat Alaska's Establishment
Wall Street Journal. September 5, 2008; Page A13

If you've read the press coverage of Sarah Palin, chances are you've heard plenty about her religious/private family matters. If you want to know what drives Gov. Palin's politics, & has intrigued America, read this.

Every state has its share of crony capitalism, but Big Oil & the GOP political machine have taken that term to new heights in Alaska. The oil industry, which provides 85% of state revenues, has strived to own the government. Alaska's politicians—in particular ruling Republicans—roll in oil campaign money, lavish oil revenue on pet projects, then retire to lucrative oil lobbying jobs. You can love the free market & not love this.

Alaskans have long resented this dysfunction, which has led to embarrassing corruption scandals. It has also led to a uniform belief that the political class, in hock to the oil class, fails to competently oversee Alaska's vast oil & gas wealth, the majority of which belongs to the state—or rather, Alaskan citizens.

And so it came as no surprise in 2004 when Gov. Frank Murkowski(R) made clear he'd be working exclusively with three North Slope producers—ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips & BP—to build a $25 billion pipeline to move natural gas to the lower 48. The trio had informed their political vassals that they alone would build this project (they weren't selling their gas to outsiders) & that they expected the state to reward them. Mr. Murkowski disappeared into smoky backrooms to work out the details. He refused to release information on the negotiations. When Natural Resources Commissioner Tom Irwin suggested terms of the contract were illegal, he was fired.

What Mr. Murkowski did do publicly was instruct his statehouse to change the oil & gas tax structure (taxes being a primary way Alaskans realize their oil revenue). Later, citizens would discover this was groundwork for Mr. Murkowski's pipeline contract—which would lock in that oil-requested tax package for up to 40 years, provide a $4 billion state investment, and relinquish most oversight.

Enter Mrs. Palin. The former mayor of Wasilla had been appointed by Mr. Murkowski in 2003 to the state oil & gas regulatory agency. She'd had the temerity to blow the whistle on fellow GOP Commissioner Randy Ruedrich for refusing to disclose energy dealings. Mr. Murkowski & GOP Attorney General Gregg Renkes closed ranks around Mr. Ruedrich—who also chaired the state GOP. Mrs. Palin resigned. Having thus offended the entire old boy network, she challenged the governor for his seat.

Mrs. Palin ran against the secret deal, and vowed to put the pipeline back out for competitive, transparent, bidding. She railed against cozy politics. Mr. Murkowski ran on his unpopular pipeline deal. The oil industry warned the state would never get its project without his leadership. Mrs. Palin walloped him in the primary and won office in late 2006. Around this time, news broke of a federal probe that would show oil executives had bribed lawmakers to support the Murkowski tax changes.

Mrs. Palin first reinstated Mr. Irwin. By Feb 2007 she'd released her requirements for pipeline bidding. They were stricter, and included only a $500 million incentive. By May a cowed state house—reeling from scandal—passed her legislation.

The producers warned they would not bid, nor would anyone else. 5 groups submitted proposals. A few months before the legislature awarded its license to TransCanada this July, Conoco & BP suddenly announced they'd be building their own pipeline with no state inducements whatsoever. They suddenly found the money.

Mrs. Palin has meanwhile passed an ethics law. She's tightened up oil oversight & forced the legislature to rewrite the oil tax law. That new law raised taxes on the industry, for which Mrs. Palin is now taking some knocks, but the political background here is crucial.

The GOP machine has crumbled. Attorney General Renkes resigned. Mr. Ruedrich was fined $12,000. Jim Clark—Mr. Murkowski's lead pipeline negotiator—pleaded guilty to conspiring with an oil firm. At least 3 legislators have been convicted, Sen. Ted Stevens is under indictment, while Rep. Don Young is under investigation.

Through it all, Mrs. Palin has stood for reform, though not populism. She thanks oil firms & says executives who "seek maximum revenue" are "simply doing their job." She says her own job is to be a "savvy" negotiator on behalf of Alaska's citizens & to provide credible oversight. It is this combination that lets her aggressively promote new energy while retaining public trust.

Today's congressional Republicans could learn from this. The party has been plagued by earmarks, scandal & corruption. Most members have embraced the machine. That has diminished voters' trust, and in the process diminished good, conservative ideas. It is no wonder 37 million people tuned in to Mrs. Palin's convention speech. They are looking for something fresh.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

I suppose then by the comments below we are to believe that anytime a speach is delivered then it is a window to the administration? So, the libs are saying because a speech writer is employed by Bush and McCain we can hang a millstone around McCain's neck of all Bush's failed policies? The I suppose we can infere from Mr.Obama's standard reaction that anyone challenging his position is a racist and the libs here regurgitating those same sentiments, that when he in fact does face a tough call if elected he should just tell Vladimir Putin he is a racist and he will back off. Shallow politics in 08 for sure. We need someone that can lead and not worry about what others say about them. So far these two are only worried about that. No, anyone that disagrees with you Mr. Obama is not an automatic racist....time to find a new approach or you pretty much have landed all the votes your going to get.

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

Sarah Palin is an unqualified lightweight who gave a nasty, mean-spirited speech in which she failed to address, let alone propose solutions, for any of the problems facing the country. If you think that was the "best" speech of the conventions, you are even dumber and more shallow than I thought.

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

>> JimAK wrote: "Isn't it odd that public opinion is roughly 50-50 but the blog posts are 95-5? Why, it's almost as if there was an organized, paid effort *cough SOROS cough* behind this.... How dumb do you think the American public really is?"

And all the left-wing fanatical bloggers who conveniently attack all of Obama's opponents for him and do opposition research and create and flame news stories and flagellate the media to take up the propaganda as story lines and, finally, the legions of lurkers who erupt talking-points-du-jour onto blogs and gang up and berate any reporter who doesn't act like an Obama campaign staff writer...

... are all irregulars in a well-funded, underground online Internet campaign, possibly Soros-backed.

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

I respect and admire John McCain for his service and the suffering he endured from his injuries and his captivity. However, he and his campaign are themselves belittling that experience by making it their catchall response to everything.

It's like the trite "If we can send a man to the moon why can't we . . . ."

When McCain denounced government subsidized health care plans, critics pointed out that McCain and his family have received government health care all their lives - to which McCain responded "except for the time I was in the Hanoi Hilton."

Posted by: McCain follwers are sheep | September 5, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Asper"Girl" may know where the guy lives because "she" may be a paid disinfo agent who is trolling for IP addresses and has access to dossiers on anyone tagged as a "dissenter" by the authoritarians who are taking over over country.

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

"Isn't it odd that public opinion is roughly 50-50 but the blog posts are 95-5? Why, it's almost as if there was an organized, paid effort *cough SOROS cough* behind this...."


Oh yes, trot "Soros" out there. That'll scare away all those icky Obama voters.

Well JimAK, I've got a "news flash fer ya" (that was a real zinger from Ms. Wasilla's speech): John McCain actually has a program rewarding people to post his talking points on the web. Go check out his site and you can sign up to be like Aspergirl who seems to be literally chained to her/his keyboard 24/7 spewing idiocy. She/he started out as a "disgruntled" Hillary supporter (yep!) and has now gone over to the ideologically opposite side (surprise!) in support of the most comical ticket in history- McCain/Palin! Do your and you might win a free golf cooler or fanny pack.

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

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "I based my opinion on you after reading your countless tin foil lies that you post time and time again. You have no idea where I am from or where I live. But you just proved what many on here believe. You are an uninformed, disgusting, wollowing in self-pity individual. Sad that you blame your problems on the world. Get a job and stop wasting you life away on the Internet...EVERYDAY."

Oh but I do have an idea where you are from and where you live.

Your cognitive behaviors give you away.

You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to identify the speech patterns of angry haters who hang out at places like Trinity Church where they soak up anti-white-conspiracy theory hate speech rants.

The fact that you are so angry, verbally abusive and attacking me personally instead of trying to discuss your issues with what I say or how I say it or my references, shows (1) your angry, grievance mentality that is personally directed at those who say what you don't like, (2) your use of dehumanizing labels like "troll" and "fascist" that is right out of the Rev. Wright hate speech playbook for Obama supporters on DailyKos and other looney, hyperverbal lowlife hangouts on the Internet, (3) your upset emotional affect in your verbal behavior that shows how poor your control is over your emotional response to what you perceive to be the critical words of a white person against your Great Black Hope, and (4) your inability to stop attacking me when I slap you and tell you I won't discuss any issues with you shows how you have a repressed hostility to perceived slights from people like me that drive you to keep coming back and attacking me even though you know I said I won't discuss points with you.

The above wasn't a formal analysis because I don't want to put in the time with you, like identify your memes and tell you where you got them from.

But from your cognitive, communications and affective verbal behaviors, I can tell you're heavily indoctrinated in the ghetto culture of ranting against perceived white oppressors and other "fascists" and "trolls" who lurk in your half-educated, poorly matured ghetto mentality of grievance and anger.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

JimAK:

Your disinfo is lame. Get a new act. At least earn your blood money.

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

McCain promised Larry King that his VP pick would go on his show right after the announcement- an old tradition for that show. It seems his "outraged" boycott of CNN over Campbell Brown asking legitimate questions of Tucker "Rove Spawn" Bounds was conveniently timed so Palin won't even have to be subjected to Old Larry's softball questions!

The kooks at NRO have their panties in a bunch over Oprah refusing to have Palin on her show. It's their "tough issue" to talk about because they can't really comment on the dismal jobs numbers released today.

Really, it's a gift guys because I think Oprah might really be too tough for Sarah. She could perhaps do "The View" as long as it was only hosted by Elizabeth Hasselbeck.

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

I second this:

"If "small town working class" voters in Ohio, Pa., Michigan and Indiana re-elect the GOP then I don't want to hear anymore whinng from them about their disappearing jobs and livlihoods, the high cost of college and gas, lack of health care etc.

Screw 'um. Cling to your guns and religion. Pray to Jesus when you go hunting for a meal. You will deserve what you get."

Oh, and btw, morons who go on and on and on and on about how Palin connects to the "average American" - you are not average. You are not the middle class. You are POOR. You cannot afford to send your kids to college or own your own homes. The Republicans lead by the the rich of the rich, and they convince the poorest segment of the population who actually votes, but is too scared by scary sounding actual issues, so they stick with abortion and terrorists (um, you, in Kansas. how exactly does the threat of an on-soil terrorist attack ruin your day to day like...?), to follow them. Unfortunately, right now, in the wake of the Republicans last merry little effort, that is a large segment of the population.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl is possibly right about the Palin/Thatcher comparison. Thatcher was liked by only a select few in her country. Towards the end of her career she was deeply disliked by her own party and the people of her country,and ultimately asked to resign.

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

Put Palin, the moose-hunting lipsticked pit bull, at the bottom of your list, move Obama top #1, toss a Joe Biden in there somewhere, and I agree. The media are nbow swooning over Palin. How long is thios romance going to last? When are you going to get back to reporting SERIOUS news? Peggy Noonan said it best: Sarah is just more Republican BS.

Posted by: Richard Hebert | September 5, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

It's morning on January 21, 2009, and 72-year-old President John McCain doesn't wake up after a long night of inaugural balls. VP Sarah Palin is now commander-in-chief and the leader of the free world.

Does this scare you as much as it scare me? It could happen.

Would you want Sarah Palin in the most powerful position on the planet for four years? I thought that the idea of President Quayle was unnerving, but this frightens me to no end. I'm scared for my kids and yours, and especially for our country. There are about 50,000 people more qualified than her. We can't afford on-the-job training -- we need someone who can do the job from day one. It ain't her.

Posted by: Baba O'Reilly | September 5, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

How any speech that dismissively mocks the idea of working to help the poor and disenfranchised could establish ANYONE as either a serious politician or anybody's sweetheart is terribly sad.

I trust the Fix for intelligent analysis; to say Palin's angry, fallacious, vitriolic and elitist speech was better than any of the others in the line is misguided and disgusting.

On the bright side, nothing has made me more confident not only in my candidate but in my party than hearing that sort of hateful rhetoric coming proudly form the other side.

Posted by: GDouglas | September 5, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it odd that public opinion is roughly 50-50 but the blog posts are 95-5? Why, it's almost as if there was an organized, paid effort *cough SOROS cough* behind this....

How dumb do you think the American public really is?

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

"Mother. Moosehunter. Maverick...
Mayor, Governor, Maverick...
The Original Maverick made an astute choice..."

mav-er-ick

Etymology: Samuel A. Maverick 1803-1870, American politician, land baron, slave owner, "fiery tempered" prisoner of war, secessionist


Maybe McCain and Palin are The Original Mavericks.

http://latebreakingmuse.blogspot.com/

Posted by: LateBreakingMuse | September 5, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I think Obama definitely won, because he defied expectations. Unlike many people he laid out his plans and no one can now say truthfully that Obama isn't substantive.

Chris Matthews vs. Pat Buchanan
http://sensico.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/chris-matthews-vs-pat-buchanan/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

>>Dave wrote: "You ignorant little troll. You are saying the Afterschool Special series is like "Real Peolple". IT WAS A TV SHOW you moron. Is that how you view the world? As far as the "130 present comment", stop with the talking points. most people put things in to context. It is common in the IL legislature to vote present. Not to mention that the 130 votes you are complaining about were out of over 4000 total. Just because you blame all men for your pitiful little life is no reason to be uninformed. You are an embarassment to any thinking adult."

Dave, first of all, your personally attacking and verbally abusive words to me reveal that you're one of those woman-hating, white-people hating ghetto activists that freak out over any Obama critics. You learn your verbiage of hate from the ghetto churches and hip hop hate speech artists and think it's acceptable to bring talk like that into a forum.

I'm not going to answer the stupidity of the rest of your post because you're not worth it, even though the things you said are easy to knock down.

Verbally abusive ghetto trash.

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

LOL Typical Troll

Verbally abusive Ghetto trash?

Point out incorrect info in what they post and they attack. But I will say it again... YOU ARE A MORON!!!!

I based my opinion on you after reading your countless tin foil lies that you post time and time again. You have no idea where I am from or where I live. But you just proved what many on here believe. You are an uninformed, disgusting, wollowing in self-pity individual. Sad that you blame your problems on the world. Get a job and stop wasting you life away on the Internet...EVERYDAY.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Palin = America's sweetheart?!

Look no further for proof of how out of touch the McBushington Post is.

Posted by: ccatmoon | September 5, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Palin’s cold shoulder

By KENNETH P. VOGEL | 9/5/08 1:21 PM EST Text Size:
WASILLA, Alaska — While Sarah Palin’s supporters tout her personal warmth and openness, the newly minted Republican vice presidential nominee can be brusque to allies, advisers and employees who fall from her favor.

Palin has unceremoniously ended relationships with an aide who was dating a family friend’s soon-to-be ex-wife, a campaign adviser whose mother-in-law fought Palin’s legislative agenda, a local political mentor who she felt represented the “old boys' network,” a police chief who she said tried to intimidate her with “stern look[s]” and a state commissioner who refused to fire her sister’s ex-husband.

“When she decides you’re done, you’re done,” said John Bitney, who was a top aide to Palin’s gubernatorial campaign and administration.

Bitney, a longtime state Capitol hand who grew up in this small town with Palin and her husband, Todd, said he was asked to leave his job as legislative director in the governor’s office last year after the Palins found out that he was dating the soon-to-be-ex-wife of one of Todd’s good friends.

While Palin’s office framed the departure as an “amicable” mutual decision, Bitney told Politico that Sarah and Todd Palin “were upset with me about my divorce and who I was dating, and they didn’t want that in the governor’s office. I wanted to stay with the governor and support the governor — we’re talking about someone who’s been a friend for 30 years — but I understood it, and I have no ax to grind over the whole thing.”

Still, Bitney took a line from the "Seinfeld" character Elaine, deeming Palin “a bad breaker-upper.”

Palin’s abrupt and often unexplained — or not fully explained — dismissals, though, leave former colleagues and political observers speculating about the “real reasons,” Bitney said, adding that Palin's style “is more dramatic than the way most executives do it. They bring you in, tell you they’re going to go in another direction and get everyone in the office to sign a card and cut a cake. But that’s just not her style.”

The McCain-Palin campaign declined to answer questions about Palin’s personnel moves or personal rifts. Her supporters in Wasilla — a group that seems to include an overwhelming majority of the city’s 7,000 or so residents — say she is guided by the taxpayers’ interests and a strong moral compass.

“In general, she is an extremely kindhearted person,” said Judy Patrick, a close ally who served on the city council when Palin was mayor. “It’s just difficult when you’re a leader. She had to make tough decisions on how she planned to accomplish what she planned to accomplish and who was going to be on the team to do that.”

Palin’s willingness to end allegiances with those who offend her may have helped propel her rise in 2004, when she exposed corrupt dealings by a Republican bigwig on the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, burnishing her reformer credentials and setting the stage for her 2006 gubernatorial campaign.

But on other occasions, her trigger finger has gotten her into trouble.

An ongoing investigation by the state Legislature — expected to be released before the presidential election — into Palin’s firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan in January threatens to damage her reputation as a reformer.

At first, Palin offered only a vague, platitudinal explanation for Monegan’s dismissal. But after Monegan asserted he was pressured by both Sarah and Todd Palin, the governor accused Monegan of not being a team player, and of failing to hire sufficient numbers of troopers or doing enough to reduce rural alcohol abuse.

Earlier this month, he said that "pressure could have been perceived to exist” from her office to have the trooper fired, “although I have only now become aware of it."

Some who worked with Palin during the beginning of her political career here say her hair trigger revealed itself as soon as she became mayor of her hometown in 1996 and, at least initially, hurt her ability to get the job done.

After upsetting the three-term incumbent Wasilla mayor in 1996, Palin quickly eliminated the position of one city department director and asked five others for a letter of resignation, a résumé and a letter explaining why they should be retained.

Though five of the six department heads had supported her opponent, John Stein, Palin insisted the housecleaning was not politically motivated. Only two directors kept their jobs and one of them — city planner Duane Dvorak — left on his own eight months later.

“After all the excitement, I kind of felt like the ax could fall any time and just never felt like the situation warmed up,” said Dvorak, who had worked for Stein for more than two years and is now a planner for the far away Kodiak Island Borough.

Dvorak, who did not back either Stein or Palin, recounted being asked to brief the new mayor and her top aide on a wide variety of topics related to the city and state codes “that really didn’t have a whole lot to do with planning. But because they let everyone else go, they didn’t have anyone else to call on,” he said. “It’s one thing to take the city in a different direction and try to work with the staff that you have and maybe make a few key changes over time, but to just precipitously let people go and then restaff — it didn’t go over well.”

According to once-confidential records, Palin suggested that one of Stein’s top backers, then-Police Chief Irl Stambaugh, had purposefully made her miss a city proceeding — which she called “a very embarrassing situation for me” — by not informing her of it and asserted Stambaugh did not participate enough in staff meetings.

“And when you did speak, you often did so in a disrespectful or condescending tone,” she wrote in a termination letter to Stambaugh, in which she asserted she had tried for three months to win his support. “You never gave me that,” she wrote Stambaugh, who had been chief since the town created its own police department four years earlier.

“When I met with you in private,” she continued, “instead of engaging in interactive conversation with me, you gave me short, uncommunicative answers, and then you would sit there and stare at me in silence with a very stern look, like you were trying to intimidate me.”

The letter was released as part of Stambaugh’s wrongful termination and discrimination lawsuit against the city, in which his lawyer wrote Stambaugh, who stood over 6 feet tall and weighed more than 200 pounds, “had been informed that Mayor Palin felt intimidated because of his size. The mayor never discussed this perceived problem with Stambaugh. However, Stambaugh, being sensitive to the mayor’s concern regarding his sex, size and height, made particular efforts to sit in a chair whenever discussing matters with Mayor Palin and talk in a quiet, soothing voice to the mayor.”

The suit alleges Palin ousted Stambaugh at the behest of the National Rifle Association, which supported a state concealed weapons bill that Stambaugh opposed, and of local bar owners, who — along with Palin — opposed Stambaugh’s push to shorten bar hours. Both NRA members and bar owners made campaign contributions to Palin.

Stambaugh’s suit was dismissed.

One day after Palin delivered an “intent to terminate employment” letter to Wasilla's veteran library director, Mary Ellen Emmons, Palin relented, telling the Anchorage Daily News that Emmons promised to support the new mayor.

"You know in your heart when someone is supportive of you,” she told the paper after talking with Emmons, who quit before the end of Palin’s first term.

Stein, who Palin easily bested in a 1999 rematch, told Politico that Palin ended up doing a fine job in her two terms as mayor. But the 1996 falling of the “Palin ax” — as the local Frontiersman newspaper dubbed it — was unprecedented and whipped up a fierce controversy in the town, including a threatened recall petition from a group headed by Stein and then-Councilman Nick Carney.

Carney, whose daughter had played high school basketball with Palin, in 1992 recruited the then-28-year-old Palin to run for city council. She easily won the race but quickly broke from Carney.

“Right away, I saw that it was a good old boys' network,” Palin is quoted as saying in a favorable biography of her published in April. “Mayor Stein and Nick Carney told me, ‘You’ll learn quick, just listen to us.’ Well, they didn’t know how I was wired." It contends that soon after Palin took office, she “made a political enemy of Carney,” who owned a garbage removal company, by voting against an ordinance he proposed that would have required city residents pay for curbside pickup.

And this year, Palin largely shut out Tuckerman Babcock, an influential local Republican strategist who has advised her in each campaign since 1996, and who the Frontiersman said was up for — but never received — a top city job when Palin became mayor.

Babock’s mother-in-law is state Senate president and fellow Wasilla Republican Lyda Green, who fought many of Gov. Palin’s legislative initiatives and recently told the Daily News that Palin is "not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?"

Babcock would not speculate as to why Palin stopped seeking his counsel but told Politico, “She’s doing fine without me, so it’s not a big deal.”

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

How about worst speech.

I hope you read this Rudy Giuliani. Your speech gave me nightmares. You are a slimeball, seriously it was like something out of "Animal Farm." Palin's snide comments and McCain fumbling and stumbling for change. Actually the RNC appeared to be a modern day "Animal Farm," where the pigs wear heels and suits and ties. Snobbery, Lies and Videotape.

The DNC speeches were definitely more positive and uplifting.

I usually vote Independent, but this time around its definitely Democrat.

Posted by: RNC not for me | September 5, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart? I just threw up. She was quite snarky and partisan, and her belitting people who work on behalf of the poor was disgusting. If you like mean girls, yeah, I guess it was a great speech.

Posted by: NiceGirl | September 5, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl Says
The Republicans keep nominating people who come from "the outside".

yeah, lets see. George HW Bush, George W Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain...real outsiders.

Posted by: Ha Ha HA | September 5, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

This may all be for nothing if, and I believe it is, the cover story on the Enquirer is true.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Palin is being savaged on Talk Radio here in Ohio! People are saying she is an "Empty Pantsuit!!" The bottom line - they think the McCain campaign is hiding her from the press because they know she is not ready for primetime!! No Sunday talk shows? No press conference? Almost EVERY VP over the last 30 years has held a press conference almost IMMEDIATELY after their selection. But not SILENT SARAH! Does she REALLY not know the difference between Sunni and Shiite? Oh, wait, that's McCain! Oh my! What a pair!!!


Posted by: Kathy | September 5, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, are you done folding my laundry?

We checked the accuracy of McCain’s speech accepting the Republican nomination and noted the following:

McCain claimed that Obama’s health care plan would "force small businesses to cut jobs" and would put "a bureaucrat ... between you and your doctor." In fact, the plan exempts small businesses, and those who have insurance now could keep the coverage they have.


McCain attacked Obama for voting for "corporate welfare" for oil companies. In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $300 million over 11 years while providing $5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.


McCain said oil imports send "$700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much." But the U.S. is on track to import a total of only $536 billion worth of oil at current prices, and close to a third of that comes from Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom.


He promised to increase use of "wind, tide [and] solar" energy, though his actual energy plan contains no new money for renewable energy. He has said elsewhere that renewable sources won’t produce as much as people think.


He called for "reducing government spending and getting rid of failed programs," but as in the past failed to cite a single program that he would eliminate or reduce.


He said Obama would "close" markets to trade. In fact, Obama, though he once said he wanted to "renegotiate" the North American Free Trade Agreement, now says he simply wants to try to strengthen environmental and labor provisions in it.

Posted by: More Facts | September 5, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, are you done folding my laundry?

We checked the accuracy of McCain’s speech accepting the Republican nomination and noted the following:

McCain claimed that Obama’s health care plan would "force small businesses to cut jobs" and would put "a bureaucrat ... between you and your doctor." In fact, the plan exempts small businesses, and those who have insurance now could keep the coverage they have.


McCain attacked Obama for voting for "corporate welfare" for oil companies. In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $300 million over 11 years while providing $5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.


McCain said oil imports send "$700 billion a year to countries that don't like us very much." But the U.S. is on track to import a total of only $536 billion worth of oil at current prices, and close to a third of that comes from Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom.


He promised to increase use of "wind, tide [and] solar" energy, though his actual energy plan contains no new money for renewable energy. He has said elsewhere that renewable sources won’t produce as much as people think.


He called for "reducing government spending and getting rid of failed programs," but as in the past failed to cite a single program that he would eliminate or reduce.


He said Obama would "close" markets to trade. In fact, Obama, though he once said he wanted to "renegotiate" the North American Free Trade Agreement, now says he simply wants to try to strengthen environmental and labor provisions in it.

Posted by: More Facts | September 5, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

>>JakeD's shadow wrote: "Hillary Clinton, BA, JD
William Clinton BSFS, JD and Rhodes Scholar
Rudy Gulliani BA, JD
Mitt Romney, BA, MBA, JD
Barack Obama, BA, JD magna laude
After attending 20 schools, John McCain graduated in what, i don't know. It took Sarah Palin 6 years to get her degree. Where i come from you're called "doctor" after so many years.
Dumb and Dumber 2008"
::::::::
Democrats keep nominating smooth-talking, shifty, elitist lawyers. That's part of their problem. The only really successful politicians they have nominated were the Clintons, who, although they are lawyers, were from the grounded Southern Jacksonian tradition of the Democratic party. The Republicans keep nominating people who come from "the outside".

Victor Davis Hanson on Why Democrats Keep Nominating Losers

Hanson: Want change, Democrats? Stop nominating lawyers
By Victor Davis Hanson


"The 2008 presidential campaign is supposed to be a referendum on "change" — who brings it and who doesn't.

"Real change, however, hasn't yet proved to mean new politics.

"The "hope and change" Barack Obama sounds like a traditional Northern liberal who always wants to raise taxes on the upper classes and businesses, expand government services and provide more state assistance to the middle class and poor."

more at http://www.mercurynews.com/elections/ci_10374495

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Paul,

It's pretty simple. McCain supporters simply did not want to listen to Obama's speech, because it might interfere with their prejudiced opinion of him.

On the other hand, Obama supporters are still open-minded enough to listen to the opposition.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you've made a formerly loyal reader consider removing my Fix bookmark for good. I can't believe you actually wrote the words "Palin established herself as a serious politician and America's sweetheart". You really need to get out of your media echo chamber--she did neither of these. She did however establish herself as a savvy, extremely ambitious female version of George W Bush circa 2000. No one with a brain should've lowered the bar so much for a former pageant contestant and sportscaster; of course she could deliver that speech well. She probably rehearsed that moment for years. But #1 speech of both conventions?? Man am I disappointed in who I thought was a rare, credible journalist.

Posted by: So Disappointed | September 5, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

CC,
Palin had absolutely nothing to say in her speech except to offer vicious, personal insults. The entire speech was incredibly off-putting, but it looks like you ate it up. Idiot. Our country deserves a better media.

Posted by: JC | September 5, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Palin's speech was cynical, snarky and down right rude. As she stood up on the podium, no one could imagine her as president when McCain kicks the bucket. The red team has no ideas, and can only run on fear. sad.

Posted by: djeterpt1 | September 5, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

It's happening again, the republicans are going to beat us, obama screwed up not picking clinton

Posted by: Lorna | September 5, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Change you can(not) trust...

USED PUBLIC FUNDS FOR POLITICAL GAIN

In her 2002 Lt. Governor bid, Mayor Palin used city employees, telephones, computers, fax machines for campaign fundraising and literature. On her candidate registration form, she used her City Hall fax number, and her mayoral e-mail address. Records show that Wasilla city property was used to contact supporters, donors, media contacts, and media purchasing. [Anchorage Daily News, 7/21/06]

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Why are you calling Palin American's sweetheart? What part of the anatomy do some of you men think with? She was nasty on her first "real" appearance as a candidate. I guess that turns men on. By the way, I'm a woman, so I can say it without being sexist. You, on the other hand, calling her the "hottest" will be taken as sexist. Better be careful, Chris.

Posted by: ossilot | September 5, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Shy are you calling Palin American's sweetheart? What part of the anatomy do some of you men think with? She was nasty on her first "real" appearance as a candidate. I guess that turns men on. By the way, I'm a woman, so I can say it without being sexist. You, on the other hand, calling her the "hottest" will be taken as sexist. Careful, Chris.

Posted by: ossilot | September 5, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

>>Dave/Anonymous/evil little kid: "What a difference when you write something in your own words rather then a copy and paste. Man are you an idiot."

You are ghetto trash for bringing your interpersonal hate speech habits onto a forum.

Go back and get your infusion of anti-white rage rhetoric from Trinity Church.

You're not doing Obama any favors when you act, as a supporter, by coming on a forum and unloading your anti-white hatreds and doing that Rev. Wright hate speech.

Your head is full of "trolls", "fascists", "McThis", "McThat" and other junk.

You're trash with your head full of junk.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

How can this be, what's wrong with America -

John McCain has won the ratings race.

The Republican nominee beat Democratic challenger Barack Obama's record-setting convention speech viewership by 500,000.

Posted by: Paul | September 5, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Seriously, Chris, before you crow about what a "successful" speech Palin made you might want to start asking why this new "superstar" of the Republican Party will not even commit to an interview with a mainstream journalist.

I would think that any "rising" politician who had just been picked to run with "Old Salty" McCain would be jumping at the chance to go on the network shows the weekend following her "exciting" introduction to the American people.

That the McCain Campaign is allowed to get away with this obvious avoidance is totally unacceptable.
................................
I completely agree. Not to mention she is not even going on "Faux News". The Mcain campaign is telling the American people that the only verison that you will know of Gov Palin is what we tell you. She is so unqualified that she can't speak without asking permission. God for bid if you have the nerve to ask questions people like that embarassment to human life, Aspergirl, say it is sexism. Give me a break.

Posted by: Dave | September 5, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton, BA, JD
William Clinton BSFS, JD and Rhodes Scholar
Rudy Gulliani BA, JD
Mitt Romney, BA, MBA, JD
Barack Obama, BA, JD magna laude

After attending 20 schools, John McCain graduated in what, i don't know. It took Sarah Palin 6 years to get her degree. Where i come from you're called "doctor" after so many years.
Dumb and Dumber 2008


Posted by: JakeD's shadow | September 5, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

>>Dave wrote: "You ignorant little troll. You are saying the Afterschool Special series is like "Real Peolple". IT WAS A TV SHOW you moron. Is that how you view the world? As far as the "130 present comment", stop with the talking points. most people put things in to context. It is common in the IL legislature to vote present. Not to mention that the 130 votes you are complaining about were out of over 4000 total. Just because you blame all men for your pitiful little life is no reason to be uninformed. You are an embarassment to any thinking adult."

Dave, first of all, your personally attacking and verbally abusive words to me reveal that you're one of those woman-hating, white-people hating ghetto activists that freak out over any Obama critics. You learn your verbiage of hate from the ghetto churches and hip hop hate speech artists and think it's acceptable to bring talk like that into a forum.

I'm not going to answer the stupidity of the rest of your post because you're not worth it, even though the things you said are easy to knock down.

Verbally abusive ghetto trash.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Susan Eisenhower: Barack is the best choice (CNN Interview)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1Kmsv8-Jzk&feature=related

When Dwight Eisenhower's granddaughter Susan said "Yes we can!" over 84,000 supporters at the Democrat Convention cheered her on and yelled "Yes we can!"

My Favorite Eisenhower Story From Wikipedia. Dwight could have been a Professional Football player?

At West Point, Eisenhower made the football team. He started as a varsity running back and linebacker in 1912. In a bit of a fabled match-up, he even tackled the legendary Jim Thorpe in a 1912 game.

Ike Eisenhower and Harry Truman Fans supporting Change We can believe in!

Obamacans for Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Republican Football Fan | September 5, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Sure, the rankings are great, put Sarah Palin at #1 if you go for style and a good put-down at the expense of truthfulness.

Posted by: There go my hopes of a substantive campaign | September 5, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

What a difference when you write something in your own words rather then a copy and paste. Man are you an idiot.

-------
>> alanms wrote: "Aspergirl is a troll - pls ignore her. Beyond the Palin is a bizarre Stepford wife fascist automaton armed with guns and a penchant for wise ass one-liners. I cannot believe the naivety of people who are declaring her the second coming. She simply did what the voices in her head (implanted by Karl Rove and Bush's speechwriter) told her to do. Her taking over this country (should McWeird be found face down on his dentures), would be another chapter from Life in Hell. Heaven help us!"

What's this with the "troll" "fascist" "McWeird"?

You're one of Obama's little sophomoric cult minions. You use baby language filled with monsters and villains, which is how you process politics in your ignorant, childlike understanding of national and world politics.

You don't know how to think or form opinions, so you go around parroting memes to each other, lifted out of "Lord of the Rings". You use the talk of "trolls" and "fascists" and "McBabble" to explain your world. And the only people you convert or enlighten with your posts are other children, stoned losers, or genuine socialists and fringe radicals.

You can use all your talk of monsters, trolls and evil fascist "Stepford" rulers, but please don't point the gun of your pathetically prepubescent diction at me.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:28 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

>> alanms wrote: "Aspergirl is a troll - pls ignore her. Beyond the Palin is a bizarre Stepford wife fascist automaton armed with guns and a penchant for wise ass one-liners. I cannot believe the naivety of people who are declaring her the second coming. She simply did what the voices in her head (implanted by Karl Rove and Bush's speechwriter) told her to do. Her taking over this country (should McWeird be found face down on his dentures), would be another chapter from Life in Hell. Heaven help us!"

What's this with the "troll" "fascist" "McWeird"?

You're one of Obama's little sophomoric cult minions. You use baby language filled with monsters and villains, which is how you process politics in your ignorant, childlike understanding of national and world politics.

You don't know how to think or form opinions, so you go around parroting memes to each other, lifted out of "Lord of the Rings". You use the talk of "trolls" and "fascists" and "McBabble" to explain your world. And the only people you convert or enlighten with your posts are other children, stoned losers, or genuine socialists and fringe radicals.

You can use all your talk of monsters, trolls and evil fascist "Stepford" rulers, but please don't point the gun of your pathetically prepubescent diction at me.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Quick, someone do me a favor and explain how a sportscaster's job better suits him or her to become vice president than does a journalist's job.

Bonus points if you can explain, in detail, the difference between them. And a gold star for explaining the differences in college curriculum for both.

Posted by: VBArthur | September 5, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

The truth is, Mccain has no partner to campaign with now, just some dope he has to wet nurse.
Obama and Biden are out on the trail and Hillary and every powerful woman in the democratic party are going out starting today. Mccain is already behind in the polls and now he is being outnumbered 10 to 1 campaigning. Palin is like an anchor around his neck now.
----------
You Obama supporters are a group of flaming hypocrites.

After months of claiming that great speechifying is enough qualification for Obama being present, because he can inspire the country and move the masses, you're now belittling the fact that Sarah Palin is a more gifted and grounded orator than he.

Not only that but you're crying that she worked with speechwriters, when Obama's major speeches were written for him and he has a whole team of speechwriters on staff for his speeches.

What a bunch of flaming hypocrites and bubble-boys you are, living in your own reality of the cult.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:21 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

For anyone who still wonders how the Nazis were able to take over "modern" German society, note how our usually rational Mr. Cillizza has bought into the Sarah Palin agit-prop.

Let this be a warning to us all.

Posted by: Mike McConnell | September 5, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

I guess if Julia Roberts read it you would be voting for her without knowing anything further.

====
You Obama supporters are a group of flaming hypocrites.

After months of claiming that great speechifying is enough qualification for Obama being present, because he can inspire the country and move the masses, you're now belittling the fact that Sarah Palin is a more gifted and grounded orator than he.

Not only that but you're crying that she worked with speechwriters, when Obama's major speeches were written for him and he has a whole team of speechwriters on staff for his speeches.

What a bunch of flaming hypocrites and bubble-boys you are, living in your own reality of the cult.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:21 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Seriously, Chris, before you crow about what a "successful" speech Palin made you might want to start asking why this new "superstar" of the Republican Party will not even commit to an interview with a mainstream journalist.

I would think that any "rising" politician who had just been picked to run with "Old Salty" McCain would be jumping at the chance to go on the network shows the weekend following her "exciting" introduction to the American people.

That the McCain Campaign is allowed to get away with this obvious avoidance is totally unacceptable.

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

You Obama supporters are a group of flaming hypocrites.

After months of claiming that great speechifying is enough qualification for Obama being present, because he can inspire the country and move the masses, you're now belittling the fact that Sarah Palin is a more gifted and grounded orator than he.

Not only that but you're crying that she worked with speechwriters, when Obama's major speeches were written for him and he has a whole team of speechwriters on staff for his speeches.

What a bunch of flaming hypocrites and bubble-boys you are, living in your own reality of the cult.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

The long Soros post goes up when the paid disinfo's seek to disrupt the discourse on blogs like this.

Memo to Mike McConnell:

Check on Monday morning to make sure agencies under DNI watch are adhering to rules and regs and not violating laws against government propagandizing.

And secure all Directed Energy Weapons deployed in the field and make sure none is being used on civilians by any agency or their interests. Investigate any and all reports of DEW use on civilians.

WHAT IF THEY COULD SHOOT YOU
WITHOUT LEAVING A TRACE? THEY CAN.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/zap-have-you-been-targeted-directed-energy-weapon-victims-organized-gang-stalking-say-its-happening-usa-1

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl is a troll - pls ignore her.

Beyond the Palin is a bizarre Stepford wife fascist automaton armed with guns and a penchant for wise ass one-liners. I cannot believe the naivety of people who are declaring her the second coming. She simply did what the voices in her head (implanted by Karl Rove and Bush's speechwriter) told her to do. Her taking over this country (should McWeird be found face down on his dentures), would be another chapter from Life in Hell. Heaven help us!

Posted by: alanms | September 5, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Wonder if Obama will target and rid of sharp opponents reporting that Gov. Sarah Palin’s popularity is now even larger than his??

Or will GOP Guiliani target and murder mutual opponents with his mob ties via protege Bernard Kerik whose got 140 years of jail time to cut sweetheart exchange deals with to lessen penalty? Hitler Guiliani, the mobster himself...

As sharp critics to both of them, wonder if we should worry about our family’s physical safety especially when we are jogging in public this afternoon or our car tampered with this afternoon after work for example?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

>> Dave wrote: "The POW and the Hockey Mom... sounds like an "Afterschool Special"

Yeah, real people. Not hollow phonies who have never done anything for anyone else in their long career of "public service".

Obama's years as a state senator in Illinois is so empty of any leadership that he voted "present" 130 times to avoid taking stands on "controversial legislation" (as if there were 130 career-killing controversial laws he had to take a pass on at the state level, come on!) and yet no one noticed his failure to take a lead


You ignorant little troll

You are saying the Afterschool Special series is like "Real Peolple". IT WAS A TV SHOW you moron. Is that how you view the world? As far as the "130 present comment", stop with the talking points. most people put things in to context. It is common in the IL legislature to vote present. Not to mention that the 130 votes you are complaining about were out of over 4000 total. Just because you blame all men for your pitiful little life is no reason to be uninformed. You are an embarassment to any thinking adult.

Posted by: Dave | September 5, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Mccains wife will have more power if they get elected.

========
If by chance they ever got in office they will giver her a staff run by Cheney and she will be told to keep her mouth shut. In other words, "STOOGE"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

sarah

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

If by chance they ever got in office they will giver her a staff run by Cheney and she will be told to keep her mouth shut. In other words, "STOOGE"

---------
She is a stooge. She actually thinks she is running for VP. She is a prop.

=========
Yes, Palin can read a partisan attack speech written for her by Rovian Bush Hacks in front of a crowd of True Believers but why can't she go on "Meet the Press" or "Face the Nation" this weekend like Joe Biden has done a million times?

Ready to "Lead On Day One" ? She can't even deal with the Big Bad Media:

"A senior McCain campaign official advises that, despite the gaggle of requests and pressure from the media, Gov. Sarah Palin won't submit to a formal interview anytime soon. She may take some questions from local news entities in Alaska, but until she's ready -- and until she's comfortable -- which might not be for a long while -- the media will have to wait. The campaign believes it can effectively deal with the media's complaints, and their on-the-record response to all this will be: "Sarah Palin needs to spend time with the voters.' "

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 4:04 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:09 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

maria, it is much worse than just dodging the press...

""According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads....

"It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens. Maybe she can, maybe she can't. As far as Wallace is concerned, it's none of their -- or your -- business." Wallace actually says, "who cares?" "
http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/palin-will-not.html

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

She is a stooge. She actually thinks she is running for VP. She is a prop.

=========
Yes, Palin can read a partisan attack speech written for her by Rovian Bush Hacks in front of a crowd of True Believers but why can't she go on "Meet the Press" or "Face the Nation" this weekend like Joe Biden has done a million times?

Ready to "Lead On Day One" ? She can't even deal with the Big Bad Media:

"A senior McCain campaign official advises that, despite the gaggle of requests and pressure from the media, Gov. Sarah Palin won't submit to a formal interview anytime soon. She may take some questions from local news entities in Alaska, but until she's ready -- and until she's comfortable -- which might not be for a long while -- the media will have to wait. The campaign believes it can effectively deal with the media's complaints, and their on-the-record response to all this will be: "Sarah Palin needs to spend time with the voters.' "

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 4:04 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

It's now been 7 days and counting since Palin was chosen to be McCain's running mate. We are advised there are no plans to allow her to take questions about her competency to assume the role of President from the media. It seems POW McCain has now imprisoned his running mate and told the American voter that they will have to trust him that she's qualified.


Well, "my friends", I have some questions. McCain claims he is a maverick. Would a maverick not allow his own hand picked candidate to answer questions about her views on issues that are at the heart of this campaign? Would a maverick vote for his own party 90% of the time? Just how different are you than Bush? Personally, anyone that believes 90% of the Bush policy isn't a maverick, it's a strong supporter. Does his running mate support imprisoning doctors that perform abortions? Why are you having Bush insiders brief Palin if you are so independent from the President?


At the end of the day, the longer this campaign goes on, the more you revert to the tactics used by the Republican party in the past. Where is the transparency with Palin? Why is Rove a part of your thing tank? Why does your economic adviser still call everyone who doesn't agree with you a whiner?


I was a strong supporter of Goldwater and Reagan because of their integrity and willingness to change the way Washington operated. You, Senator McCain, aren't worthy to call them your mentor. Your service to America isn't an entitlement to continue the Bush policies which are destroying the middle class.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c

Posted by: AsperDude | September 5, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, it was very difficult to listen to Palin's "speech". The ?spontaneous? applause/cheering eruptions were not unlike cheerleaders at a high school basketball game. I'd like to see Palin give a real speech in front of a neutral audience. And the demeaning nod to Obama's community organizing activities was just too much! I fear SP is just not what we need on a national stage.

Posted by: fruppel | September 5, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

WATCH THEM AGAIN!

Sarah Palin National Speech 09/03/2008:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26535823#26535823

John McCain Republican Speech 09/05/2008:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F0d6MChQnY

To support Palin's candidacy, you MUST now donate to the RNC, as the McCain campaign has accepted federal funds and can't spend donations for campaigning as of 09/01.

https://secure.gop.com/donate/

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Tom Toles said it best.

WATCH OUT MR. BUSH/REPUBLICAN PARTY:

With the exception of economic policy, and energy policy and social issues and tax policy and foreign policy and supreme court appointments and Rove style politics ...we are coming in to really shake Washington UP!

John McCain
Sarah Palin

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Palin can read a partisan attack speech written for her by Rovian Bush Hacks in front of a crowd of True Believers but why can't she go on "Meet the Press" or "Face the Nation" this weekend like Joe Biden has done a million times?

Ready to "Lead On Day One" ? She can't even deal with the Big Bad Media:

"A senior McCain campaign official advises that, despite the gaggle of requests and pressure from the media, Gov. Sarah Palin won't submit to a formal interview anytime soon. She may take some questions from local news entities in Alaska, but until she's ready -- and until she's comfortable -- which might not be for a long while -- the media will have to wait. The campaign believes it can effectively deal with the media's complaints, and their on-the-record response to all this will be: "Sarah Palin needs to spend time with the voters.' "

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 4:04 PM | 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
=========
OBAMA HAS SO MUCH LESS TO OFFER THAN SARAH PALIN

Obama is a freshman senator in the U.S. senate and has been mainly engaged in running for president since his first year. What is his professional history?

Obama got a "community organizer" job after 2 years of unemployment after graduating from Columbia with a bachelor's degree. And as his book admits, he didn't get anywhere as a "community organizer" and that's why he went back to law school.

And as we all know, after graduating from law school, Obama failed to make partner at his law firm, set no precedents in cases he might have handled, didn't get published in any law review and didn't produce any scholarly or professional works of any nature contributing to the field of law.

Obama's probably the only politician in the U.S. to not accomplish a single thing with an ivy league law degree before going into politics.

Obama's years as a state senator in Illinois were so devoid of any leadership that he voted "present" 130 times instead of "yes" or "no", now claiming he had to do so to avoid taking stands on "controversial legislation" (as if there were 130 career-killing controversial laws he had to take a pass on at the state level, come on!).

As an Illinois state senator, Obama climbed the greased pole of corrupt, dirty Chicago politics leveraging racist politics of Trinity Church, insider ex-radical terrorists like William Ayers' networks and trading favors with corruption figures like his convicted slumlord friend Tony Rezko.

Obama has never published journal article in any law review, collaborated on any professional project, engaged in no landmark signature legislation, or made any tangible, substantial contribution of any nature to his professions as a lawyer or politician.

The only tangible works Barack Obama produced in his life are 2 fictionalized books about himself, glorifying his search for identity and his alcoholic, polygamous, already-married Kenyan father who was a failed Muslim communist (huh?) who knocked up his then-17-year-old mother and then abandoned them.

Lately, Obama has been trying to claim his "experience" "running" a campaign stacks up against Sarah Palin's experience as elected Governor of Alaska! Running for president is the experience needed to be president! That's almost as self-referential as "we are the ones we've been waiting for"!

And I was so shocked to discover that Obama uses a whole team of speechwriters! Giving great speeches is the only professional leadership talent he has true claim to! I thought he was writing his own speeches this whole time.

NY Times Feature Article on Obama's Head Speechwriter
By Ashley Parker, The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/fashion/20speechwriter.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

lurker, Sarah Palin was a sportscaster, not a "journalist." If you're going to try to trap me into a debate, at least get your facts straight. Sportscasters are way more qualified to be VP than mere journalists.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

My apologies for going off the speech topic, but I didn't see them all so I felt I had not much to offer. I do agree that Palin's speech was overrated based on extremely low expectations. She was a TV sportscaster, after all. And the pit bull joke can only be considered an ad-lib if you mean it wasn't written into the speech. It was pre-planned to be used at some point, and despite being a very old joke, Palin herself had used it before.

Again sorry to go off-course, mostly sorry I got hot-buttoned by a rabble-rouser.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

The ladies of Heart have contacted the McCain/Palin campaign and asked them to immediately cease and desist from using their song "Barracuda".

A portion of the statement from Ann and Nancy Wilson:

"Sarah Palin's views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song 'Barracuda' no longer be used to promote her image. The song 'Barracuda' was written in the late 70s as a scathing rant against the soulless, corporate nature of the music business, particularly for women. (The 'barracuda' represented the business.) While Heart did not and would not authorize the use of their song at the RNC, there's irony in Republican strategists' choice to make use of it there."
http://www.boston.com/ae/music/blog/2008/09/heart_to_mccain.html?s_campaign=8315


When will the Republicans and the McCain campaign begin respecting artists and copyright laws? How many artists have to threaten and/or sue them before they stop ripping off their work? I'd say it is time for them to "band" together and put a stop to it once and for all.

Posted by: Bush + Cheney = McCain | September 5, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

>>lurker wrote: "No, they are genuinely stupid. They consist mostly of journalism and other liberal-arts-lite majors. That's one of the least demanding academic majors intellectually. Most of them can't think beyond framing and reframing events in a variety of artful memes."- aspergirl
--er....aspergirl- not to make you out to be really stupid yourself, but you did know that Sarah Palin has a degree in journalism and was a journalist? I'm looking forward to you dancing around on this one."

She has clearly overachieved her degree. Most importantly, she has gone out and lived a real life that involves commitment, concrete thinking and action. She's one of the real people, not one of the infantile-regressives who have never matured, who are shallow and rhetorical, like the left-wing liberal elites who can think up ideas all day long but don't know how to have an original one, or start a lawnmower or save a life.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

please send me the link that shows that making abortions in the us illegal will not reduce abortion i'd like to read it, you may be right but i find it hard to believe

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:36 PM


Here it is:

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/ib_0599.html

Posted by: rb-freedom-for-all | September 5, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

A pretty face gets 'em every time. This line says it all: "It ensured that for the next week -- and likely longer -- she would be THE story in the presidential race, the hottest thing on the campaign circuit since a fast rising Illinois senator named Barack Obama."
A "serious politician"? Dude she read from a teleprompter. She hasn't answered a single probing question about any issue.

Posted by: Only in America | September 5, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The long Soros post goes up when the paid disinfo's seek to disrupt the discourse on blogs like this.

Memo to Mike McConnell:

Check on Monday morning to make sure agencies under DNI watch are adhering to rules and regs and not violating laws against government propagandizing.

And secure all Directed Energy Weapons deployed in the field and make sure none is being used on civilians by any agency or their interests.

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I did not like Sarah's speech. It was mean-spirited and shallow and lacked any attention to the issues, other than saying "drill." I also did not find that the way she delivered the speech as increasing her likability or presenting her at all as statesmanlike. I thought her wrinkling her nose (sneering)to drive home a zinger or derisive point was a particularly bad speech-making mannerism.

Her speech did nothing to make me more comfortable that she is prepared to be vice president or, if needed, president. Since she is such an unknown quantity, I believe her speech had to really succeed in doing this. Seeing that she has chutzpah may have impressed you, Chris, and many others, but it did nothing for me. I would not put her speech in the top five.

Posted by: Byron | September 5, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I join others in being incredibly disappointed with your ratings. All Palin proved was that she could read the condescending, snippy lines Bush's speechwriter wrote for her off the teleprompter, one line at a time. Contrast that with Obama and Bill Clinton, who are intimately involved in the drafting of their own speeches. Each of their speeches revealed a depth of understanding of the issues facing our country, the solutions we need, AND the ability of both men to motivate and inspire through their words.

Posted by: CVB | September 5, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Everyone knows about McCain's explosive temper. Everyone knows the risk this man poses to our nation. How McCain got in the position of power is beyond me. But the powers that be see something in this man that we don't. McCain had to prove to them that he will do everything they tell him, that he's willing to "stay in Iraq for 100 years, a million"-or be willing to annihalate Iran "bomb bomb Iran" if they tell him to!


In short, McCain sold his soul to the rightwing lunitic fringe fascists, and sold us all out for the neocon regional and world hegemonic agenda of pre-emptive, perpetual war. He may or may not be a manchurian candidate as some claim, but is it worth taking the risk for us to find out the hard way?
I for one am not fooled or convinced by their Wingnut propaganda and lies. McCain-Palin is supremely unfit to run this nation. The mere thought of McCain deciding to take a permanent dirt nap and being replaced by an unknown(to us) quantity like Palin is enough to scare the pants off me.


Who are these people anyway? We better find out with a quickness, and we've only got two more months to do it in!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnb2IrsU1Cg
.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 5, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA HAS SO MUCH LESS TO OFFER THAN SARAH PALIN

Obama is a freshman senator in the U.S. senate and has been mainly engaged in running for president since his first year. What is his professional history?

Obama got a "community organizer" job after 2 years of unemployment after graduating from Columbia with a bachelor's degree. And as his book admits, he didn't get anywhere as a "community organizer" and that's why he went back to law school.

And as we all know, after graduating from law school, Obama failed to make partner at his law firm, set no precedents in cases he might have handled, didn't get published in any law review and didn't produce any scholarly or professional works of any nature contributing to the field of law.

Obama's probably the only politician in the U.S. to not accomplish a single thing with an ivy league law degree before going into politics.

Obama's years as a state senator in Illinois were so devoid of any leadership that he voted "present" 130 times instead of "yes" or "no", now claiming he had to do so to avoid taking stands on "controversial legislation" (as if there were 130 career-killing controversial laws he had to take a pass on at the state level, come on!).

As an Illinois state senator, Obama climbed the greased pole of corrupt, dirty Chicago politics leveraging racist politics of Trinity Church, insider ex-radical terrorists like William Ayers' networks and trading favors with corruption figures like his convicted slumlord friend Tony Rezko.

Obama has never published journal article in any law review, collaborated on any professional project, engaged in no landmark signature legislation, or made any tangible, substantial contribution of any nature to his professions as a lawyer or politician.

The only tangible works Barack Obama produced in his life are 2 fictionalized books about himself, glorifying his search for identity and his alcoholic, polygamous, already-married Kenyan father who was a failed Muslim communist (huh?) who knocked up his then-17-year-old mother and then abandoned them.

Lately, Obama has been trying to claim his "experience" "running" a campaign stacks up against Sarah Palin's experience as elected Governor of Alaska! Running for president is the experience needed to be president! That's almost as self-referential as "we are the ones we've been waiting for"!

And I was so shocked to discover that Obama uses a whole team of speechwriters! Giving great speeches is the only professional leadership talent he has true claim to! I thought he was writing his own speeches this whole time.

NY Times Feature Article on Obama's Head Speechwriter
By Ashley Parker, The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/fashion/20speechwriter.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

The long Soros post goes up when the paid disinfo's seek to disrupt the discourse on blogs like this.

Memo to Mike McConnell:

Check on Monday morning to make sure agencies under DNI watch are adhering to rules and regs and not violating laws against government propagandizing.

And make sure DEW is not deployed on civilians.

Posted by: Eyes2d | September 5, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I thought the topic was the speeches...
My pick was Brian Schweitzers'....
He got em fired up and ready to go...his was my favorite..then came Obama..
Fred Thompsons' was ok..Palins' was for her base..and Bubbas' wasn't his best..that is the order I would go with..
I was surprised by little this past two weeks...
Now the next 60 days will be very interesting indeed.
Can't wait for the debates!

Posted by: Goddesscon2001 | September 5, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

mike in midland:

I completely agree with you and salute you for adopting a child. Illegal abortions will only bring back the horrors that occurred years ago. Also, I'd like to ask all these people who agree with Palin that, even if her daughter was raped, she would not approve of an abortion - what if it was your daughter and she was only 13 or so? The big problem with Palin's stance is, she would not be the one who would have to live with and raise that child who was a constant, horrible reminder of what happened. And do not tell me that this child would be raised in a loving home. I cannot believe that would happen. Women must be very careful with their vote in this election. McCain/Palin will not keep us any safer than Obama/Biden and there is so much more to think about. Unless you are rich, the last 8 years has done more damage and caused more dishoner to our country than ever before. Think, think, think and then think again, hard. Oh, getting back to the ranking of speeches. Chris, you can't honestly believe that Palin and Clinton were better than Obama. You rated them as a "popularity" contest instead of what they were - political. He covered all the bases and let the public know what he will do for them looking ahead. That's what they should be rated on.

Posted by: ossilot | September 5, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

"No, they are genuinely stupid. They consist mostly of journalism and other liberal-arts-lite majors. That's one of the least demanding academic majors intellectually. Most of them can't think beyond framing and reframing events in a variety of artful memes."- aspergirl

er....aspergirl- not to make you out to be really stupid yourself, but you did know that Sarah Palin has a degree in journalism and was a journalist? I'm looking forward to you dancing around on this one.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's shrill iteration of neocon philosophy, punctuated by mean humor, the so-called "red meat" so dear to the hearts of conventioneers is deemed a success by you.

Okay.

I guess what I liked were the many red, white and blue flag images. When my head swells with American pride I don't have to think about problems and their solutions.

Based on the above, I think I'll vote Republican and get what I deserve.

Posted by: Bike Tourist | September 5, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Do you even "KNOW", what it means to vote present? Unlike John Mccain who just never even bothers to show up and vote. To vote present means you are here and ready to vote but what you are voting on is not ready to be voted on in your opinion. There are things in it you support and things you don't. You want to see it worked on some more so instead of just voting "YES" like a lot of senators do who are too lazy to fight for what they believe in. Or voting "NO" and killing what may be a good bill if it was just worked on, you vote "PRESENT" meaning "Im am here and ready to vote but not on what has been presented to me".

IT IS A "GOOD" THING TO VOTE PRESENT, IT MEANS YOU ARE THERE READY TO WORK AND TAKE YOUR JOB SERIOUSLY BUT NOT SOME STOOGE WHO WILL JUST SIGN ANYTHING MANY TIMES THINGS THEY DIDN'T EVEN READ.

If you see someone who has no present votes, they were probably not even there half the time. "LIKE JOHN MCCAIN"


------------
Martin, lol
If one thinks as a 7 year old, perhaps that's the way they would communicate.
If you don't even get that statement, it's no wonder you don't get the rest/real picture.
Senator McCain has a record in the senate. Obama's record is saying present 130 times.
Too deep I'm sure

-------
Yeah, real people. Not hollow phonies who have never done anything for anyone else in their long career of "public service".

Obama's years as a state senator in Illinois is so empty of any leadership that he voted "present" 130 times to avoid taking stands on "controversial legislation" (as if there were 130 career-killing controversial laws he had to take a pass on at the state level, come on!) and yet no one noticed his failure to take a lead.

posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:07 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Palin lied about the bridge - she took the money. Is there not a journalist left in this country who cares whether or not the speech was true?

She lied to the American people. Have we not been lied to enough?

Posted by: TW | September 5, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

There seems to be an awful lot of uppity bítchiness in the room.

Before anyone accuses me of being sexist, I'd like to cite dictionary.com:

bítchiness
noun
malevolence by virtue of being malicious or spiteful or nasty

See?! It's not a loaded word! It's in the dictionary!

Posted by: Pain in the AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

>> Dave wrote: "The POW and the Hockey Mom... sounds like an "Afterschool Special"

Yeah, real people. Not hollow phonies who have never done anything for anyone else in their long career of "public service".

Obama's years as a state senator in Illinois is so empty of any leadership that he voted "present" 130 times to avoid taking stands on "controversial legislation" (as if there were 130 career-killing controversial laws he had to take a pass on at the state level, come on!) and yet no one noticed his failure to take a lead.

As an Illinois state senator, Obama climbed the greased pole of corrupt, dirty Chicago politics leveraging racist politics of Trinity Church, insider ex-radical terrorists like William Ayers' networks and trading favors with corruption figures like his convicted slumlord friend Tony Rezko.

Obama has contributed nothing to his profession and his only achievements are those that involve his ability to advance his own status and promote himself.

Obama has never published journal article in any law review, collaborated on any professional project, engaged in no landmark signature legislation, or made any tangible, substantial contribution of any nature to his profession as a lawyer or politician at any time since graduating with an ivy league law degree.

The only tangible works Barack Obama produced in his life are 2 fictionalized books about himself, glorifying his search for identity and his alcoholic, polygamous, already-married Kenyan father who was a failed Muslim communist (LOL) who knocked up his then-17-year-old mother and then abandoned them.

How odd that there is such an empty suit on one ticket against such a real person on the other.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I join others in being incredibly disappointed with your ratings. All Palin proved was that she could read the condescending, snippy lines Bush's speechwriter wrote for her off the teleprompter, one line at a time. Contrast that with Obama and Bill Clinton, who are intimately involved in the drafting of their own speeches. Each of their speeches revealed a depth of understanding of the issues facing our country, the solutions we need, AND the ability of both men to motivate and inspire through their words.

Posted by: CVB | September 5, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

what a hoot! You guys are worried about Soros when you ought to be worried about robert wood Johnson and the other heavy hitters trying to buy the election. republicans may I say. I love it. Pot meet kettle. Call each other names.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Whoops, sorry, that was me.

Posted by: Dori | September 5, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse


Past statistics. It was never illegal to get an abortion just to perform one. Anyone who got pregnant will have no problem finding someone to do it. Same as you can buy crack in any city today. Laws have no effect.

--------
please send me the link that shows that making abortions in the us illegal will not reduce abortion i'd like to read it, you may be right but i find it hard to believe

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:36 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

She inherited a town of $10,000 and no debt and left it $22 million in hock. Is that what all those "hockey mom" signs mean?

Of course, after watching Reagan, Bush and Bush run up $8 trillion in debt (usually with at least one house of Congress in Republican clutches), I'm thinking Sarah feels she'll fit right in.

Sorry people, it won't be long before people figure out she's Dick Cheney with breasts.

Posted by: Deficits don't matter | September 5, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by Dori @ 2:43pm

Incidentally, the people I know in the disability community are pretty much uniformly pro-choice; her child is still young enough that caring for him is frankly not much different than any other infant that age. When he gets to be a toddler, however, the family will have their hands full, more than they can possibly realize at this point.

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

So, what you're saying is that infants with disabilities are great, but you should abort them because they're handful's when they grow up?

I have lost a little faith in humanity from your post.

Posted by: IsDoriSerious | September 5, 2008 2:58 PM


No, what I'm saying is that those of us who have kids with disabilities have a viewpoint that you do not.

Our daughter is very deeply loved. My husband, other kids, and I are all far better people for having raised her-- more compassionate and caring. And we would NEVER force another family to have to deal with this situation. We have strong reason to believe that her disabilities are the result of birth trauma, as I had an amniocentesis when I was 3 months pregnant and the results were normal.

But the facts are:

1. Families into which a child has been born with a disability, whose marriages are not strong are much more likely to break up than those with all "normal" children.

2. Children who are disabled are more likely to be abused than those who are not.

3. A person with a disability requires resources that are in short supply and more expensive, and has fewer opportunities. My daughter would LOVE to move out and live independently. She's on a waiting list for a group home, apartment, etc., but will probably be with us for another 10 years. She's loved, not abused, has her own room and TV and literally hundreds of her own books and DVDs, decent clothing, etc. My husband and I are in our mid 50's and in reasonably good health. She's low on the priority list for geeting DDA funds, and unfortunately we cannot afford to rent an apartment with our own money.

I do not have statistics at hand for my points, but I have seen a number of studies over the years. I worked for a while as a special-ed teacher and can tell you from anecdotal experience, the statistics do hold.

When she was younger, my daughter threw temper tantrums so serious at times that she literally punched holes in the wall. My other children couldn't have friends over to visit. Taking her into public situations (shopping, kiddie movies, a restaurant-- we were thrown out of a Friendly's once--, a museum, etc.) was always something of a gamble. I literally had people walk up to me and tell me to my face that I was a terrible mother.

And don't tell me that "these kids are happy"-- she is QUITE aware that she's different. She can't understand why she isn't allowed to drive, or when she attended a program at a local college for the last 2 years of her FAPE (Free and Appropriate Public Education), why she couldn't live on campus like her big sister did. She doesn't understand when she's being teased. We used to invite the entire class to her birthday parties when she was in elementary school, in a "normal" classroom. The number of invitations she got in returned, for a full FIVE YEARS in school, could literally be counted on one hand.

She is now taking a 2-year program designed to promote independence at a local community college. We're carpooling with 2 other families, but 3 days a week I have to drive literally to the other side of our county to take the three young adults, or pick them up. Afternoons, 2 days a week she works at the local Old Navy (and yes, I have to drive her). The other 3 days she goes out job-hunting for the sort of job she REALLY wants. I will drive her to a horse-riding lesson tonight, and Hebrew school on Sunday. She takes crafts classes, cooking classes, and has social outings with other young adults with disabilities. I describe my job as being her chauffeur. With her schedule, I can't work.

I am NOT asking for sympathy. However, I hope you'll understand a little more about the issues faced by families after reading this, and perhaps develop a little perspective on just why the vast majority of these families are and will always be pro-choice.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Why can't the "pro abortion" people just admit that life begins at conception since your DNA is "created" at conception. I would have more respect for your arguments if you just admitted the truth, life begins at conception and you really don't care since the mother can decide at any time to abort the child."

It's not about life or not life. It's about who gets to decide what is what.

The mother decides. No one else is entitled to enforce their decisions in the matter on someone else.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

The POW and the Hockey Mom... sounds like an "Afterschool Special"

Posted by: Dave | September 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

A tip of the hat to mikeinmidland. You are likely correct, sir, in that the abortion issue has the propensity to remain a wedge issue for the rest of eternity. I suppose I still harbor some skepticism that Republicans would even risk getting rid of something they use so effectively as a wedge issue, but I would agree with your point that were Roe v. Wade overturned, the issue would linger for many years afterward.

It's against my better judgment to respond to anything AsperGirl writes, but I just can't resist this one:
"No, (journalists) are genuinely stupid. They consist mostly of journalism and other liberal-arts-lite majors. That's one of the least demanding academic majors intellectually. Most of them can't think beyond framing and reframing events in a variety of artful memes."

What was Sarah Palin's college major again?

Posted by: VBArthur | September 5, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl- Do you really live in this country? I see you as some inbred redneck who comes out at night to avoid being seen and has the reading coprehension and self awareness of a shrew. Hmm... that does work, on several levels.

You've made it very clear what your real problem is with Obama and his has nothing to do with the issues and everything to do with you resenting the fact that he has a life (earned by hard work, by the way) that you never will. Keep posting, hon- the more you do, the smaller and meaner and less intelligent you look.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Obama writes his own speeches, but that is not to say someone may not help him with structure to make is have it's best impact.
Move a line around here and there rehearse it with him and so no. For someone like his wife she would put down everything she wants to say and a professional help her polish it. Speech writers also have other duties such as produce press releases or write for other members of the campaign.
Mccain by the way worked on an practiced that speech last night for three weeks every day. It was horrible in every way from delivery to structure, timing and content. Who ever he has he should get rid of.

------------
aspergirl wrote: "I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER BARACK OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!

My opinion of him went way down after that!

The guy's great claim to fame, and why people say it's not that important that he's never done anything real as a lawyer or politician, is that he's so great at inspiring people with speeches."

+++++++++++++++++

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

please send me the link that shows that making abortions in the us illegal will not reduce abortion i'd like to read it, you may be right but i find it hard to believe

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I remember reading the posts here just before her speech and thinking she was toast.

The best five speeches:

1. Palin
2. Palin
3. Palin
4. Palin
5. tie -- Palin and Palin

Posted by: info | September 5, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Palin was picked as a distraction. McCain can't cut it so the GOP (not McCain) decided a "good looking, redneck woman" will do the trick. And, the Democrats will be afraid to mess with her because she's a woman. I hope you guys realize soon what a mistake this is. She's come off as a nasty, combative and just another Republican telling stories and lies. She's not for any women's rights and will vote against their needs just like McCain has since he's been in government. She's lied about her background including the fact that her husband is a fisherman and works for BP. From what I hear, he's a stay at home Dad. Why lie about that? She's lied about the pipeline and all other aspects of her record as Mayor and Governor AND she's under investigation for abuse of power (Bush come to mind by any chance?). She apparently had no time to teach her daughter proper morality and she's using her Down Syndrome son to bring in votes. She should be ashamed and so should John McCain. The people, and expecially women, are not fooled by this nonsense. Okay, maybe Republican women are but not others. Sad, sad set of circumstances.

Posted by: ossilot | September 5, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "Soros Runs British Foreign Office Coup Against U.S. Elections"

Actually, this is true. Soros has created a sort of circle of elite billionaires, who are acting to interfere in governments' elections around the world. They funnel money and services to support selected candidates.

They helped get that guy elected in Georgia, who tragically walked into the Russian baited trap.

They're like some council of elites who decides who gets elected. It's gross and stupid.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

You know how I can tell that Gov. Palin was the right pick?

By the level shear terror in the Democratic base.

They are like dogs digging in the mud. They're throwing quite a bit of it behind them, hoping at least some of it sticks.

You have to admit, the stuff you guys/gals are trying to pin on her is petty and insignificant when compared to what McCain, Obama, Clinton, Kerry, Reagan, Carter, and Nixon did during they're lives.

Keep trying, something might actually stick one of these days.

but right now, her approval rating is higher than Obama, McCain, and especially Biden.

Politics are fun!

Posted by: GeorgeObama | September 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse


I understand that you make no distinction between a fetus and a baby. What you need to understand is that not every one agrees with that position.

I am a Christian and a father who has also adopted a child taken from an unfit unwed teenage mother. The suffering my son endured in the first 3 months of his life will affect him the rest of his life.

I would love for every child in the world to be well cared for. What are YOU doing, besides posting anonymously, to make that happen for anyone outside your own gene pool?

I will admit to having a practical side. The fact is that making abortion illegal does not reduce the number of abortions. The rate is nearly the same all over the world, whether it is illegal or not.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,
Why so angry? You rage is palpable and it permeates all your posts. . Please, take up tennis or something, and blow off some steam. You can pretend the balls are the liberals you 'love' so much.

Just sayin'...

Posted by: Wassap | September 5, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

liberal wish washy "grey area" bs allows babies to be killed - are you people born with liberal mush for brains, it must be

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Soros Runs British Foreign Office Coup Against U.S. Elections
Increase Decrease

by Anton Chaitkin

September 5, 2008--Civilization is in danger from the globalist financial system blowing apart, with the present U.S. administration lurching towards new British-guided war adventures, and the two U.S. Presidential nominees detached from the reality of the crisis and floating towards catastrophe. The Democratic Party, which should lead the way out towards national survival, has been taken over and bound head to foot by a British coup led by Foreign Office agent George Soros.

The billionaire speculator and his London sponsors created the time-bomb regimes on the borders of Russia, that are now detonating a potential world war with Dick Cheney's gleeful encouragement.

With the slimiest money-conduiting political assets inside the United States paralleling those in Georgia and Eastern Europe, George Soros is running an illegal foreign intervention into the U.S. Presidential elections, on behalf of the British Crown.

The world financial system began to visibly disintegrate in summer, 2007. Working people losing their jobs and homes would surely back a Democratic Party committed to defend their lives. The front-running Hillary Clinton could unite a large majority, the lower 80% of income brackets, white, black and Hispanic, behind a return to Frankiln Roosevelt policies and a successful war against the power of British-Wall Street financier axis. London knew she was tough enough to chew and spit out potential opponent Republican rightists who spout populist sophistry.

To destroy these prospects, George Soros has employed a titanic money-channeling apparatus whose operatives are under investigation for wholesale looting, partners of the worst mortgage swindler-bankers. The Soros combination of anonymous financiers and deployable street forces went berserk against Hillary and Bill Clinton. They concentrated on splitting black and white voters, with Soros-owned Democratic chairman Howard Dean and Soros-owned Moveon.org working on severing the remaining ties of the Party to labor voters.

— How the Foreign Agency Works —

The core Soros apparatus inside the U.S., now boasting itself an "alternative" to the ruined Democratic Party, starts at the top with the secretive offshore unregulated hedge funds through which the British have awarded billions to Soros personally — the Caribbean-based Quantum Group of Funds, overseen by Soros Fund Management; and the tax-exempt Open Society Institute, where Soros dispenses $300 million a year to rig the political system.

In that fateful pre-Presidential-race spring and summer of 2007, British imperial strategist Sir Mark Malloch Brown was vice president of both Soros Fund Management and the New York-based Open Society Institute. The Queen made him Baron Malloch-Brown in July, 2007, after he became Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Foreign Office chief for Asia, Africa and the United Nations.

Under Soros management are four core elements functioning as a single integrated foreign agency:

** The Democracy Alliance. a private billionaires' political club founded by Soros in 2004-2005;

** The 2-million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU), led by Soros servants Andy Stern and Anna Burger. They broke up America's AFL-CIO Labor Federation in 2005, and their clique is under Congressional and federal criminal investigation;

** The Tides Foundation, a tax-exempt channel for political funding ($80 million per year) from anonymous wealthy donors;

** The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — ACORN — a vast street-level corps created in the 1970s as a neo-fascist "New Left" control mechanism over the black ghetto, used since 2004 as the primary political agency for Obama campaigns. Built up as a covert grouping of private and tax-exempt entities, ACORN is now imploding from scandals of theft and sleaze.

There is a startling, shameless interlock between the treasuries of these political units, and these relationships deserve careful scrutiny from the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.

Drummond Pike is Treasurer of the Democracy Alliance, and permanent chief executive of Tides Foundation.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger is vice chairman of Democracy Alliance (and chairman of the "Change to Win Federation" which broke millions of members away from the AFL-CIO).

Prior to July, 2008, Wade Rathke was permanent chief executive of ACORN; chairman of the board of the Tides Center, the link between Tides Foundation's anonymous wealthy donors and their targeted "radical politic causes"; and chief executive of the Texas/Louisiana/Arkansas region for SEIU. Rathke quit Tides and quit as ACORN's sole boss after it was revealed that his brother stole $948,000 from the ACORN group's commingled funds. The embezzlement was kept quiet for eight years. In August, 2008, the New York Times exposed a secret arrangement (with $700,000 paid in by Tides chief Drummond Pike) to keep law enforcement away.

— Soros Chooses Obama —

The combination carrying out the present British electoral intervention was put together five years ago.

Barack Obama came under special Soros sponsorship in the 2004 U.S. Senate race, Obama's first successful run for national office. Then a state senator, Obama had been deeply involved for over a decade with the ACORN apparatus that Soros was just then, in 2003-2004, incorporating into his national political machine.

George Soros raised $60,000 for the 2004 Obama U.S. Senate campaign. Obama was reportedly the only candidate with whom Soros met personally (in March) during the 2004 election cycle, and Obama was in Soros' New York home for a July 27 fundraising event.

To put this Soros sponsorship into perspective, note that simultaneously in 2003-2004, Mikhail Saakashvili was installed as Georgia's President thanks to $40 million from Soros for the "Rose Revolution." A few weeks before Soros first met with Obama, Soros, Sir Mark Malloch Brown and Saakashvili held a Switzerland press conference to announce that Soros and the UN Development Progamme which Malloch Brown then headed would be financing the Saakashvili government, paying the prime minister and police salaries. The Georgia Open Society Institute executive director who distributed that Soros money, Alexander Lomaia, is now (in 2008) head of the National Security Council of Georgia and supervised the attack against South Ossetia that brought on the brutal conflict with Russia.

On December 4, 2006, two years after getting into the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama went to Soros' New York office to be interviewed for higher office. Soros then took Obama into a conference room for other, politically subordinate billionaires, to speak with Obama after the Soros approval. With money and connections assured, Obama announced for the Presidency soon afterwards.

Soros put behind the Obama candidacy — and into the savage attacks against Hillary Clinton — his Democracy Alliance and Tides billionaires, with funds passed as legal "bundlers" and otherwise, together with his SEIU and ACORN street-managers.

— London's U.S. Election Squad —

The street units that British Foreign Office agent George Soros is deploying to rig the 2008 election are herded by Rathke's ACORN and the Andy Stern/Anna Burger SEIU leadership, a clique shaped since the 1960s as a covert action project of the London-New York axis. With all its vaunted power, this clique is now in a deepening legal and political crisis.

It began with the methods and networks of Saul Alinsky (1909-1972), the anti-Franklin Roosevelt professional radical employed, through cutouts in Washington and New York, by strategists based at London's Tavistock Clinic and Psychiatric Institute.

Alinsky's 1930s experimental "community organizing" in the Chicago slums at last bore its sick fruit in the post-Kennedy, late 1960s sex/drugs culture, when Alinsky trainees and front groups got financier and government backing to control the poor and divide working people.

This false-flag Community Organizing, leading neighborhoods into militancy around strictly local concerns, was identified as a variant of the earlier Mussolini syndicalist-fascism by Lyndon LaRouche in his 1968 article, "The new left, Local Control and Fascism (Campaigner magazine, Sept. 1968): "Legions of black and white radical judas goats are being bankrolled by the Ford Foundation, the [Office of Economic Opportunity, and other ruling class agencies to spread the gospel of 'community control' in the black ghetto and elsewhere....It is the syndicalist's role as a conscious saboteur of every effort to bridge the ... separation of black and white workers, of workers and students ... which is syndicalism's most poisonous feature ... leading directly to fascism."

In 1972, the Alinsky-trained Washington operative Margery Tabankin and her assistant Drummond Pike took control of Wade Rathke and his then-two-year-old ACORN enterprise. Tabankin and Pike moved Rathke around the country and incorporated him into their Alinskyite arrangement known as ARF, for "Associated Rich Folks"! Among other financiers, the Bagley family, a wing of the London Imperial Tobacco-controlled R.J. Reynolds family, were counterinsurgency projects for lower income people.

It was this Drummond Pike, together with Ms. Tabankin's Bagley sponsors, who created the Tides Foundation in 1976, bringing Wade Rathke in as the first Tides director. Immediately afterwards, Margery Tabankin became Director of the United States federal agency, Volunteers in Service to America. In September, 1977, Tabankin's federal agency paid out $470,475 to supply 80 free organizers to ACORN, enormously expanding its scope. As a Bagley family member chaired the Tides Foundation, and Tabankin herself ran the Bagley family's ARCA Foundation, high-level protection and unaccountable millions of dollars were channeled into the ACORN project.

Government support continued on until, in the Bush-Cheney years of 2003-2006, government grants provided at least $10,035,479 to ACORN (counting only two of Rathke's dozens of operations, ACORN Institute and ACORN Housing Corporation, according to their IRS filings).

The biggest banks, that are now sinking in the global credit meltdown, Bank of America (which ate the toxic Countrywide)), J.P. Morgan Chase and many others, have given ACORN millions. They have officially engaged ACORN as "radical" partners in marketing new mortgages, and as counselors to prior predatory lending victims on How To Cope without touching the bankers' power.

— Obama, and the Crackup —

Barack Obama got into this picture in 1985-1988, directing the Saul Alinsky spin-off, Developing Communities Project, for Chicago slum residents self-help and local-issue confrontations. He went onto the board of the Alinsky-legacy Woods Fund, that had paid for his Project, and then funded ACORN. He ran ACORN's 1992 "Project Vote" Chicago registration drive.

Obama was the lawyer for ACORN's 1995 election law suit against Illinois Governor Jim Edgar; and his law firm ran the 2002-2003 law suit resulting in the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank (HSBC) paying ACORN huge sums on the pretext that ACORN would counsel predatory lending victims.

For at least the years 1995-2004, according to ACORN officer Toni Foulkes (Social Policy magazine, Winter 2003/Spring 2004), Barack Obama led ACORN training sessions on political power, building up a cadre of ACORN leadership around himself. Alongside the new ACORN overlord, George Soros, ACORN thus employed street forces, paid and volunteer, to win for Obama the 2004 Democratic primary election for U.S. Senator.

On February 22, 2008, an ambiguously-identified "ACORN Political Action Committee" formally endorsed Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. They were already in action against Clinton in the field, on the Web, on the radio, paying and otherwise herding thousands of operatives in combination with the SEIU and other Soros elements.

The July, 2008 resignation of ACORN chief and SEIU regional boss Wade Rathke in the 2008 embezzlement and cover-up scandal has been followed by other shocks deepening the public disgrace of ACORN and SEIU.

Since ACORN is the Soros/Obama street machine, ACORN's earlier cases of election fraud have now spilled into public view. In 2004, four ACORN employees in Ohio were indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms. In January, 2005, two Colorado ACORN workers were convicted of submitting false voter registrations. On November 1, 2006, four ACORN employees were indicted in Kansas City, Mo., for voter registration fraud, in part of a national criminal investigation. In 2006, ACORN was investigated for submitting false voter registrations in St. Louis, with 1,492 fraudulent registrations identified. In 2007, five Washington state ACORN workers were sentenced to jail, and ACORN agreed to pay King County $25,000 for investigative costs.

Now the House Education and Labor Committee, chaired by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), the U.S. Labor Department, and the U.S. Attorney's office in Los Angeles are each investigating possible criminal misconduct by Tyrone Freeman, the head of the SEIU branch in Los Angeles. The Soros stooges, SEIU President Andy Stern and SEIU/Democracy Alliance official Anna Burger, gave Freeman control of the California section of the union in a power struggle against California-based opponents of their leadership.

Freeman has resigned, and Freeman's former chief of staff, Rickman Jackson, has also left his present post as head of an SEIU local in Michigan. SEIU executive vice president Annelle Grajeda, a top California operative of Stern and Burger, has also stepped down amid separate allegations of illegal payments.

Stern and Burger reorganized their California region in an attempt to crush a rebellion led by Oakland-based SEIU leader Sal Rosselli, who has fought against Stern and Burger's sweetheart deals with anti-patient, anti-worker health-care operators, and dirty arrangements with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The vast ocean of money flowing through SEIU, ACORN and affiliated Soros agent enterprises, has proved to be a dangerous temptation.

A series in the Los Angeles Times has reported that Tyrone Freeman's local paid almost $178,000 to a video firm owned by Freeman's wife, $16,000 to Freeman's brother-in-law's basketball team, $219,000 to a Freeman's close friend's company, hundreds of thousands (from a union charity) to Freeman's mother-in-law's day-care service, and almost $300,000 to a golf tournament, a steakhouse, a cigar club and a talent agency. Freeman's unopposed 2002 election as an SEIU local president is under investigation, as are complaints of thug tactics against Feeman's members.

Annelle Grajeda, the SEIU's international executive vice president and an aide to President Andy Stern, has left her posts amidst complaints of union payments to her former boyfriend after he ceased being an SEIU officer. Grajeda heads the SEIU's California state council, which runs the union's lobbying efforts with Governor Schwarzenegger and the legislature, and which oversees get-out-the-vote drives overlapping with the entire Soros apparatus.

Desperately counterattacking, Stern and Burger have demanded the rebellious, whistle-blowing Oakland SEIU local be put into receivership, provoking public rallies of the union membership against those operatives who have put the union at the service of London's George Soros.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Eat a republican baby

Posted by: Make America Safe | September 5, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Soros Runs British Foreign Office Coup Against U.S. Elections
Increase Decrease

by Anton Chaitkin

September 5, 2008--Civilization is in danger from the globalist financial system blowing apart, with the present U.S. administration lurching towards new British-guided war adventures, and the two U.S. Presidential nominees detached from the reality of the crisis and floating towards catastrophe. The Democratic Party, which should lead the way out towards national survival, has been taken over and bound head to foot by a British coup led by Foreign Office agent George Soros.

The billionaire speculator and his London sponsors created the time-bomb regimes on the borders of Russia, that are now detonating a potential world war with Dick Cheney's gleeful encouragement.

With the slimiest money-conduiting political assets inside the United States paralleling those in Georgia and Eastern Europe, George Soros is running an illegal foreign intervention into the U.S. Presidential elections, on behalf of the British Crown.

The world financial system began to visibly disintegrate in summer, 2007. Working people losing their jobs and homes would surely back a Democratic Party committed to defend their lives. The front-running Hillary Clinton could unite a large majority, the lower 80% of income brackets, white, black and Hispanic, behind a return to Frankiln Roosevelt policies and a successful war against the power of British-Wall Street financier axis. London knew she was tough enough to chew and spit out potential opponent Republican rightists who spout populist sophistry.

To destroy these prospects, George Soros has employed a titanic money-channeling apparatus whose operatives are under investigation for wholesale looting, partners of the worst mortgage swindler-bankers. The Soros combination of anonymous financiers and deployable street forces went berserk against Hillary and Bill Clinton. They concentrated on splitting black and white voters, with Soros-owned Democratic chairman Howard Dean and Soros-owned Moveon.org working on severing the remaining ties of the Party to labor voters.

— How the Foreign Agency Works —

The core Soros apparatus inside the U.S., now boasting itself an "alternative" to the ruined Democratic Party, starts at the top with the secretive offshore unregulated hedge funds through which the British have awarded billions to Soros personally — the Caribbean-based Quantum Group of Funds, overseen by Soros Fund Management; and the tax-exempt Open Society Institute, where Soros dispenses $300 million a year to rig the political system.

In that fateful pre-Presidential-race spring and summer of 2007, British imperial strategist Sir Mark Malloch Brown was vice president of both Soros Fund Management and the New York-based Open Society Institute. The Queen made him Baron Malloch-Brown in July, 2007, after he became Prime Minister Gordon Brown's Foreign Office chief for Asia, Africa and the United Nations.

Under Soros management are four core elements functioning as a single integrated foreign agency:

** The Democracy Alliance. a private billionaires' political club founded by Soros in 2004-2005;

** The 2-million-member Service Employees International Union (SEIU), led by Soros servants Andy Stern and Anna Burger. They broke up America's AFL-CIO Labor Federation in 2005, and their clique is under Congressional and federal criminal investigation;

** The Tides Foundation, a tax-exempt channel for political funding ($80 million per year) from anonymous wealthy donors;

** The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — ACORN — a vast street-level corps created in the 1970s as a neo-fascist "New Left" control mechanism over the black ghetto, used since 2004 as the primary political agency for Obama campaigns. Built up as a covert grouping of private and tax-exempt entities, ACORN is now imploding from scandals of theft and sleaze.

There is a startling, shameless interlock between the treasuries of these political units, and these relationships deserve careful scrutiny from the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.

Drummond Pike is Treasurer of the Democracy Alliance, and permanent chief executive of Tides Foundation.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger is vice chairman of Democracy Alliance (and chairman of the "Change to Win Federation" which broke millions of members away from the AFL-CIO).

Prior to July, 2008, Wade Rathke was permanent chief executive of ACORN; chairman of the board of the Tides Center, the link between Tides Foundation's anonymous wealthy donors and their targeted "radical politic causes"; and chief executive of the Texas/Louisiana/Arkansas region for SEIU. Rathke quit Tides and quit as ACORN's sole boss after it was revealed that his brother stole $948,000 from the ACORN group's commingled funds. The embezzlement was kept quiet for eight years. In August, 2008, the New York Times exposed a secret arrangement (with $700,000 paid in by Tides chief Drummond Pike) to keep law enforcement away.

— Soros Chooses Obama —

The combination carrying out the present British electoral intervention was put together five years ago.

Barack Obama came under special Soros sponsorship in the 2004 U.S. Senate race, Obama's first successful run for national office. Then a state senator, Obama had been deeply involved for over a decade with the ACORN apparatus that Soros was just then, in 2003-2004, incorporating into his national political machine.

George Soros raised $60,000 for the 2004 Obama U.S. Senate campaign. Obama was reportedly the only candidate with whom Soros met personally (in March) during the 2004 election cycle, and Obama was in Soros' New York home for a July 27 fundraising event.

To put this Soros sponsorship into perspective, note that simultaneously in 2003-2004, Mikhail Saakashvili was installed as Georgia's President thanks to $40 million from Soros for the "Rose Revolution." A few weeks before Soros first met with Obama, Soros, Sir Mark Malloch Brown and Saakashvili held a Switzerland press conference to announce that Soros and the UN Development Progamme which Malloch Brown then headed would be financing the Saakashvili government, paying the prime minister and police salaries. The Georgia Open Society Institute executive director who distributed that Soros money, Alexander Lomaia, is now (in 2008) head of the National Security Council of Georgia and supervised the attack against South Ossetia that brought on the brutal conflict with Russia.

On December 4, 2006, two years after getting into the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama went to Soros' New York office to be interviewed for higher office. Soros then took Obama into a conference room for other, politically subordinate billionaires, to speak with Obama after the Soros approval. With money and connections assured, Obama announced for the Presidency soon afterwards.

Soros put behind the Obama candidacy — and into the savage attacks against Hillary Clinton — his Democracy Alliance and Tides billionaires, with funds passed as legal "bundlers" and otherwise, together with his SEIU and ACORN street-managers.

— London's U.S. Election Squad —

The street units that British Foreign Office agent George Soros is deploying to rig the 2008 election are herded by Rathke's ACORN and the Andy Stern/Anna Burger SEIU leadership, a clique shaped since the 1960s as a covert action project of the London-New York axis. With all its vaunted power, this clique is now in a deepening legal and political crisis.

It began with the methods and networks of Saul Alinsky (1909-1972), the anti-Franklin Roosevelt professional radical employed, through cutouts in Washington and New York, by strategists based at London's Tavistock Clinic and Psychiatric Institute.

Alinsky's 1930s experimental "community organizing" in the Chicago slums at last bore its sick fruit in the post-Kennedy, late 1960s sex/drugs culture, when Alinsky trainees and front groups got financier and government backing to control the poor and divide working people.

This false-flag Community Organizing, leading neighborhoods into militancy around strictly local concerns, was identified as a variant of the earlier Mussolini syndicalist-fascism by Lyndon LaRouche in his 1968 article, "The new left, Local Control and Fascism (Campaigner magazine, Sept. 1968): "Legions of black and white radical judas goats are being bankrolled by the Ford Foundation, the [Office of Economic Opportunity, and other ruling class agencies to spread the gospel of 'community control' in the black ghetto and elsewhere....It is the syndicalist's role as a conscious saboteur of every effort to bridge the ... separation of black and white workers, of workers and students ... which is syndicalism's most poisonous feature ... leading directly to fascism."

In 1972, the Alinsky-trained Washington operative Margery Tabankin and her assistant Drummond Pike took control of Wade Rathke and his then-two-year-old ACORN enterprise. Tabankin and Pike moved Rathke around the country and incorporated him into their Alinskyite arrangement known as ARF, for "Associated Rich Folks"! Among other financiers, the Bagley family, a wing of the London Imperial Tobacco-controlled R.J. Reynolds family, were counterinsurgency projects for lower income people.

It was this Drummond Pike, together with Ms. Tabankin's Bagley sponsors, who created the Tides Foundation in 1976, bringing Wade Rathke in as the first Tides director. Immediately afterwards, Margery Tabankin became Director of the United States federal agency, Volunteers in Service to America. In September, 1977, Tabankin's federal agency paid out $470,475 to supply 80 free organizers to ACORN, enormously expanding its scope. As a Bagley family member chaired the Tides Foundation, and Tabankin herself ran the Bagley family's ARCA Foundation, high-level protection and unaccountable millions of dollars were channeled into the ACORN project.

Government support continued on until, in the Bush-Cheney years of 2003-2006, government grants provided at least $10,035,479 to ACORN (counting only two of Rathke's dozens of operations, ACORN Institute and ACORN Housing Corporation, according to their IRS filings).

The biggest banks, that are now sinking in the global credit meltdown, Bank of America (which ate the toxic Countrywide)), J.P. Morgan Chase and many others, have given ACORN millions. They have officially engaged ACORN as "radical" partners in marketing new mortgages, and as counselors to prior predatory lending victims on How To Cope without touching the bankers' power.

— Obama, and the Crackup —

Barack Obama got into this picture in 1985-1988, directing the Saul Alinsky spin-off, Developing Communities Project, for Chicago slum residents self-help and local-issue confrontations. He went onto the board of the Alinsky-legacy Woods Fund, that had paid for his Project, and then funded ACORN. He ran ACORN's 1992 "Project Vote" Chicago registration drive.

Obama was the lawyer for ACORN's 1995 election law suit against Illinois Governor Jim Edgar; and his law firm ran the 2002-2003 law suit resulting in the Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank (HSBC) paying ACORN huge sums on the pretext that ACORN would counsel predatory lending victims.

For at least the years 1995-2004, according to ACORN officer Toni Foulkes (Social Policy magazine, Winter 2003/Spring 2004), Barack Obama led ACORN training sessions on political power, building up a cadre of ACORN leadership around himself. Alongside the new ACORN overlord, George Soros, ACORN thus employed street forces, paid and volunteer, to win for Obama the 2004 Democratic primary election for U.S. Senator.

On February 22, 2008, an ambiguously-identified "ACORN Political Action Committee" formally endorsed Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. They were already in action against Clinton in the field, on the Web, on the radio, paying and otherwise herding thousands of operatives in combination with the SEIU and other Soros elements.

The July, 2008 resignation of ACORN chief and SEIU regional boss Wade Rathke in the 2008 embezzlement and cover-up scandal has been followed by other shocks deepening the public disgrace of ACORN and SEIU.

Since ACORN is the Soros/Obama street machine, ACORN's earlier cases of election fraud have now spilled into public view. In 2004, four ACORN employees in Ohio were indicted by a federal grand jury for submitting false voter registration forms. In January, 2005, two Colorado ACORN workers were convicted of submitting false voter registrations. On November 1, 2006, four ACORN employees were indicted in Kansas City, Mo., for voter registration fraud, in part of a national criminal investigation. In 2006, ACORN was investigated for submitting false voter registrations in St. Louis, with 1,492 fraudulent registrations identified. In 2007, five Washington state ACORN workers were sentenced to jail, and ACORN agreed to pay King County $25,000 for investigative costs.

Now the House Education and Labor Committee, chaired by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), the U.S. Labor Department, and the U.S. Attorney's office in Los Angeles are each investigating possible criminal misconduct by Tyrone Freeman, the head of the SEIU branch in Los Angeles. The Soros stooges, SEIU President Andy Stern and SEIU/Democracy Alliance official Anna Burger, gave Freeman control of the California section of the union in a power struggle against California-based opponents of their leadership.

Freeman has resigned, and Freeman's former chief of staff, Rickman Jackson, has also left his present post as head of an SEIU local in Michigan. SEIU executive vice president Annelle Grajeda, a top California operative of Stern and Burger, has also stepped down amid separate allegations of illegal payments.

Stern and Burger reorganized their California region in an attempt to crush a rebellion led by Oakland-based SEIU leader Sal Rosselli, who has fought against Stern and Burger's sweetheart deals with anti-patient, anti-worker health-care operators, and dirty arrangements with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The vast ocean of money flowing through SEIU, ACORN and affiliated Soros agent enterprises, has proved to be a dangerous temptation.

A series in the Los Angeles Times has reported that Tyrone Freeman's local paid almost $178,000 to a video firm owned by Freeman's wife, $16,000 to Freeman's brother-in-law's basketball team, $219,000 to a Freeman's close friend's company, hundreds of thousands (from a union charity) to Freeman's mother-in-law's day-care service, and almost $300,000 to a golf tournament, a steakhouse, a cigar club and a talent agency. Freeman's unopposed 2002 election as an SEIU local president is under investigation, as are complaints of thug tactics against Feeman's members.

Annelle Grajeda, the SEIU's international executive vice president and an aide to President Andy Stern, has left her posts amidst complaints of union payments to her former boyfriend after he ceased being an SEIU officer. Grajeda heads the SEIU's California state council, which runs the union's lobbying efforts with Governor Schwarzenegger and the legislature, and which oversees get-out-the-vote drives overlapping with the entire Soros apparatus.

Desperately counterattacking, Stern and Burger have demanded the rebellious, whistle-blowing Oakland SEIU local be put into receivership, provoking public rallies of the union membership against those operatives who have put the union at the service of London's George Soros.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

God bless ya, mikeinmidland, God bless ya!

NO ONE is pro-abortion. But juxtaposing the 'rights' of an unborn child with that of the mother's automatically makes them adversaries at the point of conception. No good can possibly come out of that.

Education is key, and that's what Obama advocates; the 'prevention is better than cure' point of view. Unlike Ms. Baracuda who's ideological failure haunts her very own home.

Think, people.

Posted by: Banji | September 5, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "The reason members of the press support Obama is twofold. 1. Most of them are democrats and want a democrat elected. 2. They are deathly afraid of being called racist, since it is the quickest way to get fired."

No, they are genuinely stupid. They consist mostly of journalism and other liberal-arts-lite majors. That's one of the least demanding academic majors intellectually. Most of them can't think beyond framing and reframing events in a variety of artful memes.

They are genuinely stupid. They drag down public discourse in any issue from energy policy, the economy, international warfare and politics down to the level of a 100 point I.Q. liberal arts major (no concrete thinking). And that's the best of them.

Even more stupid are the bloggers like on DailiyKos. They are all reporter-wanna-bes. They are the C-average, liberal arts or journalism majors from 4th rate state schools or community colleges, who can't get jobs with their underachieving degree and blame the Republicans.

I actually had one ask me, "How can I get a job with an average liberal arts degree in this economy?" And the answer to that, of course, is that in any economy, with a degree like that, you can't expect to get a job that doesn't involve strapping on an apron or carrying lumber from place to place unless you're a popular kid with charm and drive who starts selling insurance or managing a Wal-mart.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Why can't the "pro abortion" people just admit that life begins at conception since your DNA is "created" at conception. I would have more respect for your arguments if you just admitted the truth, life begins at conception and you really don't care since the mother can decide at any time to abort the child.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

VBArther:

If another conservative justice is appointed, and the court took up a challenge to Roe v. Wade, it might be overturned. That would certainly not be the end of the story. It would then go to the individual states. And you can be sure that lawsuits would be filed trying to reinstate abortion rights, possibly under a different clause in the Constitution.

If nothing else, the social conservative rallying cry would become "we can't rest until abortion is illegal in every state" or "they're trying to make abortion legal again!"

This will ALWAYS be a wedge issue.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Jersey John

Suggesting the pit bull line was the best ad lib was done by the fix.
That's why I put a question mark after it and that's why I said its appearance in Newsweek prior to the speech DISQUALIFIES it as an ad lib.

Posted by: MJS | September 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Whoa! white trailer trash's speech gets picked over everyone else's? And Bill's over Hill's? Keep firing for effect, you'll get the range down someday.

Posted by: sundog2 | September 5, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Maybe no one really wants to kill babies, they just don't care that much if it happens. This argument of quality of life is so lame it makes me sick. You assume a baby will have a bad quality of life so it's ok to kill it. I bet you know people right know who would have been aborted if that argument was followed. You argue that the end justifies the means. You need to rethink your position of aborting innocent helpless human beings.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl/Anonymous/Aspergirl is HOT (all obviously the same person), please give ALL your money to the McCain/Palin ticket; you certainly don't deserve any of it. Otherwise, you could simply gather it all together and purcahse a LIFE. Your pick.

Chris, the fixer, please fix your list:

Barack
Michelle
Bill
Brian
Fred (all points for delivery, nothing for content).

Posted by: Passin'thru | September 5, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

>>nyc sparrow wrote: "aspergirl wrote: "I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER BARACK OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!
--I have to tell you- I think you're a fake. Anyone who pays so little attention to the facts ...has to have the maturity level of a 6 year old or is simply a troll. You can keep posting your so-called facts, gleaned from every right-wing nutjob blog you know- and you know so many- but lies and misrepresentation consistently repeated are still lies and misrepresentation.

Uhh, nyc sparrow. Not only was Barack Obama's 2004 convention speech WRITTEN FOR HIM, but so are all his speeches. Barack Obama not only uses a speechwriter, he has a STAFF of speechwriters.

Here's a NY Times feature article about the HEAD of Obama's STAFF OF SPEECHWRITERS:

What Would Obama Say?
By Ashley Parker
January 20, 2008
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/fashion/20speechwriter.html

It's the Obama supporters who get their "facts" and "ideas" programmed into them by the Obama campaign as distributed through his corps of blogger irregulars.

Not everyone in the world is a programmed member of a cult, like the Obama base is.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

McCain will probably win, and Democrats will still have a majority is Congress.

Nothing will get done, and we'll all be the better for it.

:)

Posted by: MoreCowbell | September 5, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Asper"Girl":

The more people watched Palin and then McCain, the most absurd the argument became.

The bigger issue make turn out to be the reliability of electronic voting...

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

RATINGS ARE IN: JOHN MCCAIN'S SPEECH DRAWS 38.9 MILLION

WATCH IT AGAIN!


Watch it again? I could hardly sit through it the first time. Painful to watch.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

The reason members of the press support Obama is twofold. 1. Most of them are democrats and want a democrat elected. 2. They are deathly afraid of being called racist, since it is the quickest way to get fired.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

To anonymous anti-abortionist:

No one in the world is "pro-abortion." No one wants to kill babies, or even fetuses. Some people factor in the quality of a future life. In other words their empathy doesn't END at birth.

I would encourage every "pro-life" person out there to go and adopt a drug-addicted inner-city baby, or maybe take in a pregnant mother off the streets for a year, before they try to make every woman's womb the Property of the State.

And btw, if liberal women don't care because they aren't getting laid, then why would they bother being pro-choice?

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 5, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

e hart,

In fact, BHO's acceptance speech was written by him -- at least the first draft -- in the solitude of a hotel room in Chicago, in longhand. Did others contribute to it and help edit it? Yes, of course. But -- unlike Palin's snarky "Tonight Show" monologue, witten by former Bush speechwriter Matt Scully, for a man -- the ideas were all his.

Posted by: jac13 | September 5, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,
Obama writes his own speeches. He has his writers go over them.

Listening to McCain and Palin give a speech, I can't imagine how you can make a comment at all on any or Obama's speeches.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

'Uppity' is racist, and everyone knows it. Republicans are racists and everyone knows that too.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

OK, this keeps getting brought up, and I just have to know: Why is everyone so sure that a John McCain presidency means the overturning of Roe v. Wade?

Sure, we all realize McCain might have the opportunity to appoint neoconservative justices if he takes the White House. But how can we be so sure they'll take measures to fully criminalize abortion -- or that McCain will even appoint justices who would take that step? Let's not forget here that in the political world, re-election is Priority No. 1, and if you take abortion off the table, all of a sudden you've lost one of your most important wedge issues. There are a lot of voters who use the abortion issue as a litmus test -- "I won't vote for a candidate who's pro-choice" -- but what if that were no longer an issue? Then you risk those voters staying home or, worse, finding reasons to vote Democratic now that Reason Numero Uno is irrelevant. Sure, the guy who gets rid of abortion might get a "Hey, he got rid of abortion! Let's re-elect him!" bump, but he's only one guy.

Abortion -- like gay rights and the myth of the liberal media -- is too useful to Republicans as a boogeyman. Radical action to stop any of those three things entirely will never happen.

Posted by: VBArthur | September 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

the more i think about it Barrack and Michelle are uppity, it's the perfect word

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

still no job, eh zouk?

still a useless moron.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

>>"Guess most of the people on this blog have not read or heard about the esteemed congressman from Georgia, Lynn Westmoreland, who has called Barack and Michelle Obama "uppity"."

Uhh, hate to disillusion you in the middle of a racial grievance mentality bout, but your race card is wrong.

"Uppity" is bigoted when applied to someone who DOESN'T deserve the label.

But where people really do fit the core, classical meaning of the word, it's not bigoted. And if you look up the work, Barack Obama IS uppity

Before looking for racial coding in words, you should first look in a dictionary to see what the core meaning is:

up·pi·ty
1. affecting an attitude of inflated self-esteem; haughty; snobbish.

(dictionary.com)

What part of "elitist narcissist" don't you understand? Did you miss the $6 million stage Obama built to deliver a one-time speech on, using his poor donors' money?

BARACK OBAMA IS "UPPITY"

Most elitists who suffer from narcissistic personality disorder are.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl wrote: "I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER BARACK OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!

My opinion of him went way down after that!

The guy's great claim to fame, and why people say it's not that important that he's never done anything real as a lawyer or politician, is that he's so great at inspiring people with speeches."

+++++++++++++++++

aspergirl- REALLY???????? And you think you know what you're doing, huh?

I have to tell you- I think you're a fake. Anyone who pays so little attention to the facts and consistently shrieks "information" like a banshee wailing over an acorn really either has to have the maturity level of a 6 year old or is simply a troll.

You can keep posting your so-called facts, gleaned from every right-wing nutjob blog you know- and you know so many- but lies and misrepresentation consistently repeated are still lies and misrepresentation. Repetition doesn't make them true, it just makes you seem annoyingly out in la la land..

Posted by: nyc sparrow | September 5, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

PALIN VP PARADOX: A Pawn In a Geopolitical Game?

• Still no convincing reason why McCain picked someone so untested

• Did he choose her it because he felt he had to?


Could John McCain's odd GOP convention adventure of the past week be subtitled, "The politics of induced schizophrenia?"

He headed to the twin cities after a running mate selection that seemed incongruous with arguments he had made in earlier campaigning, as well as those he proffered in a spry but unconvincing acceptance speech. Now, in the wake of a convention that yet fail to deliver much of a bump in the polls (as was the case with the Democrats), McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin still perplexes the pundits as well as some worried GOP insiders.

In one fell swoop, McCain took off the table in this year's presidential politics the experience factor -- arguably his strongest suit against the candidacy of Democratic opponent Barack Obama. The experience factor also explains why Obama felt compelled to choose long-time Washington politico Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate.

McCain's Thursday night convention wrap-up employed a biographical film that was heavy on P.O.W. images, making the case that he's a fighter who's well-prepared, battle-tested and ready to lead the nation as commander-in-chief. Viewers also can read into the narrative this subtext: Torture and psychological pressure couldn't break McCain's spirit or alter his core beliefs.

But what about the here and now? Short-term Gov. Palin, despite the ballyhoo about her sass and brass and all the convention hype that she's a "maverick just like McCain," cannot be described as someone who's well-prepared, battle-tested and ready to lead. Less than two years as Alaska's governor and four years as a small-town mayor comprise a thin resume for the 44-year-old mother of five, who puts "hockey mom" first when asked to define herself.

Palin supplicants, with a straight face, point to her line authority over the Alaska National Guard, and the state's proximity to Russia, as proof of foreign affairs bona fides. The argument is both specious and outrageous.

Her newfound acolytes describe her as a brave "reformer," citing her battles with state party regulars. Yet this is a woman who had the temerity to brag on her opposition to earmarks and the infamous "bridge to nowhere," when in fact she hired lobbyists to secure Congressional pork for her state -- some $300 million this year alone, about nine times as much pork per person as the national average.

Palin appears to adhere to hard-right positions on social issues ranging from sex education and gun control to censorship in the public library.

Recordings of Palin's remarks in her church reveal what some might see as an embrace of apocalyptic dogma. The mainstream media, perhaps intimidated by the McCain campaign's charges of "sexism" in their Palin coverage, have yet to explore this angle of inquiry. Certainly she is entitled to such beliefs; but those asked to elevate her to executive office deserve to know much more about the doctrines and values which have shaped her thinking.

As of this writing, the McCain camp is keeping Palin under tight wraps, having granted an extended interview thus far only to People magazine. The mainstream media is offering Palin a soapbox, what amounts to free political advertising. But the McCain camp apparently has chosen to make the media its whipping boy, as reporters quite rightly seek to learn more about Palin's background, experience, qualifications, temperament and fitness for executive office.

Bereft of interviews with Palin herself, the media is left to dwell on what might be termed The Unsinkable Molly Brown/Annie Get Your Gun angle -- interviews with past friends and associates, tales of her frontier woman habits and pastimes, and puff pieces about her good looks, her vocal screech and her honeybun hairdoo.

And then there are those ostensibly private, family issues being doggedly pursuing by such outlets as the National Enquirer, fresh off its deadly pursuit of former Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards. Some say such personal matters should be off-limits; when someone is seeking high office, that is rarely the case these days. John F. Kennedy's exploits with the secretaries "Fiddle" and "Faddle" were well-known to some Washington media insiders in the Camelot era; such secrets could never be kept in the current tabloid climate.

This emerging profile of the woman her high-school classmates knew as "Sarah Barracuda" stands in contrast to McCain's, although his youthful traits and his voluable temperament have earned him some colorful nicknames as well.

On social issues, Palin appears to stand much more to McCain's right. Despite his conversion to an anti-abortion stance, McCain has favored reproductive rights for women in his political past and is considered to be a moderate on a broad range of social issues.

McCain has consistently refused to wear his religion on his sleeve; his recent appearance with Barack Obama at that Saddlebrook forum was one of the rare times when he's elaborated on matters of faith.

And with more than three decades of public service under his belt, combined with his command of a naval squadron, McCain's experience and qualifications are unassailable.

So what explains his selection of Palin, especially when he was rumored to prefer as his running mate a longtime confidante such as former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge or Sen. Joe Lieberman, both of whom are pro-choice on the abortion issue? McCain, you may recall, had hinted that he wouldn't rule out a pro-choice running mate. He'd only met Palin once before, at a conference earlier this year. And reportedly, he only took a very short meeting with her just before the convention when he offered her the job that's potentially a "heartbeat away" from the presidency.

There's something oddly inconsistent with this Palin pick. Something troubling, unsettling.

Is it possible that some of the same advisers who counseled against Ridge or Lieberman lobbied heavily for the little-known and untested Palin? And is it possible that McCain only grudgingly acquiesced? Some media reports tend to answer those questions in the affirmative.

But here is a question that few have asked, at least not publicly: Is possible that even Palin doesn't realize that she could be a pawn in an ideologically-driven game -- an exercise of power with serious consequences for every American citizen, and for people of every nation worldwide?

Could the Palin pick be just one ingredient in a secret geopolitical stew that's been simmering on a back-burner for some time?

My mission here is to merely raise such questions and to provoke discussion and debate on subjects that seem to cry out for furthering airing. Your comments are welcome.

See related story: The Presidential 'Psy Ops' Wars: Who's Got the Voodoo? at

http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Also check out: Oppose State-Supported Terrorism and ZAP! Have You Been Targeted By a Directed Energy Weapon?

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

The comments on this page prove once again that conservatives are totally heartless, brainless, souless, racist and asinine.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

you are a right-wing dumbass; still dragging out the obama-muslim crap? typical rovian / bush-league "scorched earth" bs. shove it.

Posted by: ass-per-gurl | September 5, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

I personally know democrats who won't vote for Obama because he is black... sad but let's confront the truth head on

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

THE FIX HAS JUMPED THE SHARK

Posted by: PJF | September 5, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

RATINGS ARE IN: JOHN MCCAIN'S SPEECH DRAWS 38.9 MILLION

WATCH IT AGAIN!

John McCain Republican Convention Speech 09/05/2008:
http://www.youtube.com/v/5F0d6MChQnY','s-Mm2uDTldCwSheehn_E0cDg:u-AFQjCNEafJip2ojjUZk7UgFwVN_7rJIFNQ:v-0-1_1242773882

***

WATCH SARAH PALIN AGAN!

Sarah Palin National Convention Speech 09/03/2008:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26535823#26535823

To support Palin's candidacy, you MUST now donate to the RNC, as the McCain campaign has accepted federal funds and can't spend donations for campaigning as of 09/01.

https://secure.gop.com/donate/

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Guess most of the people on this blog have not read or heard about the esteemed congressman from Georgia, Lynn Westmoreland, who has called Barack and Michelle Obama "uppity".
This is the same genius who wanted The Ten Commandments posted in The House and Senate chambers but could not tell Stephen Colbert what they were when asked on "The Daily Show" in 2006.
Just a typical racist, fascist member of the GOP, just like every delegate in St. Paul.

Posted by: Tom the Teacher | September 5, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

We have seen Mr.Obama without a teleprompter and for a "gifted" orator he sure sounded like a 4th grader giving a book report on a Nancy Drew book he never read. Most politicians have trouble when that happens but man Bill Burton might as well come out and sit Obama on his lap like a vantriliquist. As far as experience goes....Mr.Obama is running for President not VP. 130 times in his state senate career he voted neither yes or no? And when he made it to the US senate he has been out running for President 80% of the time? Palin is running for VP not President so no we dont need to compare her experience with Obama's, Biden would be more appropriate....but then NBC might have to compare her daughter being pregnant to his sons being theives. Oooops we don't want to go there. Not to mention Biden is a magician that says one thing and the next time he is asked about it can make the statement disappear. Sure all politicians are crooks most of us that have sense and don't just fall over ourselves for a candidate for superficial or shallow idealogical rhetoric can see that. Obama at the DNC was not rhetoric? He basically vomitted all the same old DNC points from the past...blah blah blah fat cats blah blah blah entitlement program....blah blah blah buzzword (CHANGE)blah blah blah buzzword (HOPE) LAME! But at least he can peddle his sideshow in all 57 States?!?!? I must need a new map or maybe that is how he shows to predict out so many electoral votes cause his map has more states?

Posted by: Teleprompter | September 5, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

abortion is selfish (the me generation) life is about self sacrifice for others.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

obama uses a speechwriter and a teleprompter? he is not just speaking from his heart. OH my gosh I can't believe it, this changes everything. maybe he's just empty suit. Maybe he's trying to sell me snake oil. he lost my vote!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Posted by Dori @ 2:43pm

Incidentally, the people I know in the disability community are pretty much uniformly pro-choice; her child is still young enough that caring for him is frankly not much different than any other infant that age. When he gets to be a toddler, however, the family will have their hands full, more than they can possibly realize at this point.

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

So, what you're saying is that infants with disabilities are great, but you should abort them because they're handful's when they grow up?

I have lost a little faith in humanity from your post.

Posted by: IsDoriSerious | September 5, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse


In attacking Obama, Palin reeled off a few statements that had a nice cadence, but were light on facts.

Palin: America needs more energy; our opponent is against producing it. Victory in Iraq is finally in sight, and he wants to forfeit. Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay; he wants to meet them without preconditions. Al Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights.


We have factual problems with three of these statements.

Obama's not against producing more energy. In fact, he's not even against drilling for oil any more, within limits. He has a $150 billion clean energy program and says that he wants to develop clean coal technology, advance the next generation of biofuels, prioritize construction of the Alaska gas pipeline (surely a measure Palin agrees with) and take a host of other steps to both conserve energy and produce it, in various forms.


If Obama's comments about meeting with "terrorist states" are worthy of ridicule, then perhaps so are those of the Bush administration and other Republicans. Obama made his first statement on this in an answer to a video question at a Democratic debate last year, when he said "I would" when asked whether he'd meet "separately, without precondition" in his first year with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. Reagan, JFK and other presidents had spoken to the Soviet Union regularly, he noted.
In a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in June, Obama elaborated, saying that he would take an aggressive diplomatic approach – carefully preparing for such meetings, setting a clear agenda, coordinating with U.S. allies, and not conducting the meetings at all unless they were clearly in the U.S. interest. He also stressed he would "do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."

In recent months, the Bush Administration has been more open to beginning a dialogue with the same nations that it once referred to as the “axis of evil.” In July, the president sent a high-level official to Geneva to sit in on nuclear talks with Iran and authorized Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to speak with North Korean diplomats about ending that country’s nuclear weapons program. Reports in the Washington Post and the New York Times noted the stark contrast between the administration’s current position about meeting with “foes” and its attitude several years ago.


Further, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in May that we should "sit down and talk" with Iran. So did former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in March. As did Sen. Dick Lugar, then chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as far back as 2006.


Obama isn't worried, as Palin said, "that someone won't read them their rights" when it comes to suspected terrorists who are detained by the U.S. He does, however, support the right of detainees to challenge their imprisonment in federal court. That's the same position the Supreme Court took in June in a case called Boumediene v. Bush.
Cookin' with Gas

Palin talked about standing up to oil companies and oil lobbyists, citing her work on getting a gas pipeline built in Alaska:


Palin: I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history. And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.

Actually, construction hasn’t begun on the pipeline, and the project isn't quite a done deal. Palin signed legislation just last week that authorizes the state to give a license in 90 days to TransCanada to start developing the project. The state also can provide $500 million as seed money. She gets credit for moving the pipeline closer to realization after many years of talks. Palin pushed for legislation that would allow a private company to build the 1,715-mile natural gas pipeline, instead of oil companies, which she said were moving too slowly on the issue.

In an Aug. 27 press release, Palin indicated that there was still work to be done before the project would become a reality:


Palin, press release, Aug. 27: After dreaming of a natural gas pipeline for more than 30 years, Alaskans have now created the framework for the project to advance. This legislation brings us closer than we’ve ever been to building a gas pipeline and finally accessing our gas that has been languishing for so many decades on the North Slope.

Washington Post energy correspondent Steven Mufson wrote that the major oil companies have opposed the pipeline project, saying it wasn’t economically feasible. Yet, ConocoPhillips and BP have proposed their own gas pipeline that would compete with the state-backed project. TransCanada estimates it will take 10 years to finish the pipeline, according to its application to the state, and it will cost about $26.5 billion – not $40 billion as Palin said.

As for Palin having “stood up to ... the Big Oil companies,” as she said in her speech, she has on this issue, not on others. Oil is, after all, incredibly important to Alaska’s economy. About 80 percent of the state budget comes from oil and gas taxes and royalties. Palin is in favor of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and offshore areas, a position she shares with oil companies.

Posted by: More Facts | September 5, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER BARACK OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!

My opinion of him went way down after that!

The guy's great claim to fame, and why people say it's not that important that he's never done anything real as a lawyer or politician, is that he's so great at inspiring people with speeches. "Inspiration" and conveying "vision" to move the masses is supposedly what he really brings to the table for leadership.

To discover that his 2004 convention speech and his other major addresses were written for him and that he uses speechwriters regularly now on his campaign staff, totally undermines the notion that this is his vision. Seems to me speechwriters are reading his autobiography, getting a feel for his personality and writing things for him.

That explains why he could never come up with specifics in all those debates he lost to Hillary Clinton, even though he sounds so great when he delivers speeches. He can't perform unscripted.

His big claim to achievement was giving great speeches! If he doesn't even write his own speeches, what is he? A rhetorical performer? A political actor?

I knew that all politicians used speechwriters, but for some reason it never occurred to me that Obama did because his speeches are supposed to be his one real professional talent. Guess he's just a talent at reading speeches and hiring good speechwriters.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

and the award for dumbest and most amateurish political analysis goes to (drum role please!0 Aspergirl! "Hillary Clinton will alienate her base if she's perceived as standing in Sarah Palin's way.

Not only that, but people will assume, correctly, that after failing to fight for her own nomination, Hillary Clinton wants to stop someone else from breaking the ceiling before her."

and:"comparing Sarah Palin to Margaret Thatcher. She has a sarcastic, humorous, thinking woman's style of skewering people and making her points, even though her cultural appeal is directed toward blue collar workers in this speech. "

ROTFLMAO! FYI, thinking women are interested in issues like jobs, health care, keeping their homes. Sara Palin is so far from being blue collar she's never even had to lift a finger to wash one. BUt yet the GOP persists in cynically manipulating the public into thinking they really care. Aspergirl- they don't.

But you keep arguing for style.If skewering someone is a characteristic needed to be veep, then its quite obvious the republican assumption the voters are too stupid to worry their little high heeled heads about the real issues is vastly well proved by you. As for comparing Palin to Margaret Thatcher- an insult to Thatcher if ever there was one- Palin is as much like Thatcher as Hitler was like Albert Schweitzer.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, do you get your news from anywhere other than blogs?

Posted by: AsperGirl Make Me Dinner | September 5, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I finally figured out why liberal women are pro abortion - they don't care since they don't have kids cause no one will #### them.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

The Palin-Bashing Media Keeps Swinging

"Cockroaches scatter when shocked by a flipped light switch. Grizzly bears attack when startled. And when caught napping by big news, the press corps floods the zone. Editors scream at underlings who missed the story. Networks fret they'll be scooped. And all of a sudden, the norms and standards become a blur in the race to be first. In the case of Palin, the press vaulted over every principle and standard they'd established about what is and isn't fair game, like O.J. Simpson leaping over luggage in the old Hertz commercials. It required the Jaws of Life to pry news of John Edwards' affair out the mainstream press. But when it came to the personal drama of Palin's 17-year old daughter, the press clawed for morsels like they were golden tickets from Wonka Bars."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/palin_bashing_press_keeps_swin.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

jac13 : Brilliant!

How is it that it took Obama 19 months, getting more than 18 million votes, and winning the nomination to convince you supposed experts in the media that he was more than just a good speaker, while you guys folded like lawn chairs on Palin after a speech that SOMEBODY ELSE WROTE and she had THREE DAYS to practice? Could it be that you are cowed by the McCain campaign's phony attacks? Are you bending over backwards to avoid appearing to be sexist? Does it dawn on you that you're being played like a violin by the cynics in McC's campaign? History will record that Palin's transformation from small-town mayor to vp candidate took an astonishingly short 20 months, but that her even more incredible transformation from lightweight to savvy politician took 36 minutes.

No wonder we're in trouble.

Posted by: jacfan | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

from the tax policy center

The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers (see Figure 2). By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase—a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.
McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent.

Posted by: More Facts | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

What a celebration there will be the day roe vs. wade is overturned... we can stop the dems from killing babies and we will with Sarah's help

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

PALIN VP PARADOX: PAWN IN A GEOPOLITICAL GAME?

• Still no convincing reason why McCain picked someone so untested

• Did he choose her it because he felt he had to?

Could John McCain's odd GOP convention adventure of the past week be subtitled, "The politics of induced schizophrenia?"

He headed to the twin cities after a running mate selection that seemed incongruous with arguments he had made in earlier campaigning, as well as those he proffered in a spry but unconvincing acceptance speech. Now, in the wake of a convention that yet fail to deliver much of a bump in the polls (as was the case with the Democrats), McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin still perplexes the pundits as well as some worried GOP insiders.

In one fell swoop, McCain took off the table in this year's presidential politics the experience factor -- arguably his strongest suit against the candidacy of Democratic opponent Barack Obama. The experience factor also explains why Obama felt compelled to choose long-time Washington politico Sen. Joe Biden as his running mate.

McCain's Thursday night convention wrap-up employed a biographical film that was heavy on P.O.W. images, making the case that he's a fighter who's well-prepared, battle-tested and ready to lead the nation as commander-in-chief. Viewers also can read into the narrative this subtext: Torture and psychological pressure couldn't break McCain's spirit or alter his core beliefs.

But what about the here and now? Short-term Gov. Palin, despite the ballyhoo about her sass and brass and all the convention hype that she's a "maverick just like McCain," cannot be described as someone who's well-prepared, battle-tested and ready to lead. Less than two years as Alaska's governor and four years as a small-town mayor comprise a thin resume for the 44-year-old mother of five, who puts "hockey mom" first when asked to define herself.

Palin supplicants, with a straight face, point to her line authority over the Alaska National Guard, and the state's proximity to Russia, as proof of foreign affairs bona fides. The argument is both specious and outrageous.

Her newfound acolytes describe her as a brave "reformer," citing her battles with state party regulars. Yet this is a woman who had the temerity to brag on her opposition to earmarks and the infamous "bridge to nowhere," when in fact she hired lobbyists to secure Congressional pork for her state -- some $300 million this year alone, about nine times as much pork per person as the national average.

Palin appears to adhere to hard-right positions on social issues ranging from sex education and gun control to censorship in the public library.

Recordings of Palin's remarks in her church reveal what some might see as an embrace of apocalyptic dogma. The mainstream media, perhaps intimidated by the McCain campaign's charges of "sexism" in their Palin coverage, have yet to explore this angle of inquiry. Certainly she is entitled to such beliefs; but those asked to elevate her to executive office deserve to know much more about the doctrines and values which have shaped her thinking.

As of this writing, the McCain camp is keeping Palin under tight wraps, having granted an extended interview thus far only to People magazine. The mainstream media is offering Palin a soapbox, what amounts to free political advertising. But the McCain camp apparently has chosen to make the media its whipping boy, as reporters quite rightly seek to learn more about Palin's background, experience, qualifications, temperament and fitness for executive office.

Bereft of interviews with Palin herself, the media is left to dwell on what might be termed The Unsinkable Molly Brown/Annie Get Your Gun angle -- interviews with past friends and associates, tales of her frontier woman habits and pastimes, and puff pieces about her good looks, her vocal screech and her honeybun hairdoo.

And then there are those ostensibly private, family issues being doggedly pursuing by such outlets as the National Enquirer, fresh off its deadly pursuit of former Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards. Some say such personal matters should be off-limits; when someone is seeking high office, that is rarely the case these days. John F. Kennedy's exploits with the secretaries "Fiddle" and "Faddle" were well-known to some Washington media insiders in the Camelot era; such secrets could never be kept in the current tabloid climate.

This emerging profile of the woman her high-school classmates knew as "Sarah Barracuda" stands in contrast to McCain's, although his youthful traits and his voluable temperament have earned him some colorful nicknames as well.

On social issues, Palin appears to stand much more to McCain's right. Despite his conversion to an anti-abortion stance, McCain has favored reproductive rights for women in his political past and is considered to be a moderate on a broad range of social issues.

McCain has consistently refused to wear his religion on his sleeve; his recent appearance with Barack Obama at that Saddlebrook forum was one of the rare times when he's elaborated on matters of faith.

And with more than three decades of public service under his belt, combined with his command of a naval squadron, McCain's experience and qualifications are unassailable.

So what explains his selection of Palin, especially when he was rumored to prefer as his running mate a longtime confidante such as former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge or Sen. Joe Lieberman, both of whom are pro-choice on the abortion issue? McCain, you may recall, had hinted that he wouldn't rule out a pro-choice running mate. He'd only met Palin once before, at a conference earlier this year. And reportedly, he only took a very short meeting with her just before the convention when he offered her the job that's potentially a "heartbeat away" from the presidency.

There's something oddly inconsistent with this Palin pick. Something troubling, unsettling.

Is it possible that some of the same advisers who counseled against Ridge or Lieberman lobbied heavily for the little-known and untested Palin? And is it possible that McCain only grudgingly acquiesced? Some media reports tend to answer those questions in the affirmative.

But here is a question that few have asked, at least not publicly: Is possible that even Palin doesn't realize that she could be a pawn in an ideologically-driven game -- an exercise of power with serious consequences for every American citizen, and for people of every nation worldwide?

Could the Palin pick be just one ingredient in a secret geopolitical stew that's been simmering on a back-burner for some time?

My mission here is to merely raise such questions and to provoke discussion and debate on subjects that seem to cry out for furthering airing. Your comments are welcome.

See related story: The Presidential 'Psy Ops' Wars: Who's Got the Voodoo? at

http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Also check out: Oppose State-Supported Terrorism and ZAP! Have You Been Targeted By a Directed Energy Weapon?

Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I read EVERY word of every comment (took over one hour to do so) and I'm totally amazed that not ONE respondent mentioned the crap that Rudy Guiliani spewed. It was more than "red meat", it was blatant over-stating lying. To say that Sarah Palin was more qualified to be President than "Obama AND Biden, combined absolutely sickened me. What an ass!
By the way, I'm an Arizonan on a first name basis with John McCain (he calls me "Jerry" and I call him "Senator") and I'd rather vote for Karl Rove or Dick Cheney than for Senator McCain. Those two idiots are, at least, open about their political philosophies.

Posted by: Jerry Lebow/Phoenix,AZ | September 5, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

"Thanks "Maria", for confirming the suspicion that you are an uneducated, left wing male!!"
********
Funny, last time I checked I still had a uterus and all my other "lady-parts". Hopefully I will still retain full operational control over them when Christian Taliban "Feminist" Sarah Palin goes down in flames this November.

And I thought being "uneducated" is a Badge of Honor in the Republican Party. Just like killing wolves from airplanes and banning books. USA USA USA!

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

McCain's speech had higher ratings than Obama's and McCain was up against the NFL. How could this be I thought Barrack was the blessed one who everyone loves. I just don't understand. Are the American people crazy? Could Mccain actually beat The One?

Presidential candidate John McCain's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention drew more television viewers than his rival Barack Obama attracted at the Democratic party's event last week, according to preliminary ratings from Nielsen Media Research.

Across all broadcast networks Thursday, Sen. McCain’s speech ended the night with a 4.8 rating/7 share, compared to Sen. Obama’s 4.3/7 average, according to overnight numbers from metered households in 55 U.S. markets measured by Nielsen. These ratings are preliminary, however, and are subject to change.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

my , what negative comments from such "educated" people. every candidate has a speech writer. do you really think the speech that Barack Obama delivered came from his own mind . he is a gifted orator, just like Sarah Palin is. the only difference is she is sincere .

Posted by: e hart | September 5, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Servo and AsperGirl, read on from factcheck.org.

We spoke with Len Berman, director of the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which has produced one of the most authoritative analyses of the two candidates’ tax plans. When we asked him if Obama’s claim that he would “cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families” was true, Berman told FactCheck.org that it was “consistent with our estimates.” Overall, the TPC found that Obama’s plan would produce a tax cut for 81.3 percent of all households, and a cut for 95.5 percent of all households with children.

Under Obama's plan, the TPC estimates that people (or couples) making between $37,595 and $66,354 a year would see an average savings of $1,118 on their taxes.

Under McCain's plan, on the other hand, those same individuals would save $325 on average — $793 less than the average savings under Obama's plan.

Posted by: More Facts | September 5, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Can't wait for Palin's "Got Milk?" commercial.. red, white and brown...

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

ANOTHER OBAMA LIE - "I WORKED MY WAY THROUGH COLLEGE"

Who is Khalid al-Mansour?
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman

Who is the “mystery man” former Manhattan Borough Chairman Percy Sutton named as having aided Barack Obama financially at Harvard Law School?

...

“In respect to Mr. Obama, I have told him, because so many people are running after him, and when stories get printed they usually get distorted and then he has to spend a lot of time trying to unravel them – and then after the experience of Rev. (Jeremiah) Wright whom I’ve never met, but I’ve followed the media coverage – I was determined that I was never going to be in that situation. I never discuss Barack Obama,” al-Mansour said.

“I wish him the best, and hope he can win the election, and if he wins the election, that he adopts this campaign for education,” he said.

Al-Mansour wants Obama to launch an education and program” for black and Hispanic students, using his rock-star popularity to motivate young people, parents, and teachers to improve achievement standards.

Al-Mansour said he is aware of Percy Sutton’s revelations that identified him as raising money for Obama’s law school education when the presidential candidate was 25.

Born the 11th of 12 children as Donald Warden to a polyglot father who often spoke glowingly about Islam, al-Mansour decided to change his name in 1964 after learning Arabic and studying Islam.

http://newsmax.com/newsfront/khalid_al_mansour/2008/09/04/127844.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

With the pick of Palin, McCain's told the world he's more conservative than anyone feared, and if he wins, he'll do everything he can to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, overturn Roe v Wade and restart the culture wars and re-fight the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, and by the sound of the speech last night any other war he can get his hands on. He wants a base election not because he believes in it, but because he will do anything, anything, to win, including sell his soul on live television to the religious right. This is a man that puts ambition over country and over family, and it was as plain as the humorless and mean-spirited speeches throughout the convention.


McCain didn't have the guts to choose Joe Lieberman, the guy he wanted, so he took the Governor of Alaska?, who has done nothing to prove her qualifications to stand next in line to a 72 year old who doesn't radiate health. In doing so, he's appeased the social conservatives and exposed his naked ambition. People know that. The voters understand it. The party of Lincoln can't fool all of the people all of the time.


McCain, who has been a creature in and of Washington for decades, who voted with Bush 95% of the time, who supported him on Iraq and on the economy, now wants to convince the country that the problem is Republicans (yes, we know that, Senator), and so therefore the solution is - wait for it - Republicans. Riiight. That will go over well with the country. Easy sell.

Posted by: Bluto | September 5, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I strongly disliked Gov. Palin's speech. She was nasty, sarcastic, and offered no insight to her own opinions on the issues. While she may have energized the conservative base, she's alienated far more people than she attracted.

The following quote describes my thoughts as well: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the Devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it. --Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881)." These are words Gov. Palin should take to heart.

I am the mother of a young adult (age 21) with special needs (autism, moderate retardation, and other issues). Gov. Palin's promise to support the families of those who have special needs did not impress me; in the past, Republican candidates have almost always refused to fund special education programs to any great extent. These programs grow to include more access to necessary services under Democratic politicians-- which may be expensive in the short run, but cost-effective in the long run. Because my daughter was given all the supports she needed to do well in school, she now holds down a competitive job and is a taxpayer. She was even able to travel overseas with "normal" teens several years ago, because she spent much of her school time in a "normal" classroom.

I vote on the issues, not personalities. I do not want people in the White House who would appoint judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade, I do not want someone as my president who thinks it's acceptable to teach creationism in science class, and I do NOT want someone who asks a librarian, even as a rhetorical question, whether it's possible to ban books. Nor do I want someone as Vice President (and very possibly President) who is proud of being compared to a pit bull, or one who doesn't mind posing in a bikini and with an automatic weapon.

Incidentally, the people I know in the disability community are pretty much uniformly pro-choice; her child is still young enough that caring for him is frankly not much different than any other infant that age. When he gets to be a toddler, however, the family will have their hands full, more than they can possibly realize at this point. (I've read that Mr. Palin has taken time from his work to care for Trig.) My daughter, at age 21, still requires more attention than a so-called "normal" kid. I know nobody who "relates" to Gov. Palin, on ANY level.

I was a Hillary Clinton supporter, as were my husband and children. We are now enthusiastically supporting the Obama/Biden ticket.

Posted by: Dori | September 5, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

McCain was so low key he slipped under the radar of these sorts of lists. But he projected a quality not much found in other speeches -- conviction. And made a strong case for himself as a leader of an independent disposition. He also artfully handled something no one else confronted -- clowns trying to sabotage his speech. One of the reasons -- as a Hillary Democratic -- I can't warm up to Obama mania is that sort of ugliness. Despite Obama's solemn pleas for civility, fanatics keep popping up to advance his cause with reprehensible behavior. Disrupting a nomination speech, concocting a repulsive baby switch rumor. One of his big "issues" against Hillary was his pontificating about a better sort of politics, yet a lot of ugliness always seems to follow in his wake.

Posted by: bri | September 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

grandpa fred thompson?!?!?!

all i could think of during his yammering about the torture, er, harsh interrogation techniques st john underwent, was how many of the gitmo detainees will be able to someday recite those very same words about the treatment they suffered while imprisoned by the united friggin states of america.

Posted by: linda | September 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

>>"I'm predicting that McCain/Palin will take a statistically lead over Obama/Biden by early next week."
yeah, of course you are. take a look at the electoral map, however. as you know, the popular vote doesnt win elections, the electoral map does. right now (according to liberal, mccain hating, palin bashing, god hating, communist CNN) it shows obama with a lead in the electoral map based upon current polls.

Well, I suppose that it makes sense to watch the Republican convention/Sarah Palin bounce and the electoral map at the same time. If the popular polling goes up but the swing state electoral vote counts don't move, that would indicate a bump in red states only. But that's counter-intuitive because that assumes that the all of McCain's counter-bump comes only from the ranks of the already-converted.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

To the paid propagandist "Asper"Girl":

Palin stopped the Dem convention bounce?

So where is the GOP convention bounce when the next polls come out?

Wanna take bets that there is none?

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

I was fortunate enough to be there at Invesco for Obama's speech,and I can only say that if you weren't there, you can't appreciate the history of Obama's speech.

Palin's issue-challenged diatribe agaist Obama and the middle and left was nthing more than a a string of cliches, cobbled together to get her worshipful, tongue-hanging wingnut groupies into a lather.

If that makes a speech great, please, give me the microphone.

Lay the two speeches side by side, and issue by issue, and it is quite apparent Palin's speech was pontification and platitudes was purely political, while Obama's was poignant, profound and eloquent.

Chris, you are once again putting the "o" in the word "poundits." Get real. Palin's just another red herring the desperate Republicans are throwing to the wolves, as they try to stop the Obama landslide from turning into a future-changing tsunami.

If they keep making all the wrong choices (Hagel for VP might have been their only worthwhile ploy) and then call thier own stupid mistakes political genius, the future does not bode well for the GOP.

And Palin's "Pull MY Finger" political image may play well in some states, but most intelligent voters, women in particular find it degrading.

This "mean girl for VP" tack will backfire on the Republicans, the polls already show the only bounce Palin got for McCain was with a minority of white women...

Read this...http://www.pollster.com/blogs/omero_the_palin_effect_prelimi.php

Then DRILL THIS!

Posted by: JEP | September 5, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Palin might pretend to be keeping reporters at "an arm's length" because of the "harsh attacks" on her family but the real reason is that she is going to need weeks of coaching before they can allow her to face legitimate questions on policy, foreign affairs, geography, and economics.

Oh, and nice picture of Walter Reed Middle School, RNC! I guess you guys forgot that the wounded and maimed soldiers from McCain's Victory Occupation of Iraq are actually at Walter Reed Medical Center.

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

It's amazing how many people vomit lies as truth.

Both campaigns tell "half-truths" in their speeches.

McCain, "Obama's plan will raise taxes!"

It's true, if you're looking at the right taxes. Income tax will go down, but a lot of other taxes will go up.

Obama, "McCain wants 100 years of war in Iraq!"

McCain said he doesn't see why we can't keep troops in Iraq like we do in Germany, Japan, and Korea...as long as they weren't being injured or killed.

So if you open your eyes, Democrats and Conservatives, you'll see through the smoke given off by both sides.

Posted by: Servo | September 5, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Chris I know it's Friday and you have had 2 weeks of conventions...but you really shouldn't drink before you write.

So Sarah Palin can read a speech written for her!!! Yeah!! And I'm watching her give the same speech today!! Wow she knows how to repeat things!! She must be VP material!!

She is no way in the same league as Obama and I wouldn't even mention her speech in the same breath with his speech of a life time.

No substance to the Republican message and I laugh at how scared they are of Obama!!

No policy or vision...their only lame answer...attack Obama.

News flash...Lame Ducks lose!

Posted by: Cubbybear317 | September 5, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

I really don't understand why Palin's speech has been so well received. In my mind, she was way too petty in her attacks and she focused too little on her own biography for someone who NO ONE knew. Where was the introduction? And I think people appreciate the quirky "hockey mom" persona because it's completely different, but what happens when the veneer wears off? Are people going to come to teh conclusion that this hockey mom is really ready for prime time?

Posted by: Chilidogger | September 5, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

'America's Sweetheart'??? Which America? What a joke! Barack Obama's speech was by far the best of the entire convention season; factcheck that. Hmmph!

Posted by: Lola | September 5, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

When I was a Republican, pre-2003, we would not have tolerated someone who…

-Tried to get books banned at the local library. (see Communist/Cold War-read Orwell)

-Wanted to teach creationism in Science Class, (subverting the US Constitution. (see-Traitor/Communist/Wingnut/Crazy Person)

-Fired her entire staff 10 days into term as mayor, for lack of loyalty. (see Stalin)

-Used every available lever to get an enemy fired from his job, and is still lying about it. (see- vindicative, again, Stalin)

-Raised taxes on corporations in Alaska. (too liberal!)

-claimed State ownership over my wife and daughter’s womb.

-Put a gag order on her administration as mayor of a town of 6500. (Communist-See Stalin, again!)

-Milked the Federal Government for a huge series of earmarks, by using lobbyists, bespoiling the Alaskan political scenery. (She’s the highest per capita earmarker in the nation: (mad liberal)

-cut the Alaska State Spec Education budget 62% over two years, when the state was flush with cash. (cruel-Jesus weepeth)

-Went back to work three days after having a fifth child, who has Down Syndrome, an acute care condition wherein the child’s chance of thriving is often a function of how much time his or her parents spend with them. (odd)

-Used Alaska First as her campaign slogan, which is the same one as her husband’s old party, the AIP, a secessionist organization she recorded a supportive piece for… this year! (traitor to the US Republic- we old Repubs fought for the Union back in 60’s. The 1860’s)

-Went to six colleges in six years- (gypsy?)

-Misled America about the Bridge to Nowhere, in her first national speech. (truth and honesty no longer apply.)

-Enjoys killing animals. Doesn’t like Polar Bears. (I value all life.)

-Fights efforts to stem Global Warming. (crack-pot deluded crazy wing nut Christian)

-Wants to ban stem cell research. (The dark Ages are back?)

-Has no International experience. (McCain having said his VP’s most important attribute would be experience.)

-Goes on record stating the Iraq war ”is a task from God.” (deluded Crusader, Cheney scary)

-Goes to a Church that hosts anti-Israel speakers. (at least she picked a side.)

-Prays for the End of Days in public and on video tape, as the Governor of Alaska.

-Left her town mayoralty with a huge debt, taking it from $0.00 to $20,000,000 in six years, mainly for a big gym, that loses money. (more taxes)

-- Has no International experience. (McCain having said his VP’s most important attribute would be experience. Huh?)

-Misled America about the Bridge to Nowhere, in her first national speech. (happy to lie for power, happy to spend Federal bucks. Liar Libaral.)

And, perhaps worst of all, about that womb thing…..

Mrs. Palin, as written into the Republican platform of 2008, in a plank that John McCain recently reneged on a pledge to attempt to remove, is calling for my 14 year old daughter to carry and birth a rapist’s child. Without regard to my, the fathers, opinion. Nor my wife’s opinion. Nor my chidlrens. Or doctors. Or counselors. We’d have no choice if she gets her way. None. She, Palin, wants my daughter’s womb as property of the state. They want control my daughters body. And my wifes. Which, of course, to those of honest mind, is fascism to the extreme, and why , perhaps, Wingers are somewhat un-American. I don’t need, or want, a rapist’s baby at my dinner table. And nor does my 14 year kid. But Palin would not give us a choice. If she has her way, I’m Grandpa Rob, with an HIV ridden criminal’s grandkid at the table each night. Or we could get an illegal abortion, and all end up in jail, if my daughter lived through it. How about your kid? Would she want to carry a rapist’s baby around in the name of somebody elses lord? To have those memories starkly there, reminding her of being raped every day of her life. How many of you men and woman would want to forced to have a rapist’s baby in your house? How many of you women are willing to give your womb to the state, to be forced to bear a rapist’s child regardless of the suffering it might cause you and your family? I could care less about Trig or Bristol, or Levi, or whatever. McCain stiffed the public. And Palin’s a culture war grenade, a stooge of the right, a grave fascist danger to our country. I love my country enough to change my party loyalty. The Repubs got hijacked. They’re driven by the Evangelicals now, the American Taliban. Thanks, but no thanks guys, I think I’ll stick with the Constitution over the Bible. We did the Dark Ages already. I’m a human rights guy now, equal rights. And no, you can’t have my wife’s or daughters womb. Sorry. I’m going to have to insist on the old Republican way when it comes to that. Which brings up Sinclair Lewis quote. The bell ringer of the day, “ Fascism will arrive in this country carrying a bible and draped in flag.” Sadly, it was my old party, nee the Grand Old Party, who let it in.

Posted by: Rob L. | September 5, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

from factcheck.org

Palin may have said “Thanks, but no thanks” on the Bridge to Nowhere, though not until Congress had pretty much killed it already. But that was a sharp turnaround from the position she took during her gubernatorial campaign, and the town where she was mayor received lots of earmarks during her tenure.

Palin’s accusation that Obama hasn’t authored “a single major law or even a reform” in the U.S. Senate or the Illinois Senate is simply not a fair assessment. Obama has helped push through major ethics
reforms in both bodies, for example.

The Alaska governor avoided some of McCain’s false claims about Obama’s tax program – but her attacks still failed to give the whole story.

Giuliani distorted the time line and substance of Obama’s statements about the conflict between Russia and Georgia. In fact, there was much less difference between his statements and those of McCain than Giuliani would have had us believe.

Giuliani also said McCain had been a fighter pilot. Actually, McCain’s plane was the A-4 Skyhawk, a small bomber. It was the only plane he trained in or flew in combat, according to McCain’s own memoir.

Finally, Huckabee told conventioneers and TV viewers that Palin got more votes when she ran for mayor of Wasilla than Biden did running for president. Not even close. The tally: Biden, 79,754, despite withdrawing from the race after the Iowa caucuses. Palin, 909 in her 1999 race, 651 in 1996.

Posted by: AsperGirl Iron my Shirt | September 5, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

It is ironic that McCain wants to keep Sarah Palin away from the Press, but Sarah Palin is a Celebrity now and just like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears will be pursued by the Press and paparazzi! As you can see, Sentaor McCain, what goes around, Comes Around --God's Hand of Judgment is Swift! As you know McCain/Palin, Jesus was a Community Organizer and Pilate was a Governor (Hah!) so was George Bush, so much for Executive Experience...

Yes, Barack worked as a community organizer, but he also worked as a civil rights lawyer, taught constitutional law, 8 years as a Legislator in the state legislature, and 4 years in the US Senate, where he is currently a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee with Joe Biden (an almost carbon copy resume to the great, Abraham Lincoln, America's Greatest President)!

Barack Obama is more than qualified to lead and bring true and positive change to this nation. Barack Obama is an intellectual genuis who is committed to looking forward. He wants to talk about the Future, not about the Past, unlike McCain who is stuck in reverse and continues to focus on his horrible treatment as a POW when he was a very young man. However, he is much older now -- that was a long time ago. McCain voted for authorization of the Iraq War, McCain wants to stay chained to the past, to foreign oil - drill, drill, drill, oil which pollutes the environment and refuses to seriously look at cleaner alternative energies. And, McCain certainly does not want to talk about the fact that Maverick McCain is code for the fact that McCain loves to gamble, loves the gaming tables and that is really who McCain is today!

By the way,it seems that our Republican Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, who could be a heartbeat away from the Presidency seems, to have switched colleges at least six times in six years, including two stints at the University of Idaho before graduating from there in 1987.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080905/...

Posted by: Angellight | September 5, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Maria wrote - "As an educated woman, I find Sarah Palin to be completely repellent.

She might be a "Sweetheart" to the Pigs of the Right Wing but that is about it."

-------------------------------------------
Thanks "Maria", for confirming the suspicion that you are an uneducated, left wing male!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

check out factcheck.org for a list of all the lies and halftruths told by rudi, sarah and mccain. great stuff.

of course, you can also find similar issues with democratic speaches as well.

i think the republicans have the edge on such things, but the important thing is that there is a place to get unbiased facts and not the lies and halftruths told by politicians on both sides.

Posted by: AsperGirl is HOT | September 5, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

The media out to destroy her? What a joke. They're licking her boots.

Posted by: jane | September 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

As an educated woman, I find Sarah Palin to be completely repellent.

She might be a "Sweetheart" to the Pigs of the Right Wing but that is about it.

Posted by: Maria | September 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

>>"AsperGirl - are you the one and teh same poster who posted daily on behalf of HRC? Are you now heading up PUMA? Sure hope you give HRC a call and let her know you left a knife in her back."

If Hillary Clinton comes out attacking Palin, she will lose a lot of supporters and donors.

She better watch out how much of a sellout to her male masters who have treated her like a second class politician and marginalized her, she will be in bashing or undermining Sarah Palin.

Hillary Clinton will alienate her base if she's perceived as standing in Sarah Palin's way.

Not only that, but people will assume, correctly, that after failing to fight for her own nomination, Hillary Clinton wants to stop someone else from breaking the ceiling before her.

Maybe she has to brown-nose Obama right now, but she better not go too far if she wants to have future cross-party appeal for female support.

>>"Also, make sure you cash those GOP division checks, you definetly earned them."

Actually, I donated a small amount to McCain's campaign on the day he announced Palin's candidacy. I might donate more to the RNC to support Palin's candidacy since the McCain campaign can't accept donations anymore.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"I'm predicting that McCain/Palin will take a statistically lead over Obama/Biden by early next week."

yeah, of course you are. take a look at the electoral map, however. as you know, the popular vote doesnt win elections, the electoral map does. right now (according to liberal, mccain hating, palin bashing, god hating, communist CNN) it shows obama with a lead in the electoral map based upon current polls. keep on posting baby!


Posted by: AsperGirl Rocks! | September 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

I see this column is completely violated and sunk in the gutter with dumb, desperate racists as usual.

CC, the woman is a bubble head, just like McCain. Get real. Neither one of them has any substance. And both of them are best buddies with the oil companies and lobbyists, and crooked as they come.

Too bad the media is afraid of the republican party-- you wimps.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Even Fred Thompson demonstrated that he could deliver a speech - well, I guess he is a professional actor. Governor Palin delivers a speech written for her - she remains an Unidentified Flying Object on the political radar. ..............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/06/writing-versus-delivering-speeches/

Posted by: Ohg Rea Tone | September 5, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Did we watch the same conventions? Thompson was awful! Bill Clinton and Sarah Palin were good, but Hillary was great and Obama was outstanding.

Posted by: SF Paul | September 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

"The media has made it very clear that they are out to destroy her, and then Obama supporters and the media are surprised she won't talk to them?

The media has been abusive of their forums, using their voices and jobs to distort reality, push a false narrative of a black candidate who has no qualifications for the job of President, and now they have viciously piled on and attacked John McCain's vice president in a way that shocked and sickened people across the political spectrum.

I think it's great that Sarah Palin is keeping them at arms' distance. The media, with their abuses, show that they represent their own political feelings, not the public. They have no right to talk to her."

this could be the single most rediculous post i've read in a sea of rediculous posts. the media doesnt have the right to talk to the person who is running of the second highest office in the land. thats hysterical. yes, the media has certainly be out to destroy her by daring to ask questions about her record, experience, stance on social issues and ongoing investigations into her ethics. and by media, i dont mean bloggers and other folks with laptops and wireless cards. of course, there are only left wing bloggers of course. nobody on the right would be doing such a thing...

aspergirl, thou doest protest too much.


Posted by: AsperGirl Is Great | September 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Uh, Chris, "voters don't elect cheerleaders president." I think that applies to Gov. Palin, too. Also, the lipstick line was as much an ad lib as "thanks, but no thanks" was.

Posted by: Kathleen Hussein in Maine | September 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

HRC not even on the list?

Posted by: Phulease | September 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

SARAH PALIN'S SPEECH STOPS DNC BOUNCE

The first set of polls that are post-Sarah Palin speech came out today. The tracking polls that sampled last night (Thursday) are the first to include reaction to Sarah Palin's speech. They would average Tuesday and Wednesday's pre-speech polling results with the post-Sarah Palin speech polling results on Thursday).

Gallup Tracking 09/02 - 09/04 Obama 48 McCain 44
Rasmussen Tracking 09/02 - 09/04 Obama 48 McCain 46

The Gallup Tracking poll shows that Obama's post-convention bounce, pre-Palin speech bump of about 8 points has been cut in half. The Rasmussen bump of 6 points has been cut by a third.

In these results, the 2 days prior to the Palin speech are still being averaged in. The first tracking poll day to fully factor in the Palin speech will be Sunday's. The first tracking poll day to fully factor in the Republican convention will be Monday.

So the effects of Sarah Palin's speech are just beginning to creep into the tracking poll results with the full effect able to be measured by the start of next week.

I'm predicting that McCain/Palin will take a statistically lead over Obama/Biden by early next week.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart? SWEET HEART?? YOU MUST BE JOKING. C'mon Chris - you just like the school marm look. Underneath all that is someone who's preacher believes that the War in Iraq is a mission from God and is waiting for the Rapture. Oh, and the Jews (well, Israel in general) should be bombed by Iran because they killed our savior. She wants to ruin the environment, (and who care about polar bears when there MIGHT be OIL under there??? Hey, there's no ice now anyway - let em drown.) She is anti-woman on every issue. Her party has no plan to change ANYTHING except to keep the fat cats fat.

Posted by: Sheridan1 | September 5, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that everyone taking the time to post something on this site had already determined the effectiveness of the keynote speakers PRIOR TO the convention speeches. Additionally, it seems like everyone here is merely looking for snippets within the speeches which they can use to validate why one candidate or the other is their candidate of choice. No one here is really listening to anyone else and what they have to say. Pity. I think this election can TRULY be historic if the American people would actually take the time to listen to the candidates and vote based on issues, rather than emotion. I know this is a bit idealistic, but I think it would produce more significant discourse and encourage real progress! Maybe next time...

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

as they literally teach her about the world in a back room we realize that she is like a bad comedy from the 80's...

only here that don't get a second take when you are deciding to shoot down saudi's or pakistani's...or russians...
and what that means...

Obama and Biden have shown for a year and a half their ability to take questions off the cuff and actually show they know what they are talking about...

she has no recorded knowledge of ANY of the issues we face...

and people like aspergirl try to blame the press.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

l. I hope Mrs. Fix sends you to the couch when you get home - you had too many good bar reccomendations (How was Hookers & Blow?)
2. It is never a good speech when it incites the other side to get out their credit cards and hit the donation web site.
3. She had a God awful twang and nose twitch as she read off the speech others wrote for her and was coached extensively.
4. The substance of her speech was below her chin.
5. She makes me wish for four more years of Dick Cheney.

Posted by: txajohnson | September 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Palin did a great job at convincing people to vote for her. Come on give her some credit!

Let's just ignore the fact that the people she convinced to vote for her would have voted for her anyways because they're GOP Rubberstamps.

I want to know who are the people outside the media that like her. 'cause I sure as hell don't know any voters who do.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

To get the forum you describe aspergirl I guess the RNC is going to announce another convention?

Why are you talking about the "liberal" press when the beginning of the quote refers to the American people supposedly not caring?

"According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy."
http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/palin-will-not.html

>>fonkyou wrote: ""It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens. Maybe she can, maybe she can't. As far as Wallace is concerned, it's none of their -- or your -- business." Wallace actually says, "who cares?""
http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/palin-will-not.html

As far as the McCain campaign is concerned -- and I think a lot of people agree with them, the media isn't interested in information and coverage. They have a partisan, mean objective to "get" Sarah Palin and help Obama win.

The media isn't the public. They don't represent the public interest and only their own manic drive to advocate for the Democratic ticket.

Sarah Palin will go to forums where she can be in front of the public, not answerable to some hostile, aggressive prosecutorial interviewer who is pretending to have an "interview" instead of a "gotcha" session.

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

OK, I don't entirely agree with what jac13 wrote, but dang if this isn't one of the funniest thing I've seen posted on this blog:

"History will record that Palin's transformation from small-town mayor to vp candidate took an astonishingly short 20 months, but that her even more incredible transformation from lightweight to savvy politician took 36 minutes."

Posted by: VBArthur | September 5, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - are you the one and teh same poster who posted daily on behalf of HRC? Are you now heading up PUMA? Sure hope you give HRC a call and let her know you left a knife in her back.

Also, make sure you cash those GOP division checks, you definetly earned them.

Posted by: AsperFraud | September 5, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl

again if it is not just her 3 days of getting her volume and cadence for someone else's words

why can't she be big enough to answer ...

uh...

anything on her own.

and America gets it... the polls are weak at best

it says something when her speech raises 10 million dollars...for the other side.

america is not going to be fooled by these rove, cheney tactics of hiding the witness and trying to divert from their covert mistakes and manipulation...

Palin is overwhelmingly unqualified and lacking any knowledge of ANY of the issues we face

if she did then why as an adult can't she answer ...uh ...anything on her own.

because she can't she is all hat and no cattle...to an extreme.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Have to agree with others arguing Palin failed.

First, in addition to her giving a speech written by a man for another man, that was then rewritten by him for her at the last minute, the cold hard reality is none of the women I talked to over the last two days heard her speech.

None.

Not any conservatives.

Not any liberals.

Not any independents.

Most of them, when asked, don't even know who she is.

And they don't care.

That's gotta sting.

Posted by: Will in Seattle | September 5, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

A sarcastic, cynical, spin-heavy, easy to refute, nothing-but-talking-points speech beat both Clinton and Obama? You're thinking with the wrong head.

Posted by: Kat from Chicago | September 5, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Fix is pretty much done after this election cycle, nothing personal, he just has no skills. More seasoning is required for this pup in this arean, the title should have been best delivered, not best speech as in whole content.

But hey, fixy-dixy, you will get better in a few years, it took Russert a little while, but he was damn good.

Posted by: Schwank | September 5, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Palin #1 ????????????

"Her" speech was written by the McBush staff, rehearsed for hours in a hotel suite - it was NOT her speech!!
Have to admit though that her delivery was #1

Posted by: johnbear1 | September 5, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Satan Palin is number one, Barack Obama, one of the best orators of out time, is number three, and NO HILLARY CLINTON????

Aw, Chris. You sure do like to mix it up. This column should be called "the mix".

Posted by: CrazyMe | September 5, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,

Watching the Palin speech once was enough. When she has something to say that she will do for the country, then please post again, in the meantime her speech was just plain republican BS! What I got from Palin was just keep on saying God sent me and told me to tell you that the Democrats are bad people. The content of Palin speech was awful, although along with Fred Thompson, they could star on a new TV series, both proved to be pretty good actors when reading the script.

Posted by: TV Guide | September 5, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure what gauge you're using to measure these speeches, but putting Palin first is a huge, huge miscalculation. In the context of a political campaign, you want your speeches to attract voters. As many as you can get. While Palin's speech rallied the ever-so-dwindling GOP base, her malicious jabs at community organizers and generally snotty, snarky tone restricted her appeal to that tiny audience. It's inconsistency--first half cute family bio, second half cynical torpedo of insults--undermined any claim to political acumen she could have made. All it showed was her ability to imbibe GOP talking points and to use the same hackneyed, divisive techniques that Bush and Cheney used to bamboozle the American electorate in the past two elections. It was like one of those late-night infomercials: you watch because the boisterous, loud guy with the headset is engaging, but there's no way in hell you'd ever buy his shamwow.

Posted by: Bonnie | September 5, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Best..


Hillary
Bill C.
Montana Gov
Palin
M. Obama


Worst...

Cindy Mac

Posted by: Yoink | September 5, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

How is it that it took Obama 19 months, getting more than 18 million votes, and winning the nomination to convince you supposed experts in the media that he was more than just a good speaker, while you guys folded like lawn chairs on Palin after a speech that SOMEBODY ELSE WROTE and she had THREE DAYS to practice? Could it be that you are cowed by the McCain campaign's phony attacks? Are you bending over backwards to avoid appearing to be sexist? Does it dawn on you that you're being played like a violin by the cynics in McC's campaign? History will record that Palin's transformation from small-town mayor to vp candidate took an astonishingly short 20 months, but that her even more incredible transformation from lightweight to savvy politician took 36 minutes.

No wonder we're in trouble.

Posted by: jac13 | September 5, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Why is it always the democrats who try to dirupt the RNC or any event where the speaker is professing a point of view that differs from their own? Isn't the democratic party supposed to be the party that opposes war and conflict? The democratic party has gone to such great lengths to position themselves as being the champions of teh spirit of inclusiveness and making room for everybody? Seems like they'll make room for anybody who agrees with them. Anyone woho disagrees shouldn't be allowed to speak, not even AT THEIR OWN CONVENTION!!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I have to disagree with the Fix: Palin's speech merely proved what a lot of us suspected: that the Alaskan governor is nothing more than a vacuous grandstander. Small wonder McCain likes her.

What I don't get is how the Republican speeches, for the most part, are all just strung-together soundbytes, yet get ranked so well.

Who cares if she's a "pitbull with lipstick"? I don't want a "hockey mom" with a history of political scandals and bad judgment and narrow-mindedness (see her efforts to reform health care in Alaska and failed abstinence programs) as VP. I think most of America would agree with me, and that doesn't happen often!

I wish I could have seen Bill Clinton's speech though, he's a great guy. With his flaws, but hey, even JFK had flaws.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

WATCH IT AGAIN!

Sarah Palin National Convention Speech 09/03/2008:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26535823#26535823

John McCain Republican Convention Speech 09/05/2008:
http://www.youtube.com/v/5F0d6MChQnY','s-Mm2uDTldCwSheehn_E0cDg:u-AFQjCNEafJip2ojjUZk7UgFwVN_7rJIFNQ:v-0-1_1242773882

To support Palin's candidacy, you MUST now donate to the RNC, as the McCain campaign has accepted federal funds and can't spend donations for campaigning as of 09/01.

https://secure.gop.com/donate/

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Palin reminds me of the "most popular" girl at my high school She really wasn't popular. People were scared of her. They were afraid that if they crossed her that she would tear them to shreds. This is obviously something Palin enjoys doing in Alaska.

Posted by: Annie Joyce | September 5, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Obama on O'Reilly, or anyone on O'Reilly, who cares,

O'Reilly is not a reporter, he has an agenda, and if the person he is talking with does not support his agenda he just continues to interrupt, interject his views, and attempts to shut down the other person.

O'Reilly equates to bad reallity TV.

Posted by: media guide | September 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

I'd give McCain far higher marks than Palin. For the most part, he adopted a bipartisan, statesmanlike tone (belied in part by 'Drill, Drill, Drill'). Palin, on the other hand, was-- as she put it-- a pit bull with lipstick. Too much attack, much of it vapid, misleading and mean-spirited, with too little content.

All told, I thought that the Dems generally outclassed the GOP for presenting a new vision and a new agenda.

My votes for top speeches:

1.Hillary
2.Obama
3.Ted Kennedy
4.McCain
5.Schweitzer/Giuliani-- tie

Posted by: ANetliner | September 5, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Why did the Republican delegates try drowning out protests during McCain's speech by chanting "USA USA USA?"
Given McCain's penchant for wallowing in his past, a better chant would have been "KEATING FIVE KEATING FIVE KEATING FIVE."
Heck, that was even a bipartisan scandal!

Posted by: Hugh Briss | September 5, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

I hope no one noticed that I decry the lack of progress in the Iraqi government but really haven't noticed it in the US Senate. I've been busy. busy. As you know I am now running for emperor. I hope to eventually find myself in this career path.

I also claim to lead by example but can't get my party to agree with me or get my minions to respect my wishes. but I will get Putin and Amhidinajhad to succomb with no problem.

and don't question me about being wrong. I am not now, nor have I ever been wrong.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Aspergirl - It must be get lonely shouting at no one all the time. You should ask for more money from the McCain campaign, you hack.

Posted by: Dan | September 5, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Palin is "America's Sweetheart?" Maybe to the base, but she terrified many of us into giving Obama $10 million more. I get your point, but the title is not apt.

You know, for all she complains about negative coverage, it seems like the media is having a lovefest with her.

The press needs to vett her since the vet didn't.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Jen wrote: I am a Hillary supporter from Ohio.

I just read that Oprah is refusing to have Govenor Palin on her show.

Why would she do that to so many of us that want to get to know her better?
--------------------------

That was a rumor on Drudge Report which (not surprisingly) turned out to be false. Oprah has a policy of not having candidates on her show (she supported Barack Obama at rallies, not on her show), so Palin is not being given any unfair rub.

This was just more Drudge Report nonsense, trying to take this election off topic and villify "Liberal Hollywood" and the "Elite Media." The Republicans know that this is best way for them to rile up their supporters. So beware of similar rumors in the future.

Posted by: d | September 5, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

NO CONTEST, SARAH PALIN BLOWS AWAY BARACK OBAMA

Palin 2008 nomination speech highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2gNE48gDI

Obama 2008 nomination speech highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_b4gVbOc4c

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I am sure you all saw me on O"reilly last night where I revealed my secret plan to contain Iran. all I can tell you is, It's a secret.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

>>"Palin's speech was mean, showing her poor judgment, and didn't say anything of importance."

Oh god, look at Obama's speech highlights. He's deeply negative, all doom and gloom and fear of disaster. He attacks McCain repeatedly by name. At one point he implies McCain is a coward, who won't go hunt down Osama bin Ladin.

Obama's a Rev. Wright with gentlemanly words, like a pig with lipstick on it, where the pig is hatred of the old white male establishment.

Sarah Palin's speech was delightful. People were laughing and clapping through the whole thing.

Night and day.

Chris was doing Obama a favor by ranking it #3. Most pundits wrote off Obama's speech as negative, shallow and a big disappointment.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

I eschew the politics of fear

except when I need it.

If Mac is elected, he will force every woman to have a baby. Depite the weak and worthless Dem congress in power. then he will steal your social security. then he will charge you double for gas.

vote for me and I will double your social security, (I have a secret plan that costs nothing), I will lower gas prices (another secret that does not involve drilling) and I will adopt every baby (well not me, but I'm counting on cindy McCain and other repubs.)

all it will cost you is everything you earn.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Indy Rebuke,

You prove my point for me! If a woman or a non-white person agrees with your position they are welcome and you cry out, "Look at me! I embrace diversity!" The truth is, you only embrace those whose opinion is in lock-step with your own. THIS IS NOT DIVERSITY! IT IS CLOSED MINDEDNESS!!! Diversity is about welcoming people of ALL faiths, ethinicities, and YES, political ideologies to have their say. You cannot just claim diversity when it suits you...

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

>>fonkyou wrote: ""It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens. Maybe she can, maybe she can't. As far as Wallace is concerned, it's none of their -- or your -- business." Wallace actually says, "who cares?""
http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/palin-will-not.html

As far as the McCain campaign is concerned -- and I think a lot of people agree with them, the media isn't interested in information and coverage. They have a partisan, mean objective to "get" Sarah Palin and help Obama win.

The media isn't the public. They don't represent the public interest and only their own manic drive to advocate for the Democratic ticket.

Sarah Palin will go to forums where she can be in front of the public, not answerable to some hostile, aggressive prosecutorial interviewer who is pretending to have an "interview" instead of a "gotcha" session.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

I would give speeches from memory but all that coke and pot, I'm pretty much gone up there.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Intelli-

The POW talk is to spotlight McCain's strengths; character and the things he has already sacrificed for the sake of country. Anyone who tries to attack his POW experience rightfully comes off as being out of touch. (I mean, what have any of us done that can compare to spending 5+ years in a Vietnamese prison camp enduring daily beatings.) So this talk is to highlight what the GOP see as his strengths, not as a call to war. Whether it is the best strategy or not is left to the voters, but I don't perceive it as war-mongering.

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Palin's speech was mean, showing her poor judgment, and didn't say anything of importance. It did show that she likes to be in the spotlight and further reinforces my opinion that she is aptly named Sarah Barracuda. I formed my opinion the day McCain introduced her when she took the Down Syndrome infant from the daughter who will probably be raising him and her own child and held him up for the photo opp, then quickly gave him back to the pregnant daughter whom she knowingly exposed to Britney Spears type media attention. .Further evidence of Barracuda's poor judgment was that she exposed that Down Syndrome infant to hours of noisy conventioneers and again, on stage, took him from her handmaiden daughter to wave him around like a prop. I do not want this woman making decisions about my country. She so obviously puts herself before anything or anybody else.

cw

As the

Posted by: cw | September 5, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

To Indy-

The Republicans you defend as embracing diversity in the party are the same republicans that have consistently used a conservative litmus test for appointing federal judges (scandal) and hiring bureaucrats (scandal). Also, look at the images from the Republican convention -- the cameras have to struggle to find any people that are not lily white. Doesn't that tell you something? Your party is not the party of inclusion, its the party of exclusion and divisiveness (by Carl Rove's purposeful design). I am not going to defend the Democrats on every issue, but on diversity and trying to bring in as many people as possible, the Democrats are head and shoulders above the Republicans.

There is no hypocrisy in supporting women in politics and also being critical of Palin. She is a right-wing neocon. If elected, her policies would be more damaging to the country than our current President's. That is not disputable.

Posted by: Indy Rebuke | September 5, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

LIBERAL MEDIA WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND THE PALIN EFFECT


Gov. Palin doesn't just say American values, she DEMONSTRATES American values through her life.

A Politician can blab forever about fealty to Pro Life and values.

But when you see Gov.Palin on stage with 5 kids--all with only
husband, one child with Downs Syndrome that she never even CONSIDERED abandoning or aborting, a son going to Iraq in the Army next week, a pregnant 17 year old supported by her family--this is the REAL DEAL.

And a tough, incompromising, combative hockey mom to boot.

And this is SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED by many.

The Liberal Pagan media will NEVER discern this--it is off their radar.

Posted by: JaxMax | September 5, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

1.Bill Clinton
2.Sarah Palin
3.John McCain
4.Hillary Clinton
5.Fred Thompson
6.Rudy Giuliani
7.Barack Obama
Thats my best list

Worst?
1.Bill Richardson
2.Mitt Romney
3.Mark Warner
4.Joe Biden
5.Meg Whitman
6.Cindy McCain
7.Michelle Obama

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who are criticizing Sarah Palin's speech, it blows away Obama's. Look at some highlights of both:

Palin 2008 nomination speech highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2gNE48gDI


Obama 2008 nomination speech highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_b4gVbOc4c

When you compare the two rhetorical styles, you can see why people are comparing Sarah Palin to Margaret Thatcher. She has a sarcastic, humorous, thinking woman's style of skewering people and making her points, even though her cultural appeal is directed toward blue collar workers in this speech. She has great range.

When you look at Obama, he's delivering a very dumbed-down, negative message that Republicans are bad, we're oppressed and miserable and need to be free. He has an ominous look on his face and spells out doom and gloom. The substance of the speech is a string of traditional liberal platform memes.

I think Sarah Palin is much more effective. Particularly since she has greater range of expression.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Of all the great orators who spoke at the conventions, you chose Sarah Palin's as the greatest speech given???

Yeah, she was a lot more moving than Ted Kennedy's speech as he is dying from cancer. Or Barack Obama's American Promise speech. I don't even know how to counter analysis like this anymore. How can you logically argue with someone who writes this analysis. How about John Lewis in the top spot. No, instead we get the new Britney Spears getting the top political speech at the most important conventions in two decades. Sarah Palin??? Come on, Fix, you're better than this. People listen to you.

Posted by: Song of Roland | September 5, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Oprah isn't having Palin on because she says no presidential candidates until after the election. Wing-nut conspiracy theorists (Asspergirl, why are you so scared of Oprah, anyways) will doubtless point to Obama's appearance, without mentioning that he was on before declaring for the White House, and Oprah's policy was announced before Obama's candidacy.

But keep propagating it. Unemployed bus-riders like Asspergirl are fixated on daytime TV, so the next complaint we'll get is that McCain isn't allowed on "General Hospital."

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Go Obama.
McDuck sucks.

Posted by: Aspergirl | September 5, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I'm always at a loss when people accuse the national media of being united for or against any specific candidate or party. I would think that since most of the major media providers are, you know, competitors, they wouldn't spend a lot of time scheduling powwows on how they can collaborate on the destruction of Candidate X. The more likely scenario, to my mind, is that when a candidate presents a weakness, the media goes after it -- you know, like we all clamor for them to do when we want dirt slung at a candidate we don't like. But there I go again, overanalyzing things. It's a media conspiracy! They're all for Barack Obama! I mean, John McCain! I mean, Sarah Palin! I mean, the liberals! I mean, the big corporations!

On a side note, have people who post on this blog really gotten to the point of having to insult their adversaries' looks? Is the effect of Palin being added to the Republican ticket? Look, I understand as much as anybody else the importance of emphasizing a candidate's strengths, but when the results is that people start postulating that the Republican party is the way to go because the Democrats are too ugly, that's a sad sign for either the strength of the Republican platform or the level of political discourse in general.

Posted by: VBArthur | September 5, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

How you could rate Palin's speech #1?

With that rating it allows the reader all the information they need on all your future comments.

You are brain dead!

A bull dog with lip stick gave the speech, and that is different, real reality TV! The media likes a photo op, flash in the pan! By November she will tell you God sent her to continue his work and you will be all over that as well.

There was no need to talk about the cost of the war in dollars and lives. The economy is a mess, jobs shipped overseas, the US government borrowing from foreign powers to run our government, healthcare costs rising while availability limited to fewer citizens.

Hell give us a pregnant teenager with a boyfriend who promises to wed on stage behind the bulldog with lipstick! Now that is ratings and will sell stories, and to make it sell we will need the speech and mom in the limelight.

Smoke and mirrors . . . . . the republican party doing the same old trick . . . . . throwing God, Flag, Mom, Babies, and apple pie on the big screen while they vote down veteran's benefits.

The speech and the person a year ago would not have gone beyond local news, it is a gimmick and hopefully when people go vote they will remember the man with a raging temper when he doesn't get his way along with the bulldog with lipstick.

OBAMA and BIDEN are the only choices possible for this county.

Posted by: seakayaker | September 5, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

@Indy Libertarian @

Don't you think that RNC laid a way too much emphasis on McCain being a war veteran as if there was nothing better to speak about? Do you think it was unintentional?

The jarring repetition about Vietnam and the cell in which McCain was put up and McCain's war-preparedness etc. continued ad nauseam.

No wonder, McCain has presumably nothing else or worthwhile to boast of!

Posted by: Intelli | September 5, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Republicans had no substance. All speeches eliminated for consideration. But to put the speeches in order it should be: Obama, Bill, Hillary, Biden, All Democratic Speeches, then the Republicans with their garbage bumper sticker phrases. Palin, I expected her to start shooting spitballs, her and her written zingers, what is she still in high school. As far as a comparison to Palin and a pig there is no difference they both wallow in the muck. Oh, that was a pit bull, she got the wrong animal.

Posted by: Mahan | September 5, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

I thought we were supposed to belittle Obama for his words and his rhetoric. So why are the same people who made fun of his gift raving about Gov. Palin to the point of saying Reagan redux? She also just read words that someone wrote for her, yes? At least Obama apparently does most of his own writing.

Rudy, whose OWN KIDS do not have much to do with him, who met his current wife in a cigar bar while he was married....these are the family values that we are supposed to believe the Rs have?

As for Mitt Romney going on about "eastern elites"...what a joke from a Harvard Law and Harvard Business grad who lives in the wealthy Boston suburb of Belmont, Ma and who has a second (or third? or fourth?) home in Wolfeboro, NH...can't get more eastern elite than that can you?

Point is: speeches and words inspire but they need to have something behind them. Americans should realize we have had enough of the pitbull approach to policy from the REPUBLICANS WHO HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE FOR MOST OF THE LAST 8 YEARS. The pitbull approach is what has caused over 4,000 of our young men and women to die leaving untold sadness, hardship and pain for their survivors. Pitbull in a suit? Thanks but NO THANKS GOV. PALIN.

Sen. McCain, you used to be a sensible politician but no more. I guess you have to placate the right wing moonbats to get them to vote. So sad!

----- a 44 year old Mom of a child with Special Needs who decided to stay home and raise him.

p.s. The funding cuts we have seen in the last 8 years for our children has been ridiculous so Gov. Palin if you are elected we shall hold you to your word.

Posted by: Fran | September 5, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

At least Palin has spokespeople to clarify things for us...

" "According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads....

"It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens. Maybe she can, maybe she can't. As far as Wallace is concerned, it's none of their -- or your -- business." Wallace actually says, "who cares?""
http://www.eandppub.com/2008/09/palin-will-not.html

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

the more i read about this the less i like about it. i have voted democrat my whole life, but not this time. I like what i see and read about Gov Palin whether Oprah puts her on her show or not.


----------
Jen wrote: I am a Hillary supporter from Ohio.

I just read that Oprah is refusing to have Govenor Palin on her show.

Why would she do that to so many of us that want to get to know her better?

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

Jen,
While I have not heard this, it would certainly be disappointing and Rosie-esque of Oprah to refuse a spot on her show to someone simply because of political ideology. (I mean she has had klan members on her show for crying out loud!!!) It would not surprise me however! That is the way with the left crowd, althought try getting Joe Biden on Rush's program for a "fair" and "open" policy discussion...

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 1:12 PM

Posted by: Jen | September 5, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

MJS
==================================
If you use a line (pit bull) on a regular basis (Newsweek the day before)
it is not an "ad lib"

Jersey John

Posted by: Jersey John | September 5, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

The line comparing hockey moms and pit bulls was the best ad lib? I read that same line the day before the speech in Newsweeks. I think that disqualifies it as an ad lib.

Posted by: mjs | September 5, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

"Hi, I'm John McCain, and I'm Barack Obama, too, but not in a bad way. Change, change, changie change. POW...POW...POW...POW... Good night!!!"

Posted by: Loren | September 5, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

>>DDAWD wrote: "In case anyone is interested...Obama on O'Reilly. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/09/obama_on_the_oreilly_factor.html

He is so boring and hollow. Yesterday's pop politician. There's a newer, fresher, better face in town.

>>"I thought Obama did pretty well given the unfriendly territory. O'Reilly seemed to be really quick to presuppose that diplomacy is a certain failure and would interrupt Obama frequently, but it wasn't the nastiest I've seen O'Reilly, I guess."

Hillary Clinton's performance on Bill O'Reilly blows Obama's away.

O'Reilly was lame and soft on Obama, and on a couple of occasions he clearly waved off Obama's indefensible answers.

Bill O'Reilly really argued with Clinton and they went head to head.

Obama's boring, and pushy and leans forward pointing his finger and thrusts his face forward.

He's defensive and O'Reilly didn't push him.

Empty suit.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Jen 01:05 PM asks why Oprah won't allow GOP VP nominee Sarah Palin on her show.
The answer is simple and obvious. Oprah is a racist like most black Obama supporters. There is no way on the planet that someone with so little experience as Obama has, and with his 20 year history of supporting racist white and America--haters, could possibly get to be a major political parties nominee for the highest and most important job in the world unless he's got something no other nominee has. Barack Obama's one major plus--as far as Oprah and the black Obama supporters see it--is that he has the same skin color. Oprah won't allow Sarah Palin on her show because Sarah is white and because she's running against her black messiah Barack Obama. Oprah doesn't want to give Sarah Palin any favorable publicity that might ruin black Barack Obama's chances of getting into the WH. Obama being black is Oprah Winfrey's only reason why she's a big Obama supporter.

Posted by: tic | September 5, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Palin gets #1, but her delivery and accent immediately reminded me of Mo Collins on Mad TV doing Lorraine Swanson and other characters.

Mo doing a couple of guest shots on Mad TV as Gov. Palin in the new season would be great.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Oh aspergirl, you mean like those terrible attacks where people question Palin's ability to care for her family, special needs child, extended faimily and be VP?

She seems to wonder herself...

Palin Explained that She Couldn't Run for Senate Because Then She Couldn't Be the "Team Mom." "A hockey mom and a former standout athlete herself, Palin said she understood her son's concerns. 'How could I be the team mom if I was a U.S. senator?' she said." [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 4/24/04]

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

#5 Sarah Palin (not a great speech substantively and too much petty sarcasm, but achieved its primary goal to show she can be more than poised on a national stage)

#4 Hillary Clinton (tremendous heart and appealing, but not enough for the brain)

#3 John Kerry (by far the biggest surprise; where was this guy 4 years ago?)

#2 Barack Obama (did everything he needed to do)

#1 Bill Clinton (did everything he needed to do and then some, and showed why he's the best political speaker in a generation)

Posted by: zvelf | September 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Intelli,

McCain never once mentions 9/11, Afghanistan, Iran nuclear build-up or any of a score of reasons previously given by "war-mongering" Republicans for going to war. He states that because he has been involved in war and experienced its attrocities first hand he desires peace for this country. How do you get the idea that he wants war from his speech? Your mind was made up long before he spoke last night. If you still prefrer Obama, great! I'm sure he will do a fine job as President. But do not pretend to get your impression of McCain's supposed "war plans" from the content of his speech. You know better...

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

>>Jen wrote: "Why would she do that to so many of us that want to get to know her better?"

The media world is united in an attempt to destroy her image and career, and undermine the Republican candidates, and get Obama elected.

They've been doing this all year. Most of the sexist bashing of Hillary Clinton had no basis in reality.

They have several tactics to act as propagandists for Democrats:

-- investigate, spin and attack the Republican in their personal lives, trying to get people to dislike them and/or feel contempt for them, which drives up the politician's negatives

-- ignore stories that contain information that make Republicans look good (that includes refusing to have people on their shows or give them air time)

-- ignore stories that contain information that make Democrats look bad (for example, not covering the fact that John Edwards was having an affair and another baby while Edwards was on the campaign trail, when his wife had terminal cancer and was at home with two kids)

-- make up false things about how great, qualified and experienced Barack Obama is, when in fact if he gets elected, he'd be actually the least qualified president ever

-- write up false analysis of what the candidates' platforms and positions are (for example, Obama's energy platform is a disaster and McCain's is the best of all the candidates this year, but you wouldn't know that from reading coverage of them)

and on and on.

The media has launched an all-out war to destroy Sarah Palin for Barack Obama. That includes not covering good things about her and blocking her from shows that would make her look good or let voters get to know her better. They also are attacking her personally and professionally and trying to make her look like a stupid woman.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Please Chris! Her line about comparing hockey moms and pitbulls was the best ad lib. I read the same line in Newsweeks article on her the day before she delivered her speech and that "fine ad lib."

Posted by: MJS | September 5, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

After listening to the two competing conventions, one is convinced by the feel of it:

# ELECT OBAMA FOR PEACE.
# ELECT McCAIN FOR WAR.

It is for America to decide now what does it want in the years to come a roller-coaster journey into the quagmire of more wars skillfully fought by the veterans in the business like McCain or a walk towards peace propounded by one who thankfully lacks experience in the 'fine-art' of warfare and bloodshed!

Posted by: Intelli | September 5, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Comrade Peter,

You are right Premiere Obama will lead us in many ways to glorious prosecuting of those Capitalist mongrels wanting to make a profit and better themselves.

The Socialist Republic of the United States.

If you are not fearful of the new and want a bright future for yourself, your children, their children and their children, vote for Obama and Biden. If you are forward looking and optimistic vote for Obama and Biden.

I am voting for Obama and Biden.

I


Posted by: Peter | September 5, 2008 1:09 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm not gonna be told about "family values" from a lady whose own family can't even follow her own advice. People in glass houses..... well you know!

Posted by: lancelot | September 5, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Palin should be fine once she gets on the trail, she has things down pat already...

Palin Delivered "Non-Answers" On Expanding Health Care Coverage and Walmart. "Asked about expanding health care coverage and about Wal-Mart's corporate conduct, she delivered non-answers with a disarming smile." [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 1/30/06]


Frontiersman Editorial Said Palin Made Statements That Were "Patently Untrue," Said She Had Shown "Unrepentant Backpedaling and Incessant Whining." A Frontiersman editorial wrote, "Wasilla residents have been subjected to attempts to unlawfully appoint council members, statements that have been shown to be patently untrue, unrepentant backpedaling, and incessant whining that her only enemies are the press and a few disgruntled supporters of former Mayor John Stein." [Frontiersman editorial, 2/7/97]


Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

I have to disagree. As a young man, a tradesman turned 6th grade public school teacher, even looking to get involved in local gov. I am searching for the right place to throw my support and the Rep. convention did not do much for me. I thought the Bill Clinton speech was the best of all by a longshot, and Obama's was good too. I don't think a speech will sway me in the end though, I want to see actions and frankly, I don't see much from either. I still like Ron Paul, however far away his IDEAS are from being successful, he is humble, and very smart. I would worry though at this point that breaking it down to such a simplified level would not work.

Bill Clinton's speech hands down the best.

Posted by: crw8s | September 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Jen wrote: I am a Hillary supporter from Ohio.

I just read that Oprah is refusing to have Govenor Palin on her show.

Why would she do that to so many of us that want to get to know her better?

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

Jen,
While I have not heard this, it would certainly be disappointing and Rosie-esque of Oprah to refuse a spot on her show to someone simply because of political ideology. (I mean she has had klan members on her show for crying out loud!!!) It would not surprise me however! That is the way with the left crowd, althought try getting Joe Biden on Rush's program for a "fair" and "open" policy discussion...

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

And where is Hillary on this list, Chris? Her speech smoked anything seen this week, especially Palin, and threatened to eclipse Obama's.

Posted by: esmerelda123 | September 5, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: The RNC, McCain-Palin, and the media at large have all scrutinized Obama’s rhetoric. Palin’s has not as yet. In fact, rhetorical flourish without substance has been an effective critique of Obama, I think. So yes, I do hold the same rhetorical standard for Obama.

Posted by: Zoe | September 5, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

>> Anonymous wrote: "Please don't jump the gun for god sake! Don't you think that it is a bit preposterous and tad too early to declare Palin as a better orator than Obama. After all how many speeches has she actually delivered till date?"

It was pretty obvious during her speech what her range is. Obama has a fairly limited range, what one might call an "affectation of the historic visionary". He's been unable to put in convincing unscripted performances. For example, in all the debates with Hillary Clinton.

Look at his Saddleback Civic Forum stumbling over his answer, putting aside his inability to come up with something coherent. A truly great speaker would have come up with a better affect during his stumbles. Yet he holds onto the "authoritative" affect, which in this case comes off as blustering puffery:

Obama's stammering answer to "what does Jesus mean to you"?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHtAWPjzvyk&feature=related

Sarah Palin showed great range of emotion and affect during her point-making in her speech.

Highlights of Sarah Palin's acceptance speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om2gNE48gDI

Sarah Palin's address to the Alaskan Independence Party conf.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

>>"On the contrary, Obama has proved his gift of gab umpteen times as a good speaker who can speak on host of subjects that too extempore."

Obama uses speechwriters, too. His 2004 convention speech was written for him. He has speechwriters on staff and uses them. He's not what you think.

His range is very limited, which is why he limits his unscripted appearances and has been refusing town halls and debates since Hillary Clinton creamed him in debates this Spring.

>>"Regarding Palin being hotter than Obama what do you think the race is for VP or a role in some god forsaken movie in Hollywood."

The Obama camp and supporters have been raving about his looks. The personality cult is mostly about his appearance and affectations and race.

>>"As far as your comparison between Biden and McCain are concerned, I wonder what charm did you find in the abnormal plastic looks of McCain?"

McCain is older and suffered a lot of physical trauma in his lifetime. But he's immensely better looking as an old man than Biden is. And if you look at the pictures of McCain under 40, he was truly hot. Whereas Biden is still a blowhard doofus in his young pictures.

No comparison. Men don't get pretty, rich wives if they're losers in love.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Palin is an empty vessel. Her speech was nothing more than red meat zingers that party hacks told her to say. McCain still lives in the Viet Nam prison camp and wants you to feel sorry for him. Another empty vessel.

If you want stupidity and wistful revival of the 19th century vote for McCain and Palin. If you are cynic and pessimist, vote for McCain and Palin.

If you are not fearful of the new and want a bright future for yourself, your children, their children and their children, vote for Obama and Biden. If you are forward looking and optimistic vote for Obama and Biden.

I am voting for Obama and Biden.

I

Posted by: Peter | September 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Palin's speech wins the number one spot only for being the most outright dishonest, condescending, nauseating, hypocritical, misleading, and grossly negative speech of either convention, dating back many, many, many years. And the worst of it is that her kind of negativity (not to mention the goal of repeating bold-faced lies enough to make the lazy think they are true) serves the very tactic that might work and win McCain this election.

Posted by: esmerelda123 | September 5, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

The NEWS

Well, i need to catch up on some News. I'll go get a copy of the National Enquirer.

Might as well pick up a copy of the New York Times and find out what the gossip amd tabloid rumors are this week as well.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

In case anyone is interested...Obama on O'Reilly.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2008/09/obama_on_the_oreilly_factor.html

I thought Obama did pretty well given the unfriendly territory. O'Reilly seemed to be really quick to presuppose that diplomacy is a certain failure and would interrupt Obama frequently, but it wasn't the nastiest I've seen O'Reilly, I guess.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Matt: you first wrote:"

Hey Anonymous,

Did you know that Palin's teleprompter broke halfway through her speech? She delivered the last half from memory and still nailed it. I seem to remember Obama's teleprompter breaking once and him stuttering like an idiot until it was fixed.

Look it up if you don't believe me...
"

Then you wrote: "

To Anomynous,

Well if you want to get technical, it actually just kept running despite the pauses from applause...it's not a rumor.
"

Embarrassed much? You not only posted a lie, you got caught in it. "If you want to get technical" ? Sounds like a whine to me.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I am a Hillary supporter from Ohio.

I just read that Oprah is refusing to have Govenor Palin on her show.

Why would she do that to so many of us that want to get to know her better?

Posted by: Jen | September 5, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

"Palin established herself as a serious politician and America's sweetheart all in the space of a 35-minute speech."

America's sweetheart??? Sweethearts don't spew vitriol. And Chris, it's not hard to find someone who can read a 35 minute speech written by someone else. I bet even you could.

There were no "quips" in her speech. If you think there were, you should look up the definition of "quip."

I'm surprised you didn't include Mr. Magoo's acceptance speech in your Top 5.

Posted by: Skeptic | September 5, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with the notion that Palin gave a good speech. While her delivery was good, it had no content. In fact, most speeches at the RNC had very little content and more Obama attacks and John McCain POW stories. And they didn't say anything about how they will fix this economy. Very poor showing. Palin's speech was also full of blatant lies, such as Barack's work and votes for Biden. There is one thing to stretch the truth, but to lie outright is just a downright shame. This just goes to show McCain-Palin have nothing to run on against the Dems.

Posted by: lancelot | September 5, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

The press might have questions about "reform" and earmarks too.

"EARMARKS

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million.

In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation, although she has cut, by more than half, the amount the state sought from Washington this year. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to Gravina Island, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere." "
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515517.html

"Three times in recent years, the Arizona senator's lists of 'objectionable' pork spending have included earmarks requested by his new running mate."
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,6145252.story

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

To Anomynous,

Well if you want to get technical, it actually just kept running despite the pauses from applause...it's not a rumor.

Posted by: Matt | September 5, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

"Maybe it was her ad lib that the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull was lipstick."

Ad-lib--not so much. This "ad-lib" was quoted in the September 8, issue of Newsweek, page 30, as one of the things that sustains her. Sounds to me more like a practiced line.

Posted by: str1ngs | September 5, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

HEY BARACK!

DON'T APOLOGIZE TO THE EUROPEANS FOR ME!

YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME!

WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?

YOU DISGRACE THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN FAMILIES THAT HAVE SHED THEIR BLOOD AND LOST LOVE ONES TO GIVE EUROPEANS FREEDOM.

YOU OWE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AN APOLOGY FOR THAT LOW BLOW!

Posted by: Zman | September 5, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

"America's sweetheart?"

You are an irrelevant hack.

Posted by: Havana59er | September 5, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I find it quite telling that the left cries out for more diversity via the inclusion of minorities and women in power positions within the GOP, then when the GOP responds by appointing minorities and women to positions of power they are criticized for it. President Bush appoints Colin Powell to his cabinet, and the left say, "Well, not THAT minority! He doesn't count. He's not really black since he is a Republican!" Bush appoints Condi Rice and the left once again cry out, "Not THAT woman! She doesn't count since she is a Republican!" The left have shown their true colors once again by criticizing the selection of a woman as Veep. "She doesn't count as a progressive female choice because she doesn't think the same way we think. Therefore, we can criticize her for "not putting her family first," or, "not having enough executive experience," or "being from a small town," or any of a number of weakly thought out objections. The interesting thing is, were Palin a Democrat with the same credentials, and had Obama selected Palin as HIS VP choice, not ONE person on the left would have a problem with her! At the same time, how quickly do you think the left would have turned on one of their own had McCain selected Lieberman as HIS VP choice? There would have been substantial rumblings from the left about how McCain, the self-proclaimed "Maverick" had selected a fellow member of the Washington insiders club. This goes to show that when it comes to Lefty, it is NEVER really about diversity! It never has been with the left! For the left, it is about insuring that anyone in power thinks the same way they do!

Posted by: Indy Libertarian | September 5, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Great delivery, what you would expect from a previous TV sportscaster. It is the substance that brings the speech down.

One example of why Palin is avoiding the press...

"PALIN: "I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history. And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence. That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.

THE FACTS: Palin implies that construction has begun on a major natural gas pipeline from the top of Alaska into Canada. That is not correct.

In fact, no building has begun and actual construction is years away, if it ever happens. This summer the Alaska Legislature, at Palin's request, passed a bill under which the state will issue a "license" to a Canadian energy company, TransCanada Corp., and pay it up to $500 million as an incentive to someday build this enormous project, which Alaska politicians have long sought with little success. The license is not a construction contract, and federal energy regulators have not yet approved the project.

Palin also puts the price tag for the project at $40 billion, an exaggeration. This is roughly $10 billion more than most cost estimates industry players and consultants have made to date."

http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515517.html

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

matt- who cares? A a matter of fact the little rumor was investigated and scotched. It never broke, but if you want to elect someone on the basis of whether or not they can read, have a ball. I still prefer to vote on the issues.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Thank goodness that more and more Americans are seeing Obama for what he is.

-accomplished nothing
-friends with terrorist Bill Ayers
-a LIAR, a PHONEY. speaks behind rural Americans backs to his elitist friends.
-a Divider. we/them mentality. McCain was the adult last night and refreshing.
--A person of No Integrity. Really, how can a "Man" vote present 165 times just so he can say later he did/did not support.
--

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

I still dont understand how you can get excited by a speech that didnt touch on how to clean up the problems in this country. We have truly dumb downed our nation if we settle for style instead of substance. I thought we learned our lessons the past 8 years about that. I guess not....

Posted by: American First | September 5, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin's pit bull joke was not an ad lib. I have seen in at least two interviews at least a few days if not even a year ago (Newsweek). They pulled it from the prepared text to surprise you media elites.

Posted by: Marletter | September 5, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin states:

“”it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the State Senate.””

The truth is quite the opposite and can be accessed here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/

Barack has been a very active legislator since joining the US Senate. He has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become law. He appears to have introduced another 570 that are at various stages of the legislative process.

The targets of these 570 bills are wide ranging: from increasing funds for veterans housing and healthcare, restricting tax havens abroad, supporting NATO’s invitation to Georgia, promoting forward thinking domestic energy uses such as coal to liquid, increased fuel economy for cars, and one that attempts to promote clarity to the legislative process by banning gifts from lobbyists and by restricting access to the Senate floor by former members turned lobbyists.

Posted by: delantero | September 5, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Hey Anonymous,

Did you know that Palin's teleprompter broke halfway through her speech? She delivered the last half from memory and still nailed it. I seem to remember Obama's teleprompter breaking once and him stuttering like an idiot until it was fixed.

Look it up if you don't believe me...

Posted by: Matt | September 5, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

@Aspergirl@

*SARAH PALIN IS MUCH, MUCH HOTTER THAN OBAMA

*SARAH PALIN IS A MORE EFFECTIVE, GROUNDED AND FUNNY SPEAKER THAN OBAMA, WHO IS A ONE-TRICK PONY WITH HIS "PROFOUNDLY VISIONARY" AFFECTATIONS

*JOHN MCCAIN HAS MORE CHARM AND GOOD LOOKS AND PERSONALITY THAN JOE BIDEN.

Please don't jump the gun for god sake! Don't you think that it is a bit preposterous and tad too early to declare Palin as a better orator than Obama. After all how many speeches has she actually delivered till date? Only one that too with the help of a teleprompter like his severely handicapped 'mouthful-of-sawdust' buddy McCain. On the contrary, Obama has proved his gift of gab umpteen times as a good speaker who can speak on host of subjects that too extempore.

Regarding Palin being hotter than Obama what do you think the race is for VP or a role in some god forsaken movie in Hollywood.

As far as your comparison between Biden and McCain is concerned, I wonder what charm did you find in the abnormal plastic looks of McCain? Atleast Biden looks normal!

Posted by: Intelli | September 5, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Chris was smitten with that pit bull.
Here's one:
Answer: Michael Steele
Question: Had Hillary won the nomination and not chosen Obama as her running mate, who would McCain have chosen as his?

Posted by: trustynailz | September 5, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

@Aspergirl@

*SARAH PALIN IS MUCH, MUCH HOTTER THAN OBAMA

*SARAH PALIN IS A MORE EFFECTIVE, GROUNDED AND FUNNY SPEAKER THAN OBAMA, WHO IS A ONE-TRICK PONY WITH HIS "PROFOUNDLY VISIONARY" AFFECTATIONS

*JOHN MCCAIN HAS MORE CHARM AND GOOD LOOKS AND PERSONALITY THAN JOE BIDEN.

Please don't jump the gun for god sake! Don't you think that it is a bit preposterous and tad too early to declare Palin as a better orator than Obama. After all how many speeches has she actually delivered till date? Only one that too with the help of a teleprompter like his severely handicapped 'mouthful-of-sawdust' buddy McCain. On the contrary, Obama has proved his gift of gab umpteen times as a good speaker who can speak on host of subjects that too extempore.

Regarding Palin being hotter than Obama what do you think the race is for VP or a role in some god forsaken movie in Hollywood.

As far as your comparison between Biden and McCain are concerned, I wonder what charm did you find in the abnormal plastic looks of McCain? Atleast Biden looks normal!

Posted by: Intelli | September 5, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

>>Matt wrote: "And I'm a former supporter of Hillary. I'm disgusted that people even think Obama is capable. "

It's all the fantasy that they write up, misrepresenting him and making him out to be more than what he is and never really vetting him or giving an accurate picture of just how incompetent and unproductive he's been professionally.

The media has become the propaganda corps for the Democratic party.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

@Aspergirl@

*SARAH PALIN IS MUCH, MUCH HOTTER THAN OBAMA

*SARAH PALIN IS A MORE EFFECTIVE, GROUNDED AND FUNNY SPEAKER THAN OBAMA, WHO IS A ONE-TRICK PONY WITH HIS "PROFOUNDLY VISIONARY" AFFECTATIONS

*JOHN MCCAIN HAS MORE CHARM AND GOOD LOOKS AND PERSONALITY THAN JOE BIDEN.

Please don't jump the gun for god sake! Don't you think that it is a bit preposterous and tad too early to declare Palin as a better orator than Obama. After all how many speeches has she actually delivered till date? Only one that too with the help of a teleprompter like his severely handicapped 'mouthful-of-sawdust' buddy McCain. On the contrary, Obama has proved his gift of gab umpteen times as a good speaker who can speak on host of subjects that too extempore.

Regarding Palin being hotter than Obama what do you think the race is for VP or a role in some god forsaken movie in Hollywood.

As far as your comparison between Biden and McCain are concerned, I wonder what charm did you find in the abnormal plastic looks of McCain? Atleast Biden looks normal!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

>> Anonymous wrote: "Thanks Oprah you just helped sarah become more popular, watch her fold and have sarah on after the backlash... i've seen this movie before"

"The queen of talk appears to be balking at inviting newly minted Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin on her show, according to The Drudge Report.

"Winfrey's staff reportedly is sharply divided on booking Palin.

"Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on," a source told Drudge. "Oprah's Web site is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,417523,00.html

THE MEDIA IS ON AN ALL OUT CAMPAIGN TO UNDERMINE PALIN AND GET OBAMA ELECTED

There is no pretense of balance and professionalism in this last stretch of the election season, is it.

The media has openly become a political media arm of the Democratic party.

Everything my conservative friends have told me for years is true. The media is a big left-wing propaganda machine. They block good things they don't want people to hear and know about Republicans and ignore bad stories about Democrats, and they make up facts, write opinion pieces that make up rationalizations and spin biases, and they use their professional access and forums create perceptions that are false and push it on the electorate as reality.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

And I'm a former supporter of Hillary. I'm disgusted that people even think Obama is capable. His support comes from people, who consider it the latest fad. It's "cool" to support Obama because he's young and energetic and eloquent. The man offers little else. I'm disgusted with my own party these past couple years. They do nothing in Congress, but blame Bush and then put up a man with no experience. Democrats for McCain-Palin!

Posted by: Matt | September 5, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

I didn't hear all the speeches, and will only say the winner is
OBAMA -- as one commentator said "he could recite the Yellow Book and make it sound interesting." I watched CNN -- David Gergen said "a masterpiece" and another Republic on the panel agreed it was a very good speech. There was substance; policy points, goals, and in answer to every Republican chant that Dems will raise taxes: he said he will cut taxes for working families and stop tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. (Please -- I don't want to speak to anyone in India anymore.) Finally, he wrote the speech!

Ted Kennedy -- what else can you say- Home Run.

Schweitzer -- unfortunately, only heard some but it certainly rallied the crowd.

Hillary was good, but too much about herself.

Didn't hear Bill, but you always can count on him to be very good.

Romney and Huckelbee- yawners

Palin: she can deliver -- sound bites.

Unfortunately only saw some of Thompson's -- another very good delivery.

Posted by: Peggy | September 5, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Why would anyone seriously consider voting for Obama? The man has spent more time running for political office than effecting the change he speaks of. He is only motivated by attaining higher and higher perches. He wasn't know to do anything substantive as a state senator; he's barely a US Senator for a couple years and then he runs for President. May I add that he hasn't even done a thing in Congress worth noting besides speak. AND he always decides with his party in groups, never judges things on his own.

McCain, on the other hand, has a record of doing the right thing even when it was unpopular with his own party.

Posted by: Matt | September 5, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Democrats for John McCain in 2008

Posted by: Gary | September 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

12:38- no, just insipid.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

former demorcrat:
brains, conscience, experience, charisma, a real plan, he's not a republican, picked a VP running mate for his experience and expertise, rather than his legs, he talks about issues because he thinks the voters actually care about those things, he thinks global warming is a real problem, as is the economy, health care, Iraq, education and foreign policy.

Oh yes- he doesn't shoot baby wolves from an airplane because he's worried that there won't be enough moose for "sportsmen" to shoot from airplanes come hunting season.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

bella - another clueless foreigner

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

U.S. Attacks on Pakistani Territory Continue
Increase Decrease

September 5, 2008 (LPAC)--The inability of the George Bush adminstration to learn from its own strategic errors--such as the support for the British-led toppling of the Musharaf government in Pakistan--was demonstrated again today. A drone deployed by the U.S.-led ISAF forces in Afghanistan, fired several missiles into Pakistani territory today, in North Waziristan. The missiles hit a house, reportedly killing at least three children and wounding several women, according to local television reports. Some reports are saying that those killed were Talibani militants, and Army spokesman Major-General Athar Abbas said they are investigating the incidents.

As Lyndon LaRouche pointed out yesterday, the destabilization of Pakistan is the key British target at this time. Internal Pakistani reports are emphasizing the killing of civilians, and the entire situation is further isolating the Pakistani Army, a key national institution, and fostering internal dissension.

This strike was the third in three days on the Pakistani area bordering Afghanistan, following the raid on Sept. 3 conducted by U.S. forces, in which some 15-20 were killed. That attack was severely condemned by the Pakistani government and Parliament. Yesterday, another drone attack reportedly killed five militants in Pakistan

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

>>Anonymous wrote: "You might not think it, but that's a pretty damn sexist comment if ever I heard one. Even I, who think she's 2 points above a religious fanatic, wouldn't disrespect her like that."

I also used the word "cute" to refer to the use of some words in McCain's speech tag cloud, in my 12:02 PM post.

Is that sexist, too?

Cute.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Bella, We Conservative Americans could care less what you think.

Crawl back under your rock.

Zman
_________________________


America's image and standing has suffered under Bush, but Palin, you have got to be kidding...right?? She comes across as an ignorant redneck who would make the Beverly Hillbillies seem sophisticated. Talk about sending a shudder around the world!!

Posted by: Bella | September 5, 2008 12:30 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

TAG CLOUDS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES' SPEECHES

Some tag clouds showing most frequently occurring words in speeches

Obama's "Temple of Obama" speech, August 28, 2008
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-demscloud28-2008aug28,1,245041.htmlstory

John McCain's "Change Means Reform" speech, Sept. 4, 2008
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-gop-cloud5-2008sep05,0,1745434.htmlstory

One thing you can read right off the top, with these tag clouds, is that

(1) McCain's speech was more issue-specific and complex than Obama's, going by all the issue-related words from diverse subject areas in it.

(2) Obama's speech is more of a partisan, dumbed-down speech, given the fewer issue-related words and his very heavy use of the words "john" "mccain".

Look at the word clouds, and weigh for yourselves which candidate is more attacking and which candidate is giving more attention to specifics of issues.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Schweitzer, you wrote: "Voters don't elect cheerleaders president."

They might elect a cheerleader VP if Palin has her way.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin looks so cute, "

You might not think it, but that's a pretty damn sexist comment if ever I heard one. Even I, who think she's 2 points above a religious fanatic, wouldn't disrespect her like that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Add in the POW story and this is about as detailed as the entire speech was.

Is this an enhanced version of 9/11 ?

McCain is running on his strongest point character and ignoring his weakest, the issues.


"What is so cute about the McCain speech tag cloud is how emotional it is. Here are the most-used words, in order of how much they were used:

Americans
love
blessed
families
taxes
washington
war
economy

McCain's "tag cloud" is signaling a positive theme for his Fall strategy.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:02 PM"

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

As a foreigner watching on the other side of the world I can't believe that American's would seriously elect McCain considering Palin could be a heartbeat away from the Presidency. America's image and standing has suffered under Bush, but Palin, you have got to be kidding...right?? She comes across as an ignorant redneck who would make the Beverly Hillbillies seem sophisticated. Talk about sending a shudder around the world!!

Posted by: Bella | September 5, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

David wrote:
I lean Democrat, but I'm plannning to vote for McCain.

My Comment:
Why would anyone who leans Democratic even consider voting for McCain? the Democrats have put up a very smart mainstream democrat who takes the time to listen and respond to questions. He gives nuanced, complex responses that do not distill down to sound bites but represent the good policies and good governance. In contrast, in McCain we have a "Maverick" that vote over 90% of the time with the President on policies which have failed. A candidate who, rather than putting his country first, made a cynical political choice for Vice-President intended to pander to the right wing of his party. A candidate who claims that he is going to clean up the mess which his party has made in DC. A candidate who claims that he wants to head away from divisive politics yet is nominated by a convention with some of the most hateful and divisive speeches ever made at any recent conventions. What possible reason could anyone who "leans democrat" ever have to vote for McCain over Obama?

David wrote:
Palin's speech was a nice performance under pressure, but is overrated. So she sounds like a regular person. So what?

My Comment: You don't want a "regular person" performing brain surgery or representing you in court or (god help us) running the country and controlling the button. You want an extraordinary person who has a high degree of intelligence and the education to understand complex issues. Gov. Palin has shown that she can read a teleprompter relatively well. So can the news and sports casters at numerous TV stations around the country. That doesn't make them competent to be one of the leaders of our nation.

Posted by: Lean Democratic? | September 5, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

ooooohhh, aspergirl- we're so impressed with your astute political analysis and professional writing. I'm proud to be a democrat- it would be an embarrassment to the party and the millions of democrats in this country to think someone like you could ever be part of it.

So rant and rave and prate all you like. You're such a fool- you can't even understand how the GOP has so distracted you from the important issues in this country that your biggest concern is what democrats look like and if McCain is better looking than Obama. If you weren't so embarrassing, you might actually be funny. Don't know what you think the election is really about but I'm voting on issues, not high heels.

And think about this- how in touch with hard working Americans do you really think McCain is when his wife (whom I happen to like) can walk out on stage in an outfit that cost 300,000$ to put together? You got 7 homes, aspergirl? Yeah- keep laughing. In the meantime the rest of us will get to work doing something constructive for the country we love- and that includes getting the GOP out of the White House.

Posted by: nyc sparrow | September 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

"so what you are saying is that you would feel better going up against our second string. I understand completely."

zouk, I'm the only lib here who gives you the time of day, so know that it is apparent to everyone but the GOP that its ticket is upside down. Palin is a better presidential candidate than McCain (please keep in mind that "better" is relative).

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Jonathan R. Seaver, you are beating an old drum! What qualifications does Obama have to be the president????

Posted by: Former democrat | September 5, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I agree that those were the five best (or most effective) speeches at the two conventions. However, I would re-order them:

1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Schweitzer
4. Thompson
5. Palin

Obama certainly toned down the loftiness of his rhetoric. However, he kept enough of his "turns of phrase" in the speech to raise it above the level of a policy laundry-list. I thought it was a terrific combination.

As for Clinton, his skill as an orator has assumed a kind of Michael Jordan-esque mystique in the press. It's not undeserved; he can truly connect with the largest of crowds. What made it better than most of his speeches were his attempts to sew Hillary and Barack supporters back together.

Schweitzer was truly impressive. While some made fun of his constant jostling on-stage, I thought he personified American exuberance. He also showed what politics should be about: enthused, genuine people working together to solve problems.

Thompson's speech was one of the best re-tellings of Sen. McCain's POW experience I've ever heard. Thompson's a natural and he really forced listeners to think about what was endured. The major drawback was his incessant throat-clearing.

I thought Palin was short on substance and long on abrasiveness. Regardless, the crowd at the Xcel knew her credentials and whipped themselves into a frenzy hearing her speak. It was the best thing for the GOP all week.

Posted by: Adanielch | September 5, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I listened to all of the speeches and in the immediate aftermath I gave them a similar ranking to yours. But then upon reflection, something kept coming back to me about Biden's speech. His words have grown on me. Is that because his was the one genuine speech, written from his own experience, in his own words? I keep remembering his poignant description of the kitchen conversations he "hears" as his train passes by the darkened homes between DC and Delaware. My family has those same kinds of conversations... Where will my 78y old mom live now that my dad has recently passed away? How will we pay for college for our three children? Why am I working harder but falling behind?

Thank you Joe Biden for giving one of the most honest and heartfelt speeches I've ever heard. I love you, man.

Posted by: Felipe Mendez | September 5, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Former democrat | September 5, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I think you have been "taken in" by the glitz and the glamour of Governor Sarah Palin, whose speech was galvanizing politically but missing so much substance that so few will miss the chief problem for John McCain's camapign - she is unqualified to be president.

Posted by: Jonathan R. Seaver | September 5, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Of course liberal women won't vote for Sarah, they are jealous of her, she is the women they wished they could be.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

sperGirl, you are right about Obama being toast! Look at the latest polls. His 9 point lead has evaporated!

Posted by: Former democrat | September 5, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

She is pretty hot, hot librarian type

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

America will not vote for a black man over a white women face it

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

She has to make indictments about Obama's foreign policy statements.

She doesn't have any of her own.

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

SPEECH! SPEECH! SPEECH!

Sarah Palin looks so cute, with a big smile on her face, as she rips into the under-qualified, affirmative action candidate, Barack Obama.

How can she be so cute when she's making people laugh at Obama.

She's devastating.

That speech of hers Wednesday night was NOT a practiced act. She's got the same stuff on the stump, too.

LOL. Obama's toast.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Liberal men are the kids who were made fun of in school and liberal women were the ones who couldn't get a date

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

How do you leave Hillary Clinton off this list? Her speech was masterful - a full-throated endorsement of Obama that set her up to be a continuing power in DC no matter who becomes President.

Posted by: pdiddy | September 5, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Lord have mercy, Chris ... have you lost your mind? First up, for what it's worth, I'm one o' them Independent white female voters. Not 'undecided' at this point, but I sure wanted to give Gov. Palin a chance, not having heard much from her directly.) What I heard and saw, unfortunately, was snide, ugly, and undignified, esp. for one in her position. Prepared text not hers, granted, but she delivered it eagerly and in italics. 'Successful' in terms of crowd response, but the crowd had already fallen in love at first sight, so a recitation of the old proverbial phonebook would've achieved the same effect. My viewing party, mostly moderate conservatives, was dismayed by Palin's invective, smugness, & small-hearted tone. One thing we *don't* need at this point in history, & where we find ourselves in the world, is a continuation of divisive one-of-us/not-one-of-us, culture war politics. The GOP lost a few votes in my living room that night, so maybe that speech wasn't as 'successful' as you think.

Posted by: kanneca | September 5, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Oprah you just helped sarah become more popular, watch her fold and have sarah on after the backlash... i've seen this movie before

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

"JOHN MCCAIN MARRIED A HOT, THIRD WORLD ACTIVIST, RICH WIFE WHILE JOE BIDEN HAS A DUMB, POOR WIFE"

John McCain dumped his disabled first wife and married for money and political contacts. Thanks for lobbing that softball at me.

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Palin: belligerent McCain: Dr Evil Clinton: Narcissistic Thompson: Brain dead
Schweitzer: Ironic Obama: Smart

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

LOL.

Sarah Palin is on the move again against Obama.

She's reading off an indictment of his foreign policy statements, in a stump speech on FoxNews right now.

She's good.

Obama's toast.

IF he weren't such a sexist who had prejudiced confidence that the Republicans would never nominate a woman, he might not have set himself up for this. He would have picked Clinton as VP.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Chris you have been working too hard. Palin was far better than expected but over Obama and Hillary? Thompson over Hillary?

Please WaPo, give this man some time off, he clearly is delirious.

Posted by: patrick nyc | September 5, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse


It's true, They have her doing 30 fund raisers this month.. She is a stooge, thats all she is.

============
"She is being used as a stooge. She actually thinks she is running for VP."

THE SEXIST DEMOCRATS HAVE A NEW CONSPIRACY THEORY

The above comment is a hint of the new looney conspiracy theory circulating around the sexist Democratic left-wingers on DailyKos.

First, you have to understand that the neo-liberal movement in the Democratic left-wing is dominated by Barack Obama's South Side Chicago-networked activists and insiders. This is why DNC headquarters have been moved to Chicago. To be frank, the Afrocentric racial politics of the Chicago political scene contains heavy doses of anti-white conspiracy thinking impulses, and traditionally black community belittling and objectifying of women.

Just as Hillary Clinton was ridiculed and treated with contempt during the prolonged Democratic primary season. The Democrats, represented primarily by their vocal base (mainstream media) came out full bore with a jeering, personally destructive piling on of Sarah Palin after her announcement. They jeered, ridiculed and belittled her in sexist and sexual ways.

After her great speech, they have now moved to a more looney kind of sexist belittling. They refuse to believe that what they think of as a pathologically white male pig dominated Republican party would really nominate and elect a woman. They think this is a ploy to disrupt the Obama convention bump and reopen the fracture between men and women in the Democratic party that the sexist abuse and marginalization of Hillary Clinton opened up.

The theory, among the dim-bulb fanatical loonies over at DailyKos and the left wing of Obama's neo-liberal Democratic Party, is that after reopening the split between men and women in the Democratic party, Sarah Palin will withdraw as VP and a regular white male Republican will take her place. I.e. after she is no longer needed as saboteur, she will be dumped. They have even opened up a line of betting at Intrade, the online futures market, on whether she will withdraw as VP before the election.

What this conspiracy theory actually reveals is the depth of the alienation, prejudice and ignorance IN THE OBAMA CAMP. The neo-libs of Obama's Chicago-based DNC headquarters are heavily South Side Chicago Afrocentric in their views, as shades of Reverend Wright's rhetoric appear in numerous forms in the left wing blogs now, including anti-white conspiracy theories.

It also reveals how sexist the Democratic party is trending under Barack Obama's leadership. Their inability to grasp that Sarah Palin is indeed the VP that the "old white men" of the Republican party have embraced and will vote for, reveals, sadly, the kind of thinking that made them ridicule the notion of Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama's VP.

If anything brings down Barack Obama's presidential bid, it will be their own misogyny and sexism, not racism.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:37 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse


It seems in your case, ugly goes all the way down to the bone.

Posted by: we be phat and fugly | September 5, 2008 12:11 PM
===========================
wbpaf- It does take one to know one. I'm sure as a GOP insider, you know far more ugly to the bone than I ever will. Have a lovely day :-)

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

"You are a racist indeed! Having acknowledged the fact I wish your favorite party could find someone as impressive and imposing in personality in place of Mccain who is completely lack luster and killjoy in looks."

It's not my fault that Democrats look like eccentric, stupid slobs.

Now I understand why everyone in the media, notably Maureen Dowd, raves about Obama being "hot' and "cool". I was baffled at what they were talking about because the only reason I'd date a guy like him is if he had a lot of money or was really brilliant or successful in some special way.

But when you see him in context to the other Democrats, he looks like a GOD.

LOL!

Let's compare the TOPS WITH THE BOTTOMS:

SARAH PALIN HAS MORE EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS THAN OBAMA

SARAH PALIN IS MUCH, MUCH HOTTER THAN OBAMA

SARAH PALIN IS A MORE EFFECTIVE, GROUNDED AND FUNNY SPEAKER THAN OBAMA, WHO IS A ONE-TRICK PONY WITH HIS "PROFOUNDLY VISIONARY" AFFECTATIONS

JOHN MCCAIN HAS BEEN ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF STRATEGIC IRAQ WAR VOTING IN THE PAST 4 YEARS, BIDEN HAS BEEN ON WRONG SIDES OF VOTES, LIKE VOTING AGAINST THE SURGE

JOHN MCCAIN HAS MORE CHARM AND GOOD LOOKS AND PERSONALITY THAN JOE BIDEN

JOHN MCCAIN MARRIED A HOT, THIRD WORLD ACTIVIST, RICH WIFE WHILE JOE BIDEN HAS A DUMB, POOR WIFE

And you're going to find out what a good debater Sarah Palin is.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

it appears that you don't know the difference between amateur and professional, something you should as you seem to be a professional journalist and not the highschool newspaper editor. One rehearsed speech read from the telepromter (oh, I forgot, it broke...) is like being the star in the highschool play - certainly not proof of professionalism. To become a professional takes years of daily performances on Broadway. Palin will bomb because she hasn't learned to navigate the waters, something Clinton AND Obama have learned over, yes, many years.

Palin is an amateur on the national and international stage. One of the most important skills in a president is to know when to say what to whom, that is to navigate the political waters. That is why the extremely competitive democratic primary has prepared Obama sufficiently to compete with any old hand and to be ready on day one.

The inane elevation of a starlet doesn't make her a star. Unfortunately, this is not a movie or a play and there is more at stake than the producers' money.

Posted by: eric | September 5, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

aspergirl-really, when someone is so invested in desperately believing any amount of drek to support their candidates who have yet to say anything of substance about real issues, well. It's not worth my time to try to convince you otherwise. I'll also venture my theory that many of those viewers tuned in out of sheer curiosity to see if Palin was indeed the very bad choice McCain made. And she certainly proved them right.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

"No offense, but the crowd at the RNC was so angry and so white, I kept expecting them to produce a noose."

The crowd at RNC looked better than the welfare recipients that got bussed to DNC! Obama will give them a bigger check hoping that they'll look better in 4 years but they'll spend their bigger welfare checks to eat more chips, drink more coke while sitting in front of the TV while the others have to work hard to support them. Fat chance they'll look any better in 4 yrs! No need for anyone to produce nooses – they are tightening the ones they put on themselves already!

Posted by: Former democrat | September 5, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Ok, I double checked.

Palin had 40.1 million, when the PBS estimate is added in, which isn't tracked by Nielsen.

Obama had 42.4 million with the PBS estimate.

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:08 PM

It seems in your case, ugly goes all the way down to the bone.

Posted by: we be phat and fugly | September 5, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Ok so the speech thing is an easy safe task. There's times to take a breath, step back and less the stew percolate.

While you do that I'll ask this:
Many people faulted Hillary as being a polarizing figure. Can we agree that Palin is a more polarizing figure than Hillary? I don't think that Hillary would've caused as a pronounced 'double-sided bump' in fund raising that Palin has.

It seems to me the language of discourse when talking about politics has become heated, more personal and is nearly exclusively about 'small things'. Despite what McCain _says_ about lowering the rancor, his _actions _ are designed to do just the opposite.

I think that the small things act as a smoke screen for the real reasons Palin makes people happy - which I suspect is because she's so anti-abortion.

Can we agree that she brings nothing to the ticket except pro-life? There are far more people - men and women - that can offer more on any other issue than Palin?

I mean if it’s Republican state governors that you like - Linda Lingle of Hawaii has been governor since 2002, Jodi Rell has been governor of Connecticut since 2004. They - perhaps - would bring less pro-life credentials, but they’d bring more governor credentials - without Troopergate.

Posted by: NoOneImportant | September 5, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Heart hates Mccain too!! (Even country stars hate him)


It was funny when it turned out John Wayne heir Clint Eastwood is essentially a liberal.

And now we find out that Toby Keith doesn't support McCain and even says he's a Democrat!

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Posted by: Heart hates Mccain too!! | September 5, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Now we know how your broke-ass gets around town.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 12:04 PM

See how smart I am, mommy. funny too. If only god had given me some brains.

Posted by: dingbats | September 5, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

I am watching Obama in PA, he is as bad in town hall settings as Mccain is with a teleprompter... he's atrocious

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

we be phat and fugly: Sure do- I've worked with many of them and have had to listen to their crap. But I guess it's ok in your book if the Republicans and conservatives posting here take all the pot shots they want? Turnabout is fair play my friend, but in the case of Democrats, we have 8 years of material to work with. Want to see the real Ugly American? Bush, McCain, Palin, Rove, Cheney, etc. And I'm not referring to their looks. We don't need to go the same shallow route you have because, like I said, we have 8 years of issues and those issues are far more important than which party has better legs.

What about that don't you get?

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The greatest orators and presidents, especially Abraham Lincoln as well as Franklin D. Roosevelt were noted for their substantive, memorable speeches. They did not try to be entertainers, which appeal to many in the contemporary media and public. These individuals offered solutions to problems and inspiration to a majority of people living in this country.

Using substance, inspiration and offering actual sound solutions to problems as the best criteria, these were the best speeches:

1) Barack Obama, a masterpiece in offering a vision of positive changes, effective rebukes to the failed Bush-Cheney regime policies, delivered with inspiration and eloquence.

2) Bill Clinton, quite effective in countering GOP criticisms of Barack and Democrats.

3) Teddy Kennedy, inspirational at a high level, especially considering his health issues.

Posted by: Independent | September 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Palin is sooooo tuff... (thats why she's scared of the media)


For such a supposedly tuff woman, Palin has been doing a lot of whining about the media. She's literally hiding from them lol! You gotta love the Republicans, only they could be this deep in scandal before even getting elected. I guess Palin feels really bad about Clinton's or Edward's personal lives being discussed in the media. Either that or she's the typical Republican hypocrite that thinks a scandal is only a scandal when it happens to a Democrat. Oh well, at least the world saw her boring speech full of empty attacks with no reference to solutions of her own. No wonder the rest of America is pretty much like this forum where 95% of the people hate her and Mccain.

Republicans = eat your vegetables or the terrorists and god will get you

Posted by: Palin scared of the media | September 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

"McCain and Obama are tied in one poll, the CBS News poll.

Palin's speech drew 37 million viewers, which is not the record. Obama holds the record at 38.4 million."

Actually it was Obama 34, Palin 40, and she was on 6 networks, he was on 10.

so what you are saying is that you would feel better going up against our second string. I understand completely.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Really? Palin at the top? How depressing to realize that if you put a pit bull in a dress, lipstick on her face, a baby in her arms, and an empty, frothy speech on the teleprompter, and suddenly you've created a sensation. Dang, it works every time, partly because pundits fall for it, and so do voters. God forbid anyone should actually think about what they're hearing.

But you were joking when you said voters don't elect cheerleaders president, right? Because that's exactly what some of them did in 2000 and 2004. And let's face it, Palin is just a pit bull with pom-poms.

Posted by: BlueDog1 | September 5, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl,

I said it before, I'll say it again:

Barack Obama: 38.4 million
Sarah Palin: 37 million

From Nielsen. Look it up.

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Obama just said in PA that he has learned a lot on the campaign trail, one being that the american people are good hardworking people. He needed to be on the campaign trail to learn that? What a friggin fool

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

>>lurker wrote: "actually aspergirl, if you were that concerned with the truth you would have posted more accurately that Palin's TV audience came in as less than Obama's."

Put up your numbers, lurker. You Obama supporters post anything you want, don't you?

Obama had 38.4 million viewers. The numbers are still coming in for Palin, but it's over 40 million.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

@Aspergirl@

You are a racist indeed! Having acknowledged the fact I wish your favorite party could find someone as impressive and imposing in personality in place of Mccain who is completely lack luster and killjoy in looks.

Posted by: Intelli | September 5, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

"Now I know what the eccentric, obese people on the bus do in their spare time!"

Now we know how your broke-ass gets around town.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

compare cindy McCain to Michele Shaniquia Obama. honest Deeds vs angry words and self-aggrandizement.

compare John McCain to B hussain Obama - accomplishment vs empty promises and unfullfilled potential

compare Sarah Palin to blowhard biden - new, interesting, effective, vs old, worthless, wrong and loquocious, garrolous even.

Posted by: pick one | September 5, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

How about content? Your speech ratings are all about style and delivery. The only hint of content is the description of the Obama speech--and even that is "content as style." Don't we have ANY interest in issues? If all we're going to hear about in the next weeks is Sarah Palin, this country's in big trouble. There are serious problems we have to tackle, and style isn't going to solve them.

Posted by: G.G. | September 5, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

A FACT ABOUT THE CONVENTION SPEECHES ATTACKING SOMEONE

The Democratic convention speechwriters devoted considerably more wordspace to attacking Republicans, Bush and McCain than the Republicans spent attacking Democrats, Obama or Biden.

The most startling statistic is comparing the word "Bush". The Democrats invoked "Bush" during their convention a rate 12 times more than the Republicans did at their own convention. This word count makes it clear that Bush has emerged as the dominant theme of the Democrats' Fall campaign strategy.

A great tool is a "tag cloud", where the words associated with memes are arranged in a list in order of first appearance, and are printed in a font size associated with how much it was used. A "tag cloud" of the Sept. 4th McCain speech is up on the LA times website.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-gop-cloud5-2008sep05,0,1745434.htmlstory

What is so cute about the McCain speech tag cloud is how emotional it is. Here are the most-used words, in order of how much they were used:

Americans
love
blessed
families
taxes
washington
war
economy

McCain's "tag cloud" is signaling a positive theme for his Fall strategy.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Since Cillizza cannot attribute his own comments to himself, but in the editorial voice "The Fix", I shall hereby refer to myself as "The entity that wastes its hours posting" and say that Fred Thompson is unfortunately prone to clearing his throat excessively. Though this is not wrong, it reminds us this is a much older generation telling us about our future. Do people really want to re-live the "glory" of the covert black ops/Iran Contra 80's with Reagan and Bush? Not so much. Let's not forget Reagan's low popularity rating at the end of his presidency.

Posted by: Richard Ray Harris | September 5, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Palin's speech was the best? What a joke! C'mon Fix! Grow a spin or some cojones!

Posted by: UTMark | September 5, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

actually aspergirl, if you were that concerned with the truth you would have posted more accurately that Palin's TV audience came in as less than Obama's.

the only people screaming about truth in media are those who have something to hide. That should explain why McCain has been refusing to let her speak to reporters. She can give a speech (of which nothing of real substance was said) but she can't be questioned? I don't think so- this person may be V-P, or worse yet, President of my country and I shouldn't be able to ask questions?

Get real, aspergirl- people like you, who parroted the party line, and slogans are the reason we're in such bad shape today. even you believed McCain is trying to say he's not like "them"- the Bush administration. Now there's a true joke if ever I heard one.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl,

McCain and Obama are tied in one poll, the CBS News poll.

Palin's speech drew 37 million viewers, which is not the record. Obama holds the record at 38.4 million.

Her speech was snide, taunting, and sarcastic, and I'll wager that moderates and a lot of independents were turned off by it.

It's not just the left calling Palin a bad choice for VP. Several GOP strategists are very concerned about the choice of a no-name governor in the midst of an ethics investigation that McCain supporters in Alaska are trying to supress the findings of until after the election.

The greatness of her speech was in it's appeal to the right-wing base that still needed a reason to vote for John McCain. The question is: Has he traded away the middle by choosing a right-wing idealogue as his VP?

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

we are throwing the bums out and getting people who talk about economy and reality.


Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 11:57 AM

you mean Obama/biden is out. who are you getting?

Posted by: confused Lib, aren't we all | September 5, 2008 11:59 AM | Report abuse

I would like to throw a wrench into the discussion this morning and maybe deter some of the negativism that is going on here by throwing in a new name.
I have heard many negatives about Cindy McCain, and names such as the "Ice Princess" that have been given to her because she is a woman of stature who up until now chose to protect her privacy and the privacy of her family. However, since I have lived in Arizona and got involved in local Democratic politics I began to hear more stories about this woman and the humanitarian work she does here and abroad. Comments are made because she sometimes chooses to walk a half step behind her husband as they enter a hall or walk up a set of stairs, but it is not because she is submissive, but I believe it is because she knows that the realm of politics is his world, and in that world he is the leader. I would imagine the opposite would occur if Cindy were to receive a humanitarian award and both were to enter her world.

The biographical video gave a brief look at the generosity of Mrs. McCain, and I kept wondering why do the Democrats care how many properties she owns when her family spent perhaps tens of millions of their own dollars helping the poor and suffering. She have given more than tender. She has given time and tears
over many years.

Her appeal during the first day of the convention was sincere as she and Laura Bush helped organize the delegates to raise funds or whatever was needed for the people who were affected by Hurricane Gustav. Last night, she in no better terms, rocked. Her speech revealed who she was, and I believe tore down once and for all the shroud that many people believed covered her. She was absolutely outstanding and she brought down the house,
as she stood tall and proud without a podium to lean upon. Critics will say she used a teleprompter, which I am sure she did, but she faced America head on, eye to eye, and I believe she was no longer an Ice Princess in the eyes of her critics.

The sad thing about this is that when I went through my homepage news, there wasn't a mention of her speech yet. I came back from Vegas four days after Michelle
Obama's speech and the raves and reviews were still available the story was marked 3 days. They wanted to make sure everyone read about it.

The media is controlling our election and our lives. Fight back! We are just a few but we can spread the word.

Posted by: Barb Brown | September 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"To see McCain resort to playing the POW card when answering legitimate questions, in my mind, cheapens that experience. And by cheapening his own experience in war, he degrades all of our experiences in war. He turns the horrific incidents we've all seen, touched, smelled, and felt into a lame excuse to earn political points. And it dishonors us all."
-- Brandon Friedman, a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan

John McCain has been exploiting his prisoner of war experience every chance he gets. He has used this story to justify everything from not knowing how many homes he has to his healthcare plan to his marital infidelities to his taste in music. The McCain campaign is even using his POW story in paid ads. But now a veteran who was a prisoner with McCain in Vietnam is explaining loud and clear that being a POW does not qualify McCain to lead our country.

Dr. Phillip Butler knew McCain as a fellow POW. Watch and listen!

http://bravenewfilms.org/posts/invite/51429-former-pow-says-mccain-is-not-cut-out-to-be-president


We are sure this video will draw an onslaught of right-wing attacks, but we bring it to you because it is our job to continue to convey the truth together and give these issues national attention. As Dr. Butler has said, McCain does not have the temperament to have his finger near the red button. Get this video to everyone you know: friends, family members, coworkers, and especially those who don't share your political views. The video is designed to reach them. Get it on your social networking sites like Digg. And get it to every blog, newspaper, and TV station that has ever overplayed McCain's POW story. It is time to fight back with truth!


The mainstream press has already begun to call out McCain for overusing his POW story. And it's cut across all political persuasions.


"Whether he's deflecting criticism over his health-care plan or mocking a tribute to the Woodstock music festival, Senator John McCain has a trump card: the Hanoi Hilton. - Edwin Chen, Bloomberg


"Noun, Verb, POW" - Andrew Sullivan, The Atlantic Monthly


"The McCain campaign's constant invocation of the candidate's POW past is weird bordering on irrational..." - Ana Marie Cox, TIME


"I think they are going to it way too many times." - Howard Fineman, Newsweek


Remember how Joe Biden got the press to refer to Rudy Giuliani as "A noun, a verb, and 9/11"? Well, let's actually take Andrew Sullivan's lead here and get the media to boil McCain down to a similar phrase: "A noun, a verb, and POW." Considering how often the McCain campaign invokes his POW story, isn't that what they're already doing?

Posted by: GOP in Loserville | September 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"still living in mom's basement, rubbing potato chip crumbs over their face and desperately hoping for a love relationship with someone who has less than 4 legs and all over body hair."


sounds like you really know a lot about this. lurker indeed. I think you just described the Kos/huff crowd to a T.

Posted by: we be phat and fugly | September 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Asper Girl

the Palin pick is like a big dose of cotton candy

at first site it looks huge and filling...

and you eat it

not so filling but a sugar rush...

and when it wears off your pi$$ed you ate it...

kind of like every trick Bush and Cheney used for the past 8 years...

seems hiring the same people to do it for mcCain has the same results ...

what do you know...

quick we fooled them now make the press the bad guys and get them away from seeing the truth... quick.

not this time... there's change coming all right...

we are throwing the bums out and getting people who talk about economy and reality.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

"Obama's lost all his convention bump due to Palin, and even before the results of polling that includes Palin's speech comes in, he and McCain are TIED in the polls again."

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

What polls? Go look at Gallup.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

"THE SEXIST DEMOCRATS HAVE A NEW CONSPIRACY THEORY"
--------------
"America's Hottest Governor from it's Coolest State"
"Pitbull with Lipstick"
"I'm a woman and I'll vote for Palin because she's a woman"

Who's sexist exactly?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

aspergirl- anyone who mistakes Michelle Malkin for a serious journalist instead of the rabid partisan rag writer that she is, is really in no position to judge anything about community organizers. But you seem to be a soccer mom type whose idea of social conscience is buying a box of girl scout cookies.

Nothing against the girls scouts- I was one and sold lots of cookies. But I'm all grown up now and I find much more to admire in how Obama has lived is life, from the time he was a community organizer through to his present nomination far more than a soccer mom whose biggest claim to fame is dressing a moose and shooting wolves out of cockpits. What has she ever done, except cut funding to help unwed teen mothers (ironic, no?), that indicates she has thought of anything other than herself? certainly not the care of her infant son. And don't tell me that's off limits. When you want to tout yourself as the family values/ woman of the year, you bet I'm going to question how you went back to work after 3 days, and you didn't get to a hospital when your water broke. And now you're dragging a 5 month old to a convention, and shoving your pregnant 17 year old daughter (yes another irony since you believe in teaching abstinence only) into the national spotlight for the purposes of your own career.

Yeah- I'd really look to Malkin and Palin for the answers. Not.

Posted by: nyc sparrow | September 5, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

really Palin is hands down the worst Vice presidential pick we have ever seen in our national history.

and it's getting worse...

you'll see she is going to have awhole new staff over the next week... all lawyers.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

The Obama supporters are bashing Chris for posting that Sarah Palin's speech was good, but they are in their bubble world of denial and will attack and punish any reporter that tries to tell the truth.

THE TRUTH

Obama's lost all his convention bump due to Palin, and even before the results of polling that includes Palin's speech comes in, he and McCain are TIED in the polls again.

Sarah Palin's speech drew over 40 million viewers in Nielsen ratings, an all-time high for a political speech.

Her speech was exceptional, one of the top debut political speeches of modern history.

THE LEFT WING BLOGGERS ATTACK ANY REPORTER TO TRIES TO REPORT THE TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA OR THE CAMPAIGNS, THAT THEY DON'T APPROVE OF

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I don't have time today to go through all this drivel, but has anyone found out who Biden stole his speech from this time?

Posted by: Aeschuylus | September 5, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

and now more lobbyists stuff coming up about she and the healthcare lobby in Alaska.

ugh

but keep her sequestered we all remeber what happened when Libby talked.

throw these bums out

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

In my first scan, I didn't register The Fix's claim of Palin as "America's sweetheart".

Chris, get some sleep. You're getting delusional.

Posted by: bsimon | September 5, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

"are all the Lib chicks fugly and the Lib men wimps? "

YES! LOL. When I had some losers from DailyKos harassing me, I went and looked at some profiles and pix where I could track them down. They're a bunch of losers and pathetic geeks.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Chris you're an idiot!!

Posted by: Ryan | September 5, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

"did anyone notice how good looking all the R women were? the crowd shots even, they included so many hot conservatives. comnpare that to the parade of cows and dogs we saw at the Dem convention. why are all the Lib chicks fugly and the Lib men wimps? Are they confused about everything?"

The Democratic convention was a zoo. A bunch of obese, eccentric, weirdly dressed slobs.

I was embarrassed for the Clinton campaign earlier this year when all her protesting "PUMAs" looked so crazy and stupid.

But, LOL, when you looked at the DNC convention coverage, at least 80 percent of the Democratic delegates looked like eccentric, obese people on the bus who try to talk to you.

Now I know what the eccentric, obese people on the bus do in their spare time!

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

In ranking speeches, of course style trumps substance. If substance won the day, he'd have to rate a boring recitation of someone's policy laundry list at the top.

On that scale, Palin ranked high. Her status as being generally unknown as a public speaker added to pre-speech doubt. The content surely roused the room - the only speech in the last two weeks that came close in tension & crowd response was probably HRC's.


On the subject of the Friday Line, this was a reasonable topic; though it has been far too long since the last House Line. In today's post at electoral-vote.com, Prof Tanenbaum notes that Dems will likely be a minimum of +50 in the House - 243 to 192, with several seats on the cusp of winnability. The Fix should update his take on the House Line.

Posted by: bsimon | September 5, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Chris, I'm hurt. The entire Palin speech played fast and loose with the facts and you made it number 1? I can see ranking it in the top 5 for the uproar it caused and the excitement among the base, but it was devoid of substance. I felt like she was spitting on me because I don't come from Small Town, USA. If you listen to the content of Obama's speech, I think it was easily the best. I've spoken with many people who side with both major parties and they were all impressed with Barack's speech in varying degrees.

Posted by: Tim in OR | September 5, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Sample McSame Press Conference:

Press: Senator McCain, can you explain the difference between a Sunni and Shiite?

McSame: I was a prisoner. Next question.

Press: How many homes do you own?

McSame: Aside from my time in a tiger cage as a prisoner? I'll get back to you.

Press: Senator, what should the average American do for heat this winter, in the face of skyrocketing fuel prices?

McSame: He should drill for oil in his yard or spend the winter at his house in Arizona. Next question.

Press: If elected President, will you be making any more shoot from the hip personnel selections?

McSame: I was a POW. Next.

Press: You constantly bleat the party line that you are sick of judges who "legislate from the bench." Name one judge who has "legislated from the bench."

McSame: Noun, verb, POW. Next.

Press: We'd like to thank you for your straight talk.

McSame: You're welcome, POW. I look forward POW to serving this country POW as its POW president POW POW POW.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

Palin #1?

She didn't choke, but that's about it. Just because she beat your expectations doesn't mean it was a great speech. She offered up nothing specific, was smug and attacked community service (which is done by people of all parties). How you could possibly pick that speech as #1 is baffling. She was outdone by longshot by both Clintons, both Obamas, Thompson and Giuliani.

I don't think I've seen anyone even attempt to claim she outdid those other speakers until now -- just McCain (which, she did).

Posted by: smartvoter | September 5, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Those were all the hookers

--------
did anyone notice how good looking all the R women were? the crowd shots even, they included so many hot conservatives.

comnpare that to the parade of cows and dogs we saw at the Dem convention. why are all the Lib chicks fugly and the Lib men wimps? Are they confused about everything?

no wonder they don't like Palin, she weighs less than her husband, wears a skirt well and is easy on the eyes. how very un-Democrat can you get? to top it all off, she is no victim. totally contrary to Liberal rules.

sick her girls!

Posted by: fugly Libetttes | September 5, 2008 11:20 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

"She is being used as a stooge. She actually thinks she is running for VP."

THE SEXIST DEMOCRATS HAVE A NEW CONSPIRACY THEORY

The above comment is a hint of the new looney conspiracy theory circulating around the sexist Democratic left-wingers on DailyKos.

First, you have to understand that the neo-liberal movement in the Democratic left-wing is dominated by Barack Obama's South Side Chicago-networked activists and insiders. This is why DNC headquarters have been moved to Chicago. To be frank, the Afrocentric racial politics of the Chicago political scene contains heavy doses of anti-white conspiracy thinking impulses, and traditionally black community belittling and objectifying of women.

Just as Hillary Clinton was ridiculed and treated with contempt during the prolonged Democratic primary season. The Democrats, represented primarily by their vocal base (mainstream media) came out full bore with a jeering, personally destructive piling on of Sarah Palin after her announcement. They jeered, ridiculed and belittled her in sexist and sexual ways.

After her great speech, they have now moved to a more looney kind of sexist belittling. They refuse to believe that what they think of as a pathologically white male pig dominated Republican party would really nominate and elect a woman. They think this is a ploy to disrupt the Obama convention bump and reopen the fracture between men and women in the Democratic party that the sexist abuse and marginalization of Hillary Clinton opened up.

The theory, among the dim-bulb fanatical loonies over at DailyKos and the left wing of Obama's neo-liberal Democratic Party, is that after reopening the split between men and women in the Democratic party, Sarah Palin will withdraw as VP and a regular white male Republican will take her place. I.e. after she is no longer needed as saboteur, she will be dumped. They have even opened up a line of betting at Intrade, the online futures market, on whether she will withdraw as VP before the election.

What this conspiracy theory actually reveals is the depth of the alienation, prejudice and ignorance IN THE OBAMA CAMP. The neo-libs of Obama's Chicago-based DNC headquarters are heavily South Side Chicago Afrocentric in their views, as shades of Reverend Wright's rhetoric appear in numerous forms in the left wing blogs now, including anti-white conspiracy theories.

It also reveals how sexist the Democratic party is trending under Barack Obama's leadership. Their inability to grasp that Sarah Palin is indeed the VP that the "old white men" of the Republican party have embraced and will vote for, reveals, sadly, the kind of thinking that made them ridicule the notion of Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama's VP.

If anything brings down Barack Obama's presidential bid, it will be their own misogyny and sexism, not racism.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

fugly Libetttes- must be really hard for you to look in the mirror because the last time I heard someone go off on a rant like yours they were still living in mom's basement, rubbing potato chip crumbs over their face and desperately hoping for a love relationship with someone who has less than 4 legs and all over body hair.

Of course it just may be that the majority of Americans are real people, with real bodies and real brains, not the freeze dried, pancaked and over-coiffed Stepford women of the GOP. But if that's your criteria for running the country, have a blast.

Posted by: lurker | September 5, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse


They wrote her a speech and she gave it pretty well. Does that mean if Julia Roberts read it we should be electing her? Maybe we should elect Mogan Freeman, he saved the world from an asteroid.

=========
Since when does a rant and pit bull attack count as a great speech? Are you kidding? America's sweetheart???????????? Wow- that Hillary wouldn't even be on that list and Thompson and Palin are, is mindboggling. You must not have a very high bar. Or you just admire style (and frankly, Palin's style is pretty low class) over substance.

Posted by: nyc sparrow | September 5, 2008 11:27 A

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

For such a suposedly tuff woman, Palin has been doing a lot of whining about the media. She's literally hiding from them lol!

You gotta love the Republicans, only they could be this deep in scandal before even getting elected. I guess Palin feels really bad about Clinton's or Edward's personal lives being discussed in the media. Either that or she's the typical Republican hypocrite that thinks a scandal is only a scandal when it happens to a Democrat.

Oh well, at least the world saw her boring speech full of empty attacks with no reference to solutions of her own. No wonder the rest of America is pretty much like this thread where 70% of the people hate her and Mccain.

Republicans = eat your vegetables or the terrorists and god will get you

Posted by: Palin is Failin | September 5, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

McCain and the Republican Party are certainly taking the idea that this campaign is "not about the issues" and running with it.

Only one specific mention of a plan for the economy: cut corporate taxes.

I'm all for, and I think that President Obama would be all for exploring a cut in the corporate tax (currently the 2nd highest rate in the world), as long as we come up with a way to get all corporations to pay their share.

The GAO reported last month that 2/3 of U.S. corporations paid no taxes from 1998-2005.

Close the loopholes that allow corps to dodge taxation, then we'll talk about lowering the rate.

McCain thinks that just cutting the rate will help stimulate the economy, but what good will it do if corporations don't pay taxes anyway?

Posted by: JamesCH | September 5, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Obama speech had real content, neatly tied together was delivered well and raised the roof as it was supposed to do under huge expectations. Extra points for writing it himself.

McCains speech won't make any positive lists.

And Michelle did pretty well.

Posted by: toby | September 5, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Also his media people should be shot for the blank green and blue backgrounds the TV had him in front of. It made him look more boring, old, and pathetic than he typically does anyway.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Props to the Fix for recognizing that Brian Schweitzer gave one of the best speeches of the entire thing. His was fantastic. On the other hand, McCain's was one of the worst speeches ever given in a convention. Every time he delivered what was supposed to be a "zinger" he unintentionally winked at the crowd, and I think it was inappropriate for him to call peace activists "static" in his delivery. His "policy" component was empty, and sounded like he was trying to convince himself and his party of its validity, rather than the public. Patriotism in this election means making the decision that is right for the country, and if the country selects McCain/Palin, I am not proud to be an American.

Posted by: c-gull | September 5, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Since when does a rant and pit bull attack count as a great speech? Are you kidding? America's sweetheart???????????? Wow- that Hillary wouldn't even be on that list and Thompson and Palin are, is mindboggling. You must not have a very high bar. Or you just admire style (and frankly, Palin's style is pretty low class) over substance.

Posted by: nyc sparrow | September 5, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

McShame the Vitenamese Collaborator


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g


Just look at the perpetual smirk on McCain's face during those interviews! The only time it alters is when someone takes a position in opposition to his point of view. Then it becomes a stormy, almost deranged, look. Smirks like that are suspect. Sane people don’t do that! I get a creepy feeling just looking at him. I remember that movie, “The Manchurian Candidate.” That would explain a lot about his demeanor. And I am getting sick of hearing about what a war hero he is! That does not qualify you to be President of the United states! As far as I can see, he has been living off taxpayer money since he left high school, free college at a military academy, military career, political career. And there are lots of war heros, including the wives and children who stay home while their men go to war. Look alive, America! you don’t have to have “been there” to know what the man is now. Let’s protect ourselves, or we’ll be living in a socialistic country that only caters to the filthy rich.

Posted by: McCain the Vietnamese Collaborator | September 5, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

No offense, but the crowd at the RNC was so angry and so white, I kept expecting them to produce a noose.

(Well, ok, some offense.)

Posted by: JT | September 5, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

anyone notice that the audience that the GOP are fugly?

Compare that to the hotties in the Audience at the DNC.

It's clear who the good looking are voting for and it's not McSame

Posted by: fugly repukes | September 5, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

I am not confused. I simply prefer my feminine side.

Posted by: Harry Reid | September 5, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

did anyone notice how good looking all the R women were? the crowd shots even, they included so many hot conservatives.

comnpare that to the parade of cows and dogs we saw at the Dem convention. why are all the Lib chicks fugly and the Lib men wimps? Are they confused about everything?

no wonder they don't like Palin, she weighs less than her husband, wears a skirt well and is easy on the eyes. how very un-Democrat can you get? to top it all off, she is no victim. totally contrary to Liberal rules.

sick her girls!

Posted by: fugly Libetttes | September 5, 2008 11:20 AM | Report abuse

I think you should have written that list in a week or two.
Palin's speech was two days ago and I think the excitement of the moment is still too fresh in your mind.
I think her speech will come off very differently in a month or two.
It struck many people as skillful but very nasty.

Posted by: michelle | September 5, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Delete Saracuda. Insert Hillary. Unlike the Republican Veep nominee (notice she deliberately mentioned Obama by name?), Hillary gave a speech that was gracious, moving and generous. She made all her supporters and most of her detractors very, very proud.

Posted by: cate2 | September 5, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Palin #1?? Hers was the only speech I could not listen to until the end -- I left the room 2/3 of the way through. (Admittedly, I was already cranky from the crap that was Giuliani's speech.) And that's not necessarily because of my personal politics -- I thoroughly enjoyed Thompson's speech.

Posted by: Ben | September 5, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Let me consult my numerous advisors about this. I'll get back to you in a few days.

I don't want to seem to be changing my mind every few hours again.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Here is the problem for McCain. At the end of the day, people vote on the presidential candidates not the VP candidates. (If the VP really mattered much Dan Qualyle would have sunk Bush I). So Palin may be today's hot news, as she is a fresh face, but by November the focus will be on McCain and Obama.

And, frankly, it seems to me that its a really tough sell to claim that you are the change candidate when you have been in Wash for 26 years and are the leader of the party that has been in power for the last 8. Especially when the Dems will keep pointing out that he voted with Bush 90% of the time.

Posted by: JT | September 5, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

John McCain: Hanoi Collaborator?


It’s clear that John McCain worked hard to obstruct a 1992 Senate investigation into the existence of American POWs left behind in Vietnam. What isn’t so clear is why he did it. Watch the video and judge for yourself:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g

The War Secrets Sen. John McCain Hides

http://www.aiipowmia.com/sea/schanberg_mccain.html

Posted by: John McCain: Hanoi Collaborator | September 5, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

headline: fix fox up again. Palin paled into insignificance alongside Biden's powerful speech which will abide with me all my days. Fix should give up politics and work for the national enquirer, a place more fitting for his celebrity predilections.

Posted by: Joseph Palin | September 5, 2008 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Chris , while i appreciate your enthusiasm for a good speech (althought Palin's wasn't written by her). You have to also be fair: her "ad lib' was not an ad -lib. She used that line in an op-ed well before she ran for governor. sorry but all politicians have at least 12 "ad-libs" in their pocket case of emergency. So let's not go overboard on the new flavor of the day. until she comes out from hiding and faces the music - the media will swoon. funny, how that happens.

Posted by: wes602 | September 5, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Nearly 125 Shot Dead In Chicago Over Summer
Total Is About Double The Death Toll In Iraq
CHICAGO (CBS) ― An estimated 123 people were shot and killed over the summer. That's nearly double the number of soldiers killed in Iraq over the same time period.


We need to redeploy from Illinois. the pols there are not getting anything done.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

It's not about the speeches, it's about the issues. McCain's VP choice is doing a better job than could have been hoped at distracting everyone.

U.S. Unemployment Rate Rises to Five-Year High

Posted by: Bill J | September 5, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

This is the new America, under Republican leadership.

Look at what happened in St. Paul, media arrested for covering news events, politicians so scared of the citizens they brought an army in riot gear to protect them, random pepper spraying of the general populace.

And now this, their own VP pick and they will not let the media ask questions. They can not let their own choice speak for herself, they will not let the media or the people speak with her.

Take a good look, cause this and more is what we can expect from McCain/Palin if elected, more wars as instructed "by God", more control and less freedom for "our safety".

Republicans, doing more to destroy our freedoms and America than the terrorists could ever do.

Posted by: McShame the collaborator | September 5, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

I have to check out the Schweitzer speech. Not mentioned here, but deserving of mention, IMO, was the six minute barnburner given by Dennis Kucinich in non-prime time building up to the manic chant of "Wake Up America" at the end and nearly a minute's ovation.

It's on YouTube here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVp9cWOcZ7g

Posted by: jackl | September 5, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

following the Wednesday night speech, voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether Palin or Obama has the better experience to be President. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin.

Posted by: can I run against her instead? | September 5, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

CBS is the worst poll, it had Obama up by 15%, then dropped him into a tie a few days later.

The best and most consitent polls are the daily ones, Rasmussen and Gallup. The Rasmussen 5% includes leaners.

Posted by: McShame/Failin 2008 | September 5, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

Are you really that deep in the tank for Palin, Chris? I am very disappointed.

Posted by: Robert | September 5, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

CBS) The presidential race between Barack Obama and John McCain is now even at 42 percent, according to a new CBS News poll conducted Monday-Wednesday of this week. Twelve percent are undecided according to the poll, and one percent said they wouldn't vote.

This is in contrast to a poll conducted last weekend, where the Obama-Biden ticket led McCain-Palin by eight points, 48 percent to 40 percent.

Posted by: bubble has burst | September 5, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

I would add Guiliani's and Lieberman's speeches. I lean Democrat, but I'm plannning to vote for McCain. Even someone as pro-Obama as Chris Matthews had to hand it to Guiliani, saying he giggled at the lines, and it was "one of the fun speeches of my lifetime." Giuliani hit Obama so hard there was really no hitting back.

Palin's speech was a nice performance under pressure, but is overrated. So she sounds like a regular person. So what?

I thought Schweitzer was comically bad; the cheerleader aspect that you point out came through to me, and the content was pretty shallow.

Posted by: David | September 5, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

TV VIEWERS FOR PALIN, 10 PM ET

FOXNEWS 9,038,000
NBC 7,720,000
CNN 6,114,000
ABC 5,050,000
CBS 4,630,000
MSNBC 3,277,000

Posted by: guess who is sucking hind tit again? | September 5, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I'm an old retired guy and I can honestly say it won't matter to me in the long run who wins this election. I do believe however that the current administration has been the worst in my lifetime (born during FDR).

If "small town working class" voters in Ohio, Pa., Michigan and Indiana re-elect the GOP then I don't want to hear anymore whinng from them about their disappearing jobs and livlihoods, the high cost of college and gas, lack of health care etc.

Screw 'um. Cling to your guns and religion. Pray to Jesus when you go hunting for a meal. You will deserve what you get.

I got mine already. I live comfortably in the sunny south on a golf course, got my steady income, my medicare and prescription drug coverage. We won't run out of gas before I go and the planet won't get too hot.

As Johnny Carson used to say - I upped my lifestyle - up yours!

God helps those who help themselves - if you're in deep doodoo economically and you vote Republican you deserve it.

Posted by: toritto | September 5, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Rove's people run Old McCorrupt's campaign

Google Bush, Rove The 4th Reich to see their ties to the Nazis

Why does Old McWarCriminal refuse to release his complete military records? Kerry released his.

Posted by: The 4th Reich | September 5, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

So as long as van Palin showed up with a heart beat she got #1?!? Shame.

Don't full victim to the whining of the Right about media coverage.

Flash
http://centrisity.com

Posted by: Flash | September 5, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA: One house, One spouse, but many, many louse!

Posted by: silly libs | September 5, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I must admit that smaller and leaner is admirable in a platform. but how do you fit your egos in that small space?

I need a removable roof for mine. and Greek columns are a nice touch, don't you think.

BTW, send more money.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Yes, yes, Saran Palin's "speech" was wonderful. Whatever. Now can someone please get her to stop dragging that poor, limp baby under the hot lights and noise around as a stage prop? Doens't Minnesota have child welfare laws?

Posted by: GreenRich | September 5, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I definately agree that Sarah Palin gave the best speech of the convention. So she didn't write it, but she sure as heck delivered it well! She is now America's sweetheart, has the conservative base motivated for a McCain/Palin ticket & overshadowes Barack Obama. That is why liberals & Obama hates Sarah Palin, because Sarah Palin overshadows Barack Obama. Obama hates it, he is being overlooked and is playing 2nd fiddle in the media now to Sarah Palin. Obama's ego can't take this and he will likely explode between now & November showing the nation how much of a liberal partisan he really is. Great pick for McCain in Sarah Palin. There were some really good speeches. Here would be my ranking:
1. Sarah Palin
2. Bill Clinton
3. Fred Thompson
4. Barack Obama
5. Rudy Guiliani

Posted by: reason | September 5, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA: One house, One spouse!

Posted by: California | September 5, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

She didn't write her own speech.

Happy now?

Posted by: chant with me | September 5, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

"1. Sarah Palin (RNC)"

!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Oh, I get it - No obviously insane assertions, no comments.

Still, it doesn't make this anywhere near correct. Didn't you flinch just typing this, though...?

Posted by: mobedda | September 5, 2008 10:53 AM | Report abuse

* Republican legislator Scott Muschany was charged with molesting a 14-year old girl.

* Republican chief of staff Eric Feltner pleaded guilty to showing pornography to a 13-year old girl.

* Republican presidential campaign official Matthew Joseph Elliott was convicted of sexual exploitation of a child.

* Republican Party Chairman Donald Fleischman was charged with two counts of child enticement, two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a child and a single charge of exposing himself to a child.

* Republican prosecutor John David Roy Atchison was arrested for soliciting sex from a 5-year old girl, then killed himself three weeks later. At the time of his arrest, Atchison was an "assistant U.S. attorney" appointed by President Bush's attorney general.

* Republican city councilman John Bryan killed himself after police began investigating allegations that he had molested three girls, including two of his adopted daughters, ages 12 and 15.

* Republican legislator Ted Klaudt was charged with raping girls under the age of 16.

* Republican city councilman Joseph Monteleone Jr. was found guilty of fondling underage girls.

* Republican congressional aide Jeffrey Nielsen was arrested for having sex with a 14-year old boy.

* Republican County Commissioner Patrick Lee McGuire surrendered to police after allegedly molesting girls between the ages of 8 and 13.

* Republican prosecutor Larry Corrigan was arrested for soliciting sex from 13-year old girls.

* Republican Mayor Jeffrey Kyle Randall was sentenced to 275 days in jail for molesting two boys -- ages ten and 12 -- during a six-year period.

* Republican County Board Candidate Brent Schepp was charged with molesting a 14-year old girl and killed himself three days later.

* Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after "sexually explicit" emails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year old boy.

* Republican executive Randall Casseday of the conservative Washington Times newspaper pleaded guilty to soliciting sex from a 13-year old girl on the internet.

* Republican chairman of the Oregon Christian Coalition Lou Beres confessed to molesting a 13-year old girl.

* Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd pleaded guilty to charges of soliciting sex from an 8-year old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.

* Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.

* Republican Party leader Bobby Stumbo was arrested for having sex with a 5-year old boy.

* Republican petition drive manager Tom Randall pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 14, one of them the daughter of an associate in the petition business.

* Republican County Chairman Armando Tebano pleaded guilty to fondling a 14-year-old girl.

* Republican teacher and former city councilman John Collins pleaded guilty to sexually molesting 13 and 14 year old girls.

* Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker is a convicted child molester.

* Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.

* Republican Mayor Tom Adams was arrested for distributing child pornography over the internet.

* Republican Mayor John Gosek was arrested on charges of soliciting sex from two 15-year old girls.

* Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.

* Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.

* Republican Committeeman John R. Curtin was convicted of molesting an underage teenage boy and sentenced to serve six to 18 months in prison.

* Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.

* Republican zoning supervisor, Boy Scout leader and Lutheran church president Dennis L. Rader pleaded guilty to performing a sexual act on an 11-year old girl he murdered.

* Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.

* Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.

* Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.

* Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.

* Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.

* Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer was sentenced to six years in prison for molesting two 8-year old girls, one of whom appeared in an anti-Gore television commercial.

* Republican fundraiser Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

* Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

* Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.

* Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.

* Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.

* Republican campaign chairman Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child and was arrested again five years later on the same charge.

* Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.

* Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.

* Republican Judge Ronald C. Kline pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer.

* Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.

* Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.

* Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.

* Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.

* Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.

* Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced prison after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.

* Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.

* Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.

* Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.

* Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.

* Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.

* Republican legislator Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).

* Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was found guilty of molesting a 15-year old girl.

* Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child.

* Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.

* Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.

* Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.

* Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.

* Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.

* Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.

* Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.

* Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.

* Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a "good military man" and "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.

* Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.

* Republican campaign worker, police officer and self-proclaimed reverend Steve Aiken was convicted of having sex with two underage girls.

* Republican director of the "Young Republican Federation" Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.

* Republican president of the New York City Housing Development Corp. Russell Harding pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer.

* Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was found guilty of raping a 15-year old girl. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.

Posted by: amazing long list of GOP paedophiles | September 5, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

McCain reminds me of an old man who has one story that he tells you over and over like you've never heard it before. When I was a POW...

I respect his service, but talk about milking it for all it's worth. Must have learned it from Rudy. Drive it 'til the wheels fall off!

Posted by: Loren | September 5, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Heehee! I'm long retired and living in Shady Rest in sunny Florida. Last night I might as well have been at the VFW hall.

McCain came across like a pompous old windbag telling war stories - like he was the only POW, how he "truly" loves America (like the rest of us don't) and that he (alone) is truly her "servant".

Oh give it a rest!

He's a militarist through and through. He believes the military is the answer to all our problems, first, last and always.

When Johnny gets that wistful, far away look in his eyes, deep in his reminiscing about his "old soldier" comrades, he is doing what every old codger does who knows his best days are behind him - he's thinking that, even with the suffering, those were the best days of my life.

Posted by: toritto | September 5, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Optimyst nailed it: Palin sounds just like Roseanne Barr.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 5, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA: One house, One spouse!

Posted by: California | September 5, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Loony Libs, based on your replies to several issues, I must conclude that your organizational goals for the executive branch are:

VP = speechwriter
P = speech giver

no other qualifications necessary.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

One can ALWAYS tell the Obama people comments.....Down & NASTY! THAT!! is why most Hillary people will NOT jump on board the PHONY Obama wagon. Mr. Obama split the Democratic Party. Mr. Obama does not care about his country, only his ego. Mr. Obama has followers that sound just like the Gingrich followers of 15 years ago.

*** As if Obama really wrote ANY of his speeches.....he can't even talk without a teleprompter, and I would like to add his show for the convention was an embarassment!

Write In Hillary 2008
the TRUE LEGITIMATE Democratic Party nominee with 18+ MILLION HISTORIC VOTES.

*** Even Palin makes Obama look small.

Posted by: librairie | September 5, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

"It also cemented the fact that Palin is no Dan Quayle or Tom Eagleton"

What on Earth does this mean? Eagleton was brought down by revelations from his past, and Quayle by his continued thickheadedness. (By the way, whatever jokes were made about Quayle, he was a one-term VP who had NOTHING to do with Bush's loss in '92.)

How does a single speech ensure that Palin won't be embarrassed by her past, or that she won't make gaffes in the future? The speech proved that Palin is no Stockdale, sure, but it has no relevance to these silly analogies.

Posted by: Pat | September 5, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

the woman needs to be belittled when you repubs have lied about how "big" she is...

funny thing is ...you know facts...

that is why they have said no interviews cover those facts and hype the anti press paranoia... like an administration with something to hide...

sounds familiar...too familiar. Like this administration before they pushed us off the cliff...now they are passing the torch of their "skills"

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 10:44 AM | Report abuse

I am officially done reading this idiotic blog. First a litany of your eating habits in St. Paul and now you think Palin's speech was the best of the year. Bye-bye "Fix". I can see now the "Fix was in" from the start.

Posted by: cedartrees | September 5, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse


Nice to see where your politics really are, Chris. Palin's speech was written for her before she was even nominated. She was snarky, condescending and mean. For a woman, that's great if you're Tina Fey. Not so much for "VP" as Palin calls the office of the Vice President. "Alaska First," right?

5. McCain
4. Thompson
3. Bill Clinton
2. Barack Obama
1. Hillary Clinton

Hillary is the person who exceeded my expectations. I have a new and profound respect for her and even her husband (who I voted for in both '92 and '96). For a while I thought the Clintons were dragging the Dems down. Well the fact is, they are the New Kennedys and can be counted on for years to come to keep us charged up and focused. I appreciate that.

Obama's speech was very, very good. But I guess I was expecting something spectacular. I now understand he only touched on King's "Dream" speech because again, Obama does not want to be the stereotypical "black" candidate.

Bill's speech could easily be #1.

Thompson is folksy and a great actor. Emphasis on "actor."

McCain, for all his weirdness, has a compelling story. I heard he was a POW in Viet Nam, did you know that? His lack of specifics hurt him a lot with independents and some rogue Democrats. John didn't even say what he would do on his first day in office.


Posted by: tony the pitiful copywriter | September 5, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

belittling and denial might make you feel good dems, but it is not going to help win the election... it is only a waste of your time

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Yes. She is a pit bull with lipstick indeed!!! People are afraid of pit bulls since they mercilessly attack defenseless people such as children and poor old folks. As Ms. Schulz said in the LKL program the next morning, Palin “as governor, she line-item vetoed funding for seniors, funding for health care, funding for children. She actually opposed and line-item vetoed funding for teen -- for pregnant teens.” As a well to do person, she does not need any funding for her pregnant 17 year old daughter! Yes indeed. She is a real Barracuda.

Posted by: hcsubbarao | September 5, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

kingofzouk

Obama worte his speech with help

Palin's speech was written before she was even the nominee then "tweaked" to fit her.

the camapign even admitted it.

so please who are you Palin ...take the facts and amke them what you want..."a plane on Ebay"

another lie....someone get this woman under control

oh they already have ...sequestered in a back room literally being educated by Joe Lieberman (yes Joe Lieberman not making it up like kingof zouk does) like Eliza Doolittle ...

I can see her on Meet the press now..."the rain in Russia falls mainly on the Plane...and I helped an oil economy dependent state approve an oil pipeline ...so that rain is magic from God"

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Remember the average voter doesn't look at details... also the independent voter always says, "I vote for the person not the party." They don't say I vote issues.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Palin? The woman who probably wrote not one word of her speech, who took sarcasm and ad hominem attacks to a new level in political "discourse"? Gag me.

Posted by: Soonerthought.blogspot.com | September 5, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

If you want to really get to know Palin you need to be reviewing this 63pg document of her record, it doesn't square well with her speech.

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

Posted by: fonkyou | September 5, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

46-45 Obama with 2/3 interviewed before Palin speech, obviously all before McCain's - probably mccain ahead by tomorrow

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Not even close this time, Chris.

5. Michelle Obama. She was calm, warm, poised, persuasive, and eloquent under immense pressure. Of the non-professional politicians these two weeks, she was clearly the top speaker.

4. Hillary Clinton. She did what she had to do in rallying her followers in a speech that was both combative, supple, and touching. She was triumphant when she had to be. In fact her best speech actually was the few sentances she uttered when she called for a vote of acclamation to select Barack Obama as the nominee. That was truly the historic speech of both conventions.

3. Rudy Giuliani/Sarah Palin. This squalid duo reminded us of just how tone deaf the Republican party remains after all these years. Their sneering attacks on community organizers heralded a new era of GOP contempt for average Americans and their concerns. The utter absence of issues or other substance in these two speeches suggests that the Republicans hope to distract voters from consideration of the economic and international perils we face as a nation. In particular, Palin came off as well-rehearsed, agile, and empty. Her attacks against Obama revealed her as a light-weight not equipped for the center ring of this contest.

2. John McCain. His speech was historic in that he tried the amazing feat of distancing himself from his own party and president. By failing at this effort, McCain underscored the sad distance between his current incarnation and the independant-minded candidate we first saw in 2000. The McCain of 2008 is unable to even control his own party and was forced to accept a vice-presidential pick he did not want. His call for non-partisanship rang particularly hollow after the rancid performances of Palin et. al. the previous night.

1. Barack Obama. This was the stellar achievement of the campaign. Obama was able to corral his soaring rhetoric and marshall his considerable intellectual force into a compelling speech packed with specific policy proposals. The address was serious, detailed, eloquent, at times angry, and always riveting.

Posted by: dee | September 5, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Unfortunately I missed some of these better speeches, like Schweitzer and Bill Clinton. As a Montanan, though, I'm not surprised that B.S. did well. (A nickname some of my friends here -- both on the right and the left -- have for him is "Energizer Bunny." As for his future national ambitions, a word of warning for everyone: despite his popularity and many gifts, he also has a reputation -- again, both on the right and left -- as a bit of a bully sometimes. That could catch up to him in a national campaign.) Obama was very, very good, but expectations for his speech were stratospheric. I agree that Palin was outstanding, and the #1 ranking fits -- partly because expectations were so low. (Disclaimer: I am a conservative, so she was speaking to me.) As for Fred T., I'll have to watch it again. The first time I saw it I never could get past the fact that, on national television, he actually told a joke about his own party's nominee dating an "exotic dancer." I kept thinking, "Does he think this is a *roast* of McCain?!"

Posted by: acasilaco | September 5, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

"Sarah Palin has given a single speech to a national audience - and she didn't even write it herself. To crown her "America's sweetheart" and a "serious politician" after half an hour of not screwing up seems incredibly premature."

I am supposed to be THE ONE with this qualification. quit stealing my schtick.

Posted by: snObama | September 5, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Obama and Palin have raised the bar, which made for an interesting round of speeches by all. The Dem convention had lots more drama and tension; everything in the GOP convention could have been done away with save the Palin speech, and the net result would have been the same. I would put the Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama speech as one-two.

BTW, I see that backstabbing crybaby Joe Lie-berman is giving foreign policy advice to Sarah Palin. Won't she be shocked to learn that there are only three countries in the world - the U.S., Israel, and Iran.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 5, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I know it sucks to face reality dems but if you have any chance of winning you must. The reality is Sarah is a super star politician. A beautiful women you connects to average Americans. You need to identify it and admit it first before you have a chance of defeating it. Denial is not the answer.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

You thought the pit bull line was an ad lib? Don't you read your own fellow reporters?

I doubt Ms Palin has a sense of humor that can be reported in a family newspaper. That;s why she couldn't say in her speech "I'm an effin' ....." like her future son-in- law"

Posted by: nclwtk | September 5, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Hey moonbats - no one writes their own speech. no, not even THE ONE.

Are you all really that clueless?

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Asper"Girl" Aspersions Revealed?

Asper"Girl" employs the familiar disinfo technique of ascribing to the targets of their campaign the very traits that mark their own illicit activity.

If it weren't for assignments like trolling major media web sites to libel, propagandize and harvest IP addresses with sophisicated "capture" software, Asper"Girl" and her band of paid trolls would have to do something else with their time...

...like maybe pursue real evil-doers instead of trying to hijack political discourse to ease the way for whatever new world order they are trying to impose on the rest of us.

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 10:25 AM | Report abuse

aspergirl

I am all on my own.. in little New hampshire.

see the only difference is I have seen ALL of these candidates outside Palin answer questions and follow ups ...

detailed and hard to answer.

the mnedia is not out to destroy Palin

they are out to actually find anything out about all of this bad stuff from her history...

they shouldn't?

they should ignore all of this...

oh...becasue she is special and it would be sexist to do that...

you are playing by the Bush Cheney playbook...

manipulate make mistakes at the cost of the country and then draw fire toward the press while you sneak the mistake out the back door of a convention hall and keep it under the veil of silence and secrecy...


we will not let America be fooled and mislead by the closing off of information like they have had destroy their country as much as it has over the last 8.

Period...

it is not about Obama support

It is right now about calling out the silencing tactics of Bush Cheney Rove that Mccain's campaign is clearly showing they will continue.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

There was no "best" speech. None of these speeches were the least bit memorable and all will be forgotten by Christmas.

Posted by: nclwtk | September 5, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin has given a single speech to a national audience - and she didn't even write it herself. To crown her "America's sweetheart" and a "serious politician" after half an hour of not screwing up seems incredibly premature. She was speaking to a base that was primed to love her, and erupt into laughter and applause regardless of how funny her jokes were or how good her points were.

Was it a good speech for what she had to do? Absolutely. Do I think it makes the top 5? Absolutely.

Is she now the greatest thing since sliced bread because she can deliver one speech with days of preparation? Not a chance.

I'm looking forward to the VP debates. We'll see how she does then.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | September 5, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

HRC was better than Obama.. way better.
Obama sounded like he took speech downers.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

If Sarah Palin ever becomes president she will be the least educated president ever. The bar keeps lowering people. We must stop this. The lowest common denominator should not lead the country or we will end up with president Comacho in 2060.

Posted by: Woodrow Wilson | September 5, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse


She is being used as a stooge. She actually thinks she is running for VP.

=======
It doesn't matter what the media says, anyways. Everyone knows they are out to destroy Sarah Palin and get Barack Obama elected.

And these forums are filled with Obama activists who pose as real readers. The Obama bloggers post things that the Obama campaign puts out as talking points for its bloggers every day.

This week they're all supposed to post how bad Palin's speech was, to try to confuse people who didn't actually watch it themselves.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 10:14 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

kingofzouk

how can anyone argue about Palin

no one has ever heard her answer anything in her own words...

NO Interviews.

and throw attacks at the press just like Bush and Cheney and the back room scariness that got us here...when they are faced with an inundation of scandals, ommissions, factual indescrepancies, a vacuum of any recorded knowledge on any of the issues we face...

and they call them suddenly sexist because they are trying to sort through the tidal wave of information that makes this woman the worst VP choice the country has EVER seen.

She has no record other than a bad one on the issues we face...and they have made Alaska (a state that has been called the furthest from the workings and challenges of the Federal Governemnt in the union)

i.e. calling governing when a 90 day legislature of an oil economy dependent state passes an oil pipeline...

"energy expertise" while refusing to show her expertise or answer a single question on energy (and oil pipelines and drilling is not an energy policy) ...and while BP is p[aying for her freakin inauguration

is bad dude.

the worst choice for VP in our nation's history...and their covering it up just shows they are leaders with the same character and "ruling" philosophy as the last 8 years...that got us here.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

It seems ALL I will have to do is quote other Demoncrats to make my point. If we discuss Obama, let's just pull out what Biden, hillary, bill and the rest said about him when they were interested in telling the truth. Heck , we can even use his own words.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter what the media says, anyways. Everyone knows they are out to destroy Sarah Palin and get Barack Obama elected.

And these forums are filled with Obama activists who pose as real readers. The Obama bloggers post things that the Obama campaign puts out as talking points for its bloggers every day.

This week they're all supposed to post how bad Palin's speech was, to try to confuse people who didn't actually watch it themselves.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Give me a break -- you thought the pit bull line was an ad lib?

She might be the Republican's sweetheart, but she's American's pit bull -- female, at that.

If her speech was intended to be divisive, she hit the mark. If it was intended to sway us working mothers, it was the worst speech ever.

Posted by: Jayne | September 5, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Palin number 1 --no way. Mean, false, nasty. And more things are found out about every day. 5 or 6 schools in 5 years to graduate college?

Posted by: Ron | September 5, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

"...It is equally difficult to keep a good woman down."
-- kingofzouk

So now you have to resort to quoting Bill Clinton to make your point?

Just who is paying you?

Posted by: Eyes2disinfo | September 5, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Cain McCain on his moralist vp pick.
Parading a pregnent teenager with her boy friend before millions saying it's ok to have unprotected sex at 17. What a disgrace and big time blunder.
The GOP has no morals and will do anything to pimp a vote. Dispicable.

Posted by: albert jackson | September 5, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

aspergirl

you sound just like Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rove and...the rest...

trying to accuse the media of being unpatriotic to hide the mistakes and maipulate the American people...

Mccain and Rick Davis are showing they are going to "rule" just like Bush Cheney Rove

no interviews for Palin.!!!!!

call the press sexist because they are doing the same job on Palin that they did on every other caniddate for the past 2 tears if not longer...

the problem is Palin has sooo many scandals and questions and ommissions and whacked ideas (like science isn't really science if it interferes with her religious beliefs...ugh)

thta it seems like they are piling on because it is an avalanche of resasons why she should NOT be anywhere near the VP role.

and people like you ... use sexism and unpatriotic accusations to throw the press away from the hiding and track covering that the Mccain campaign is presently trying....

the woman has read to speeches written by other people with the right intonation and they say that makes the questions go away?

read my post again

Mccain is showing he will lead and rule and make deciaions just like the Bush administration did...no interviews ...accuse the press and hide the mistakes... out the back door of a convention hall... a new veil of secrecy.

again...

the dark side of an old time connected government rises again...shiver.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

I know the line is subjective, but I would have had Michelle Obama's speech nudging out Schweitzer or even Thompson.

Posted by: John in Mpls | September 5, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Let me make a bold prediction about the moonbat response today:

they will resent that Palin is better in every way than their rock star. they will try to alter the metrics and compare her to their lead candidate. they will call her nasty and then get nasty.

Still no substance from the party of blathering. Deeds mattter, get some!

anyone notice how the Obama bounce lasted one day? he is already circling the drain.

speaking of circling the drain, how about MSDNC? last in ethics, last in truth, last in integrity, last in the ratings. the Air America of cable.

Of course Palin's speech was the best. the Truth finally emerged. it found a way around the left wing media filter and 40 million people watched.

even beat THE ONE.

A miracle. As hard as it is to elevate an empty vessel, it is equally difficult to keep a good woman down.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 5, 2008 10:07 AM | Report abuse

Hey AsperGirl are you 12? Everyone uses speech writers. Go talk politics on tweens.com.

IF YOU WANT TO CROWN 'EM, THEN CROWN THEIR ASSES!

Posted by: James Carville and Dennis Greene | September 5, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

In retrospect... your clueless

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

THEY ARE, WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE.

WE LET'EM OF THE HOOK!

Posted by: Denny Green | September 5, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!

My opinion of him went way down after that!

The guy's great claim to fame, and why people say it's not that important that he's never done anything real as a lawyer or politician, is that he's so great at inspiring people with speeches. "Inspiration" and conveying "vision" to move the masses is supposedly what he really brings to the table for leadership.

To discover that his 2004 convention speech and his other major addresses were written for him and that he uses speechwriters regularly now on his campaign staff, totally undermines the notion that this is his vision. Seems to me speechwriters are reading his autobiography, getting a feel for his personality and writing things for him.

That explains why he could never come up with specifics in all those debates he lost to Hillary Clinton, even though he sounds so great when he delivers speeches. He can't perform unscripted.

His big claim to achievement was giving great speeches! If he doesn't even write his own speeches, what is he? A rhetorical performer? A political actor?

I knew that all politicians used speechwriters, but for some reason it never occurred to me that Obama did because his speeches are supposed to be his great talent. Guess he's just a talent at reading speeches and hiring good speechwriters.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

In retrospect, you will regret your praise of Palin's address. It played very well in the hall, but that's not surprising. The GOP was rallying around one of its own. However, Palin is an unknown to people outside of Alaska and outside her party. In the days before her speech, observers raised many very fair questions about her record and her experience, of the sort Senator Obama has been answering for a year and a half. Gov. Palin also holds policy views that are sharply to the right of center. All of these matters give pause to moderate voters.

What did she do in her speech to allay these concerns? Not much. She came out with a few biographical remarks (she's a hockey mom), she talked a bit about energy, and she mocked the Democrats with a few sharp, TV-ready lines. She was poised and confident before the cameras, and she seemed to enjoy the applause. However, she did not make moderates very comfortable with her as a potential president. She did not leave the impression that she could take over in a crisis. She did not talk about many specific accomplishments in office, or specific plans for solving the country's problems. While people may like Palin personally, that is quite far from seeing her as a viable president in a time of war.

Spiro Agnew could give a great speech to the party faithful. That's about all he did as VP, though. He ended up resigning in disgrace. A stronger VP might have challenged the wrongdoing of the Nixon Administration and helped get us out of Vietnam sooner rather than later. Instead, Agnew just didn't have the stature or knowledge to be effective. Nixon did not like him and really didn't know him well before the election. Instead, Nixon chose someone Strom Thurmond and others in the party would not object to.

Palin is not Quayle--she's a lot brighter than he was. She is Agnew. She is so little-known, even to the candidate, that her greatest appeal is her newness. Obviously, this will not last, and her true character will be revealed. There were plenty of questions about Agnew before the election, but the campaign didn't put him in a position to answer them--keeping him before friendly audiences and away from reporters. Will it happen again with Palin? I hope not.

Posted by: wesfromGA | September 5, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Adam - as someone pointed out, it is completely subjective.

Posted by: Stephan | September 5, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

>>toritto wrote: "Rick Davis intimated this morning that Sarah Palin won't be answering in her own words like other candidates."

After the way the media has piled on Sarah Palin and her children in a disgusting abuse of their journalistic license, to help beat her down because they want Obama to win, why should she talk to them?

The media has made it very clear that they are out to destroy her, and then Obama supporters and the media are surprised she won't talk to them?

The media has been abusive of their forums, using their voices and jobs to distort reality, push a false narrative of a black candidate who has no qualifications for the job of President, and now they have viciously piled on and attacked John McCain's vice president in a way that shocked and sickened people across the political spectrum.

I think it's great that Sarah Palin is keeping them at arms' distance. The media, with their abuses, show that they represent their own political feelings, not the public. They have no right to talk to her.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Things "sweeter" than Sarah Palin

-Karl Rove
-A pitbull with lipstick
-Ron Artest
-Grapefruit
-Bill Parcells
-Drain Cleaner

Posted by: Leon Lett | September 5, 2008 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Palin number one, are you kidding me...

Don't falsehoods and blatant lies make you lose points?

I think the media needs to seriously grow a pair. This is the party that ruined the country and turned you all into propaganda machines, seriously. Step up and go after them for what they really are.

Posted by: dave | September 5, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart? C'mon Chris, that's a heckuva stretch! Republican right-winger sweetheart, for sure, but her attacks on Obama were just stock Republican talking points, and too nasty to appeal to a larger audience.

Posted by: BigBenInVA | September 5, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Do you really think rural people in OH,PA MI nad the west are going to vote for a black man over an attractive white women? I don't think so. And yes, more than ever people are going to be voting for the Vice President. The only way Obama wins is by destroying Palin, and not on issues. Right now he is sending out Hillary and a couple of women governors... that's like using a bee bee gun on an elephant

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:55 AM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart? Are you f*ing kidding me? She did a great job delivering the speech, but the content was nasty and condescending. My mom, Michelle Obama and millions of others are way "sweeter" than Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Adam | September 5, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

America's sweetheart?!?! I just lost my breakfast!

Posted by: Russell | September 5, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

The Fix was a terrible band.

Posted by: Steve Winwood | September 5, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

And I thought the Post was just a liberal rag. How long can I fool them into thinking I'm not a piece of ignorant white trash?

Posted by: Sarah Palin | September 5, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse

Oh yeah, my rankings are below:

1) Obama

2) Palin

3) Schweitzer

4) Thompson

5) Clinton

P.S. Chris of the Fix...Maybe to people such as yourself, the "Eastern Media Elite", hearing southern aphorisms is great, but I'm originally a southerner so hearing southern aphorisms was nothing new or enlightening to me.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Palin's speech, glib charming and filled not with "red meat" but empty calories, made a big splash but it's going to leave an empty pool behind. Charming and sharp, but angry, nasty, divisive and mean in spirit - and offering nothing but bitter partisan rancor. We have an ideological pit bull in the Vice President's office now; Palin's speech may show that she's no Dan Quayle, but she just might be a Dick Cheney with lipstick.

Posted by: Mitch Wood | September 5, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Of course it grated on your nerves you are a democrat. New polls out Palin more popular than Obama... numbers coming

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Palin's speech was like the Gettysburg Address crossed with "I Have A Dream" and a swift kick in the balls.

Posted by: Stephan | September 5, 2008 9:44 AM | Report abuse

As far as Palin's speech goes, shrill, sing-songy, and caustic does not make a good speech.

Posted by: Scooter | September 5, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

I must have seen a different Palin Speech than the rest of you. The one I saw lacked substance and her voice grated on my nerves.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

A lot of you are missing the point. This list is about the top 5 speeches. Not a list of the top 5 people you agreed with. I found it to be pretty accurate.

Posted by: Luke | September 5, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

chris, not enough distance from the rnc there. palin's speech was quite effective, but bill clinton's speech was definitely better. obama's was better. hillary clinton's was at least tied with palin, also due to exceeding expectations and effectiveness in the atmosphere.

Posted by: L.A.l. | September 5, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Oh come on Chris of the Fix...

Obama's speech was the top one of all. Not the very best speech he has made but it was very solid compared to the other speeches.

We all know the media is very fickle and always looking for new media darlings. John McCain was the media darling for nearly two decades, proclaiming in 1999/2000 that the media is his "BASE". Obama replaced McCain as the media darling over the last two years and now the media is looking to place Palin as the media darling, especially the conservative media.

There is a Ramussen Poll (yeah I know its a conservative-Republican leaning poll) coming out that says Palin is more popular than Obama and McCain now. If the Republicans push the "American Idol" factor, then are going to lose a lot independents.

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | September 5, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

I pretty much agree with the rankings here. Although, if I could propose a #6, I'd put up Rudy Giuliani as well. He gave a great speech that got the Republicans fired up and ready for Palin. He was humorous, self-deprecating, and articulate.

Posted by: Nathan | September 5, 2008 9:33 AM | Report abuse

Chris

Forgive this long comment but I am incensed this morning...

Rick Davis intimated this morning that Sarah Palin won't be answering in her own words like other candidates.

He intimated no interviews in the near future...this woman who has read other people's words twice ...one you are raving about...because someone wrote some words and she performed them with the right intonation...ugh.

Yet she will not be answering questions herself in the face of all the questions that have arisen...

They are going to do exactly what the last 8 years have done...

When questions arise ...call out and shut out the press on patriotism, sexism, national security...and throw cover over the mistakes.

Meanwhile, just like Bush and Cheney and Rove and Rumsfeld...our national security (and their mistakes) is slipped out the back door while they can hide the cover ups more and/or the candidate choice that doesn't have the any grasp of ANY of the issues we are facing - outside helping build a pipeline (while her inauguration was being paid for by BP) as "energy expertise" but no one is allowed to question her on that...because that is "sexist"?

While they claim Palin is being attacked for sexist reasons...they won't let her do interviews.

They continue more of the last 8 years again a just straight continuation with Palin's reading other people's words and a ticket who won't let the candidate who is second in command answer questions on her own...in her own words...not "act a speech"

She is the freakin VP nominee for the United States of America and they expect to hide her and limit access that everyone else has had to face...

I am steadfast now in the fact that that this was the worst choice or descision by a Presidential nominee in our history... (on a Presidential level this rivals the war from Bush ...the one Mccain fought for to go into from the week after 9/11)

So this is how it is going to be?!

The press wants to asks why she doesn't believe in man mad effects on global warming...

- no you can't ask that is "sexist and vicious."

Well then hy is there an investigation - again the campaign puts out a statement and won't let anyone ask her directly ...and tries to do exactly what they have done for 8 years...

"don't ask media! look america look they are sexist! and unpatriotic!"...don't do your jobs...

and "we have a right" to not answer the press or have the press decide what questions she should answer...that is pretty much what Rick davis said this morning.
So we are going to elect a woman and ignore...

why she thinks "intelligent design" and church teachings should be taught in school along scientific facts and calculations and math...

why she thinks contraception is bad for teenagers to know about if their parents don't tell them...

or what "expertise" exactly is it outside getting an oil pipeline through a 90 day a year oil economy dependent state legislation...that she has on energy?

or what is the difference between the mujahadeen and Osama Bin Laden ?(nothing...just time and ideological evolution of a fatwa if she didn't know the answer...did she even know that OBL fought for the mujahadeen.)

does she know the history of the Korean conflicts...

does she know the details of the iranian hostage crisis...

what is the constitutional basis for separation of powers...

Why did BP pay for your inauguration as you are calling for offshore drilling but not more drilling where they already have access?

The silence from the McCain campaign trying to cover up how bad and ill-equipped Palin is to answer questions and follow ups and details on ANY of the issues we are facing....

Questions may I remind you, that Obama and Biden and Mccain and Hutchinson and Clinton and any nationally recognized pol out there actually has had to answer many times on many occasions including scandals ...of which Palin seems to have many.

What exactly is she going to do when on 9/11 she is in the White House making decisions on whether or not planes should be shot down while the President is indisposed.

Will she know the difference between Saudi Arabian culture and Iraqi?

Will she know whether a sunni would be friends of Iran or Pakistan vs. Shia?

Would she know how Russia would react?

Would she know how NATO would react?

Would she know where those terrorist came from and what cultural influences would effect them in southeast asia for instance...

or Africa for instance?

This is the worst decision in the history of our nation - Palin as a vp candidate...the person, who like Cheney, in the first year had to step in and have an understanding of the complexities of the world would risk the fate of the world never mind just our nation...and she has not shown any recorded capacity or answers to the problems we face...and now they are saying probably not "really" going to be interviews with follow ups.

Is this how John McCain is going to run our government.

Is this how he makes decision in hiring/appointing?

Is this how his government will be ...no interviews...with people other than him...if questions arise.

sorry for the diatribe...

but here we are seeing that this campaign is as bad as the last 8 years of Bush and Cheney. The dark lord arises again...shiver.

Posted by: dl | September 5, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

McCain came across like a pompous windbag - like he was the only POW there ever was - how he "truly" loves American (like the rest of us don't) and is always her "servant". Oh please!

He's a militarist through and through. He believes the military is the answer first, last and always to all our problems. He did everything last night but salute.

This morning I heard comments about Sarah's "outfit" on a national news station. The commentatior loved "the power jacket" and the "cute skirt with beading"! "So feminine!"

How fascism came to America.

Posted by: toritto | September 5, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

"Just because Obama is the greatest orator of a generation"

I found Obama's speech setting pretentious. The content was merely OK. I have seen enough of his speeches to be weary of them. I have seen plenty of Hillary's too, but I thought hers had some good fire too it. McCain is kind of dry, but his content is OK. My list goes like this:

5. Obama - Flat with an utterly pretentious setting, but still better than most.
4. Thompson - Where the heck were speeches like that during his campaign?
3. Hillary - Emotional for me at least. I always liked her substantive approach over Obama's pretty words.
2. Sarah Palin - I give her this on surprise value. I like the way she deservedly blasted Obama. She could have bombed like Quayle or Admiral Stockdale.
1. Bill Clinton - Good as usual.

Posted by: hdimig | September 5, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

JakeD,
Not really sure where you were going with that...I guess I'm talking about the 2 America's where in one, our elected politicians put there hand on the bible and swear to uphold the Constitution, whereas in Palin's America, it's the other way around.

Posted by: WPE | September 5, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

Palin's speech had a good delivery, however, considering she lacks a deep economic, domestic, or foreign policy experience and the substance factor was non existent. John has shown he is not a serious candidate with his VP choice and nomination acceptance speech last night. His tone and nostalgia sounded more so a retirement speech. The speech was so tiring, the theme of 'change' was taken from the Obama campaign.

Posted by: Lou R | September 5, 2008 9:24 AM | Report abuse

CC: Palin's speech was drafted by some old white guy before he knew who the VP pick was going to be. Granted, she inserted some text but calling it the 'best' speech is putting lipstick on a pig.

I think the 'best' speeches are given by the people who actually are responsible for writing them. Otherwise, it's the political equivalent of an audition. Why not put Patrick Stewart up there and have him read the words?

Schweitzer, Thompson and maybe Clinton deserve special emphasis because they PROBABLY wrote their own speeches. Obama? Hard to say although I'd certainly bet he wrote a lot more of his than Palin.

Palin remains enigmatic. We won't know anything about her until the lone VP debate. All you see now is the shiny wrapping paper the McCain campaign has placed on the outside.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 5, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Chris

Forgive this long comment but I am incensed this morning...

Rick Davis intimated this morning that Sarah Palin won't be answering in her own words like other candidates.

He intimated no interviews in the near future...this woman who has read other people's words twice ...one you are raving about...because someone wrote some words and she performed them with the right intonation...ugh.

Yet she will not be answering questions herself in the face of all the questions that have arisen...

They are going to do exactly what the last 8 years have done...

When questions arise ...call out and shut out the press on patriotism, sexism, national security...and throw cover over the mistakes.

Meanwhile, just like Bush and Cheney and Rove and Rumsfeld...our national security (and their mistakes) is slipped out the back door while they can hide the cover ups more and/or the candidate choice that doesn't have the any grasp of ANY of the issues we are facing - outside helping build a pipeline (while her inauguration was being paid for by BP) as "energy expertise" but no one is allowed to question her on that...because that is "sexist"?

While they claim Palin is being attacked for sexist reasons...they won't let her do interviews.

They continue more of the last 8 years again a just straight continuation with Palin's reading other people's words and a ticket who won't let the candidate who is second in command answer questions on her own...in her own words...not "act a speech"

She is the freakin VP nominee for the United States of America and they expect to hide her and limit access that everyone else has had to face...

I am steadfast now in the fact that that this was the worst choice or descision by a Presidential nominee in our history... (on a Presidential level this rivals the war from Bush ...the one Mccain fought for to go into from the week after 9/11)

So this is how it is going to be?!

The press wants to asks why she doesn't believe in man mad effects on global warming...

- no you can't ask that is "sexist and vicious."

Well then hy is there an investigation - again the campaign puts out a statement and won't let anyone ask her directly ...and tries to do exactly what they have done for 8 years...

"don't ask media! look america look they are sexist! and unpatriotic!"...don't do your jobs...

and "we have a right" to not answer the press or have the press decide what questions she should answer...that is pretty much what Rick davis said this morning.
So we are going to elect a woman and ignore...

why she thinks "intelligent design" and church teachings should be taught in school along scientific facts and calculations and math...

why she thinks contraception is bad for teenagers to know about if their parents don't tell them...

or what "expertise" exactly is it outside getting an oil pipeline through a 90 day a year oil economy dependent state legislation...that she has on energy?

or what is the difference between the mujahadeen and Osama Bin Laden ?(nothing...just time and ideological evolution of a fatwa if she didn't know the answer...did she even know that OBL fought for the mujahadeen.)

does she know the history of the Korean conflicts...

does she know the details of the iranian hostage crisis...

what is the constitutional basis for separation of powers...

Why did BP pay for your inauguration as you are calling for offshore drilling but not more drilling where they already have access?

The silence from the McCain campaign trying to cover up how bad and ill-equipped Palin is to answer questions and follow ups and details on ANY of the issues we are facing....

Questions may I remind you, that Obama and Biden and Mccain and Hutchinson and Clinton and any nationally recognized pol out there actually has had to answer many times on many occasions including scandals ...of which Palin seems to have many.

What exactly is she going to do when on 9/11 she is in the White House making decisions on whether or not planes should be shot down while the President is indisposed.

Will she know the difference between Saudi Arabian culture and Iraqi?

Will she know whether a sunni would be friends of Iran or Pakistan vs. Shia?

Would she know how Russia would react?

Would she know how NATO would react?

Would she know where those terrorist came from and what cultural influences would effect them in southeast asia for instance...

or Africa for instance?

This is the worst decision in the history of our nation - Palin as a vp candidate...the person, who like Cheney, in the first year had to step in and have an understanding of the complexities of the world would risk the fate of the world never mind just our nation...and she has not shown any recorded capacity or answers to the problems we face...and now they are saying probably not "really" going to be interviews with follow ups.

Is this how John McCain is going to run our government.

Is this how he makes decision in hiring/appointing?

Is this how his government will be ...no interviews...with people other than him...if questions arise.

sorry for the diatribe...

but here we are seeing that this campaign is as bad as the last 8 years of Bush and Cheney. The dark lord arises again...shiver.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

and you know what I agree with hdimg as well. Hillary's speech WAS better than Palin's--I was playing with the cards The Fix dealt. :)

Personally my line is this:

(of all the speeches over two weeks)

5 Palin/Biden-tie
4 Gore
3 Clinton, H
2 Clinton, B
1 Obama

Worst Speeches:
5 Romney
4 Richardson (and why is noone talking about his mullet???)
3 Guiliani
2 Warner, M
1 McCain

Posted by: chadibuins | September 5, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

I did not watch McCain's speech last night because I could not stomach hearing him say "my friends" one more time. He is certainly not my friend and Palin is by no means "America's sweetheart." I read your column daily and look forward with great anticipation to the Friday Line. You really missed the mark with this one, Chris. Sarah Palin is the total antithesis of a sweetheart: she is vindictive, spiteful and down right nasty. It is blatantly obvious McCain chose her in a pathetic move to garner some of the Hillary voters, besides pandering to the extreme right wing of the GOP. Although I am not a Hillary supporter she is not fit to even stand in Senator Clinton's shadow. CNN this morning did a fact check piece on her speech and revealed all of the lies she told. Please check the facts and rethink your comments regarding this self-described pit bull. Pit bulls have been banned in the city of Denver. Hopefully this ban will extend to the entire country come November!

Posted by: Denver, Co. | September 5, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

PLEASE DEPROGRAM CILLIZZA BEFORE HE IS LOST TO THE DARK SIDE!

Will someone at WaPo please try to deprogram Chris Cillizza?

Or shield him from external manipulations that may be interfering with his native thought processes? Is this extreme psy ops?

Palin "no Dan Quayle"? A "serious" politician? "America's Sweetheart"? Yeah -- like Chuckie was the new Cabbage Patch doll.

Has his blog been cyber-hijacked with remote computing software that allows content to be altered and disinfo inserted?

Or has Chris succumbed to the same voodoo as has apparently worked a spell on John McCain? Some thought McCain would be less resistant to such persuasions than his opposition. Maybe that assessment was incorrect. See below:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/get-political-vic-livingston-opinion-presidential-psy-ops-wars-whos-got-voodoo


Posted by: scrivener | September 5, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

OK--I know she gave a great speech and completely vaulted the low expectations set for her (Quayle and Eaglton . . .??) but to give Palin top props for that speech full of distortmants and mistruths is not cool. And while she did have great delivery, she had some tics as well.

The order should be:
Thompson
Sweitzer
Palin
Clinton
Obama

Just because Obama is the greatest orator of a generation is no reason to hold other speakers to a lower bar. No one would claim Tiger or Jordan were # 3 just because some rookie had a good night.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's speech was better than Palin's.

Posted by: hdimig | September 5, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Kerry belongs somewhere in the top 5--certainly at least as good as Thompson. I hope Obama has the good sense to put him to work. Palin's was the most revealing speech, even if the word's weren't her own. She could probably read nursery rhymes and still come off as a nasty little gutter snipe.

Posted by: ejwed | September 5, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Chris!! Palin a serious politician? Ahead of great orators like Clinton and Obama?
Methinks the food and drink have gone to your head!!

Posted by: easyenough | September 5, 2008 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Aspercream is getting old.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

And the worst speeches? When that goes up I hope to see McCain's name on that list. Lame, lame, lame.

Posted by: michelle | September 5, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Chris
Get some rest ! Your judgment has obviously been affected by too much time and food on the road. Palin's very lame "lipstick " quip was in the Newsweek piece about her earlier in the week.
Her best speech will be when she tearfully has to withdraw from the race after more of her poorly vetted past becomes known. While all you "liberal media" guys will be blamed , it will really be caused by McCodger's dopey, cynical decision--and poor staff work. Can we say "Eagleton"?

Posted by: jmsbh | September 5, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse


What fun!!! I love meaningless contests like this!!

My five (and reasons).

1) Bill Clinton. He understands the essence of a great speech. A nice slow pace, make a few simple points, and keep the language simple and moving.

2) Hillary Clinton. She has been studying, and can do this when she needs to.

3) Sarah Palin. Her simple delivery of a fairly nasty speech kept the sting, but made it less offensive. A great talent if you can do it. But a bit too long on the nastiness.

4) Barack Obama. His speech had a bit too much detail for a speech (as a convention speech, this is perhaps what he needed to do, rather than hit the ball out of the park.)

5) John McCain/Brian Schweitzer. Brian was a delightful revelation to me. If he was from a bigger state, he might be running for the top. Hint, Brian, move. I want to go against conventional wisdom and say that I thought McCain did a masterful presentation of his theme, that he is for country first. He said it so many times!! And the word faith came out of us mouth almost as often. Again, not a great speech, but what he wanted.

None of this has to do with whom I am going to vote for. Just about speeches. I teach this sometimes, and I always try to get my students to speak slower, have less ideas, and connect with their audience.

Good speakers are not always good leaders, and I don't vote on that basis anyway. Platform, issues. Do we have any? The Republicans did surprise me, because they refused to offer many specifics, just lots of advertising slogans (cleaner, brighter, GOPer). The Democrats specifics weren't always that great, but what the hey.

In the final result I can't vote to put the "black box" in the hands of someone who may believe that "end times" are coming. The MSM needs to ignore the Republican attacks, and find out what this lady really thinks. THEN we can decide if we think she is qualified.

Posted by: PatrickInBeijing | September 5, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

MaryB:

I hope Mrs. Leno doesn't find that out ; )

Seriously, I've gotta go golf now. Play nice, kids.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Palin - America's sweetheart??!! Give me a break Chris... You reckon people find sarcasm and viciousness endearing? Then again, maybe you've got a soft spot for pitbulls wearing makeup...

Posted by: block | September 5, 2008 8:54 AM | Report abuse

America's Sweetheart? Right, just like Anita Bryant was!!! She is so much a sweetheart in fact that Democrats raised 10x as much money the day after her speech than the Republicans....

Posted by: RickJ | September 5, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

Ratings based on the effectiveness:
1.Bill/Hillary Clinton:Obama campaigns future depended on it!if he wins,he can thank those speeches.
2.Sarah Palin:I didnt like it but the do or die speech looks like,was a winner(the media would have ripped her further in to pieces had she failed)
3.Fred Thompson:Set the perfect opening for what was expected to be a dull convention.Did he just wake up?
4.Rudy Giuliani:Very effective in rallying the base.Contrast with Mark Warners pathetic key note.
5.Michelle Obama:It hought the speech sounded very artificial and kinda made up but with the public,looks like it helped to soften her image of an America hating bitter woman.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

You expect me to believe the "lipstick" joke was an add lib?

Please.

Posted by: Loren | September 5, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Don't agree that Palin's was best speech. Biggest surprise yes, but not a great speech.

And why won't Palin go on Meet the Press like the other 3 candidates. McCain's campaign adviser today said she doesn't have to go on Meet the Press or do interviews -- only if it will help them win!!!! She just wouldn't be able to handle the scrutiny in my opinion.

We will see Obama, Biden and McCain on these shows, but not Palin!! What does that tell you! She'll probably be on Leno, tho.

Posted by: MaryB | September 5, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

THE PALIN SELECTION AND THE DIMINUTION OF DEMOCRACY:
IS A SILENT COUP HAPPENING IN THE U.S.A?


Someone below asked the question, why did the GOP pick Sarah Palin?

• Could the Palin Phenomenon be a symptom of a seismic power grab that is transforming our government?

• Is the Palin selection part of a larger plan to seize control of the Executive Branch and make it beholden to another set of decision-makers -- unelected, entrenched, and in charge of the forces of power and control?

• Could this plan dovetail with reports from a Dutch newspaper this past week that the U.S. is planning to strike Iran's nuclear facilities?

• Could the fruition of the "Help America Vote Act," which led to the widespread use of electronic voting machines, the vast majority of which leave no voter-verified paper trail, also be part of this mosaic?

• Could John McCain's vacillations on the vice president issue and his eventual acquiescence to those who recommended Palin be part of a skillful campaign to influence and oversee his decision-making?

• Are we in the midst of a silent coup that is resulting in the loss of personal freedom via the extra-legal targeting of American citizens in an unconstitutional bypass of the judicial system, a denial of due process under the law?

• And is this power grab resulting in the emasculation of both Congress and the Judiciary, rendering those institutions little more than symbolic of power, when in fact power has been quietly usurped by unelected officials of entrenched institutions of power and control?

• Is anyone -- in the media, in Congress, in think tanks, in academia -- pondering these questions?

• If not, can we afford not to be asking these questions?

Posted by: Thomas Paine | September 5, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

And btw, The Daily Show's take on the Palin night (last night's show) was classic! One of the best Daily Shows ever, IMO.

Posted by: Loren | September 5, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Why Obama's "Community Organizer" Days Are a Joke
By Michelle Malkin

Rudy Giuliani had me in stitches during his red-meat keynote address at the GOP convention. I laughed out loud when Giuliani laughed out loud while noting Barack Obama's deep experience as a "community organizer." I laughed again when VP nominee and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin cracked: "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities."

Team Obama was not amused. (Neither were the snarky left-wingers on cable TV who are now allergic to sarcasm.) They don't get why we snicker when Obama dons his Community Organizer cape. Apparently, the jibes rendered Obama's advisers sleepless. In a crack-of-dawn e-mail to Obama's followers hours after Giuliani and Palin spoke, campaign manager David Plouffe attempted to gin up faux outrage (and, more importantly, donations) by claiming grave offense on the part of community organizers everywhere. Fumed Plouffe:

"Both Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin specifically mocked Barack's experience as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago more than two decades ago, where he worked with people who had lost jobs and been left behind when the local steel plants closed. Let's clarify something for them right now. Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies."

Let me clarify something. Nobody is mocking community organizers in church basements and community centers across the country working to improve their neighbors' lives. What deserves ridicule is the notion that Obama's brief stint as a South Side rabble-rouser for tax-subsidized, partisan nonprofits qualifies as executive experience you can believe in.

more at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/why_obamas_community_organizer.html

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:47 AM | Report abuse

The return of the green background! With a big house in the background. Classic McCain. I thought the Heart song was appropriate, too:

If the real thing don't do the trick,
you better make up something quick...

Barracuda!

Posted by: Loren | September 5, 2008 8:46 AM | Report abuse

>>desertwillow wrote: "On what basis did you come up with these ratings? Were the following factors considered? 1) Did the person write their own speech or simply read a prepared speech?"

I know, that's a big deal. That's why Bill Clinton's speech rates so highly even though it was only 10 mins. He obviously writes his own speeches, and it was more issue-based than ideological.

I WAS SHOCKED TO DISCOVER OBAMA USES SPEECHWRITERS!

My opinion of him went way down after that!

The guy's great claim to fame, and why people say it's not important that he's never done anything tangible as a lawyer or politician, is that he's so great and inspiring people because he's such a rhetorical artist. "Inspiration" and conveying "vision" to move the masses is supposedly what he really brings to the table.

To discover that his 2004 convention speech and his other major addresses were written for him and that he uses speechwriters regularly now on his campaign staff, totally undermines the notion that this is his vision. Seems to me speechwriters are reading his autobiography, getting a feel for his personality and writing things for him. That explains why he couldn't come up with specifics in all those debates he lost to Hillary Clinton.

If he doesn't even write his own speeches, what is he? A rhetorical performer? A kind of political Shakespearian actor?

I knew that all politicians used speechwriters, but for some reason it never occurred to me that Obama did because his speeches are supposed to be his great talent. Guess he's just a talent at reading speeches and hiring good speechwriters.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Florida voter:

You watched the GOP Convention Monday night?! What, exactly, was wrong with the "tone" that night? Also, I'm not sure if calling McCain "Bush's twin" qualifies as graceful.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I thought McCain's speech was bananas. He would do this weird move, where, like, he'd strike a serious note, and then smile robotically, swivel his hips, and survey his audience. Bananas!

McCain belongs in the Epcot Center's Hall of Presidents, not the White House.

Posted by: chibi | September 5, 2008 8:39 AM | Report abuse

I'll say from the start that I'm biased, but the Palin speech was too much "paint-by-the-numbers" and clearly written for her by someone else. It sounded like "What I Did on My Summer Vacation" after her Dad finished editing it.
Bill tops my list

Posted by: africaexile | September 5, 2008 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Palin's speech may have been good in terms of delivery and exciting the base - but it completely lacked substance and was the exact opposite of McCain's message the following day - end the partisan bickering.

Plus, I get tired of conservatives, and Gov. Palin, playing the victim card and whining about the mean liberal media and all of the forces that are arrayed against them. Instead of whining about the media coverage, maybe they should do something to earn good media coverage. Any maybe they should stop putting out press releases about the tabloid aspects of Mrs. Palin's life.

Now let's talk policy - did the GOP say anything other than "Let's throw the GOP out of the White House so the GOP can fix the mess it made in the White House." That not change you can believe in.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

Zoe:

Do you hold Obama to the same "rhetorical" standard?

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

I strongly disagree with your selection of Sarah Palin as giving the best speech. I thought it was great for people who were already planning on voting Republican, but I think it was very offensive to undecideds and independents and riled up the Democrats. Keep in mind that the number of registered Republicans is not keeping pace with the number of rising Democrats, so turning this into a base election might not be wise. And to voters who were unfamiliar with Palin, I thought she came across as sophomoric and mean-spirited and probably lost their respect or interest. Obama looked like more of a statesman.

There were other problems, which I wrote about here:

http://www.theseventen.com/2008/09/problem-with-palins-speech.html

Posted by: theseventen | September 5, 2008 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Why was the bar set so low for Palin? When Obama was a community organizer she was a sports reporter. If she couldn't deliver a speech I would be amazed.

I am also surprised, or more disappointed that the mainstream media has retreated after attacks of favoritism and are not looking into claims and her record. This is why attack ads and bullying work to win elections - everyone is so afraid of seeming to favor a side that they allow partial truths to go unchallenged. And just for the record, I want them to dig into Obama's claims, record and achievements just as much ... as well as McCain's and Biden's.

I thought McCain did well - compelling story, but didn't the Republicans claim that military experiences and heroism were not relevant to the election - four years ago? Nice reframing of the debate. I like McCain, and I thought the end of his speech was wonderful, but other than cutting taxes and drilling in environmentally fragile areas, I didn't hear anything about policy. And if he is serious about vetoing any bill with pork in it, the government will shut down because constitutionally the appropriations bills have to be passed before money can be spent - and that includes defense spending bills and highway bills

One of the best speeches ... Hillary Clinton's. She was graceful and forceful at the same time - something Palin lacked. I also loved Biden's speech - set out differences among parties and policies without making it personal. Hopefully that won't hurt them in the election this year.

I was leaning towards the Democrats this year, not because I really liked Obama, but because I am tired of the "only we can keep you safe' politics of the Republicans and the really nasty tone of the last twelve years. I WANT a president who is intelligent and thoughtful. After watching every night of the conventions for the last two weeks, I am more impressed with the Democrats and less impressed with the Republicans. Can the change my mind between now and November .... maybe, but not if they keep in the same direction and tone as the convention.

Posted by: Florida voter | September 5, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

We love sports too! Ours is basketball! Chris enjoy - The hot start of the Catholic University field hockey team.

First impression of McCain speech and the Presidential race between Obama and McCain ...

We have always Respected and Honored McCain's service to this country. But we know who is spinning the message Schmidt and Rove known as the guys that brought us two George W. Bush terms and now they want to sell us a third Bush term.

McCain called for an end to the“constant partisan rancor”. Yet his campaign ads have attacked American Artists by attempting to brand them as just celebrities. Barack Obama is like Ronald Reagan when it comes to support of the Talented Artists of their time. Obama's message rings of a “Beautiful day coming to America” which is similar to Reagan's "Its morning in america again".

McCain's campaign has gone after the media who are asking the important questions that help keep the voters informed about the contrasts between the Democrat and Republican Parties in the most important election of our times.

After watching this Republican convention the first impression was the Republicans rallied their base by attacking Obama/Biden instead of presenting a clear case for voting for McCain. What about their solutions for the issues voters care about? A missed opportunity for the Republicans. Follow up impression common sense now says that its Obama/Biden who can end the “constant partisan rancor” in Washington DC.

When McCain says the last weeks of this campaign will be hard fought, nothing personally, just the nature of the business we know what McCain, Schmidt and Rove are saying – more negative attacks, more slash and burn tactics. When McCain says “Change is coming,” to Washington DC – The voters look at the Schmidt, Rove and Fox News attacking and we know what is coming – A Pit Bull? Avoid The Pit Bull with Lip Stick when The Pit Bull attacks. Who says we must fight on their turf? Let them come to ours. This race is still Obama/Biden vs McCain/Bush.

America can have a beautiful day in November by Voting for Change we can believe in

U2 can have a beautiful day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omFdpnSu57U

U2 can dance with us
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlfKdbWwruY

Join us!

Vote Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: Cooday | September 5, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

Chris, Why do you and others in the media default to the notion that Palin's speech was outstanding without critically analyzing the substance (or lack thereof) of her speech? Spiteful rhetoric is not leadership. I can only hope that the media does not drop all probing reporting on Palin--our country deserves to know who she is, what she believes in, and what kind of leader she would be. Her background should begin to answer some of those questions.

Posted by: Zoe | September 5, 2008 8:27 AM | Report abuse

On what basis did you come up with these ratings?

Were the following factors considered?

1) Did the person write their own speech
or simply read a prepared speech?

2) Quality of delivery

3) Content: Was it factual?
Did it emphasis issues?
Present a future vision?
Was there humor (+), or
primarily ridicule (-)?

4) Was the content memorable?


Hey, be careful setting the Palin bar low. The newly "enlightened" Republican men, like Orrin Hatch and Tom Ridge, will accuse you of "sexism."

(You obviously are into red meat.)

My picks:

1) Obama
2) Ted Kennedy
3) Bill Clinton
4) Hillary Clinton
5) Michelle Obama

McCain's speech was better than Palin's in terms of content (though both lied about Obama's record, as well as his tax plans. Palin blatantly lied about her own record, as well). The Barracuda's delivery was better than McCain's. When the Republican focus shifts to the real issues, rather than belittling their opponents and distorting their records, I will start giving them higher scores.


Posted by: desertwillow | September 5, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Part of a great speech is content. Part of a great political speech is policy, ideas and solutions for problems. Palin's had none of the above. We'll see how she is without a script.

Posted by: NotBubba | September 5, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

scrapster:

Do you consider San Diego, CA a "rural small town"?

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

"The omission of Hillary Clinton's great and widely-covered speech that was the pivot point for the Obama convention reveals that the ability of men to tune her out and pretend she doesn't exist."

Blah...meant to put her as co-number four. Both Hillary and Sarah did a masterful job of uniting the bases, both are effective attack dogs, and both are going to bring women's issues to the forefront. I do think this is the major merit of having Palin on the ticket.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 8:24 AM | Report abuse

WPE:

Are those the "two Americas" John Edwards kept referring to? We now know he can't even keep two lovers straight (or is that two "straight" lovers?).

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

"Palin is America's sweetheart? Which America is that, Chris? Maybe Bible-thumping book-burning America, but not in my America."

Yeah, I thought that was weird. Any thoughts of her being a sweetheart vanished pretty quickly with that speech. (I doubt this is a bad thing. I don't think any voter wants a "sweetheart" to be a mole away from the presidency.)

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you need to leave the St. Paul echo chamber IMMEDIATELY! America's sweetheart?! If you're not an evangelical conservative from a rural small town, you're response to Palin was likely much more measured. I heard the words "grating" and "divisive" as much as any other. And there's no inherent magic in the term "hockey mom." Sorry.

Posted by: scrapster | September 5, 2008 8:18 AM | Report abuse

What do you call a great speech? Just rattling on and deaming people or actually uplifting and addressing issues? You be the judge! The media is something else!

Posted by: pattee | September 5, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl:

Good luck in here ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

1. Sarah Palin
2. Bill Clinton
3. Fred Thompson
4. Barack Obama
5. Hillary Clinton

Bill Clinton only got about 10 minutes to speak, which was another jealousy-driven, narcissistic mistake on the part of Obama. If Bill had gotten a full 20 or 30 mins, he would have blown that convention night all over. But he was stepped on so as to not outshine Biden that night and Obama in general.

The omission of Hillary Clinton's great and widely-covered speech that was the pivot point for the Obama convention reveals that the ability of men to tune her out and pretend she doesn't exist.

Barack Obama's speech was a great disappointment after all that build-up. Wasn't even written well, lack either substantial meaning (being party line recitations) or rhetorical force. It wasn't "workmanlike" so much as uninspired and conventional lacking insight. The only thing that puts his speech on the list is the huge media production of the staging, orchestral music and fireworks creating a movie-like feel to the setting.

Sarah Palin and Fred Thompson both surprised and were good, charismatic and insightful performances. Powerful enough to watch them again, via online video.

John McCain's might have been good. I actually fell asleep after about 10 mins. Seriously, I did. Cindy McCain's speech performance was off. She has a real problem with timing.

The McCains aren't a verbal couple.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:12 AM | Report abuse

Palin is America's sweetheart? Which America is that, Chris? Maybe Bible-thumping book-burning America, but not in my America.

Posted by: WPE | September 5, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Well, Chris, if you say so. I do know who gave the WORST speech and that was the GOP candidate for President. I will cheerfully stipulate that I lean democratic but whatever residual affection I retained for John McCain evaporated last night. As for Sarah Palin's speech, I don't think it came close to the others on your list. For my money, Hillary did better and she's not even on the list.

I guess it all depends upon whether the voters are going to perceive the candidates and their ideas as THEY present them or as Republicans caricature them.

Posted by: dch | September 5, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

It's simply bias that would put Barack Obama's speech up above Fred Thompson's. All of the impressive aura around Barack Obama's was the setting and media production, like the stage, orchestral music, fireworks.

The speech itself wasn't that good from a rhetorical sense. From a substance sense it contained very little but a laundry list of comfort-zone liberal memes, strung together in a particularly uninsightful way.

I think most people who were looking for substance in an Obama speech were disappointed and I think most people who like his rhetorical talent were also disappointed.

What bias to put Obama even as #3 when even the media admitted it was a disappointer!

Otherwise I agree with the rankings up there. If Obama wasn't fifth, he should have been fourth and only fourth on account of the multimillion dollar staging and overall media production that created an impressive aura around his speech.

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 5, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

Palin better than WJC and/or Obama? No way. A great speech can't contain outright lies and drip with sarcasm and spite. Hers did both. It may have been red meat for the wingers, but it sure as heck wasn't a "great speech".

Posted by: Julie in VT | September 5, 2008 8:01 AM | Report abuse

"DDAWD:

You do realize she was responding to questions about her being a mayor, right?
"

I've been holed up in a cabin with about one hour of internet time per day for the past week, so no. I don't hear much about her other than what I saw on cable news and her speech. For her speech, all I really took home from her talk about being a mayor is that she thinks it involves more responsibility than being a community organizer.

Who knows? She might be right. Although I do know that Obama managed more people in his earliest days than Palin did as a mayor of the SECOND LARGEST TOWN IN ALASKA!

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 8:00 AM | Report abuse

"My list:
1.Bill Clinton
2.Sarah Palin
3.Barack Obama
4.John McCain
5.Fred Thompson"
^
Agree.
How about the worst speeches? Form the ones I heard,here is the list:
1.Mark Warner:one of the worst keynote speeches ever?
2.Mitt Romney:He sounded very confused.
3.Joe Biden:Lack luster for a VP candidate.
4.Cindy McCain

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 7:59 AM | Report abuse

My prediction is that McCain-Palin get 20-30% of Hillary voters.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 7:58 AM | Report abuse

Obama's speech was lackluster, the cadences familiar and, at this point, uninteresting. The setting behind him mocked him, unintentionally.

Best speeches? Palin and Schweitzer. Who is this guy and where has been hiding?

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | September 5, 2008 7:54 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Mark about being subjective. Chris's rankings can be defended as well.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 7:51 AM | Report abuse

I agree with the first 4 in the list(though not necessarily in that order)but I would add McCain as the 5th one.
My list:
1.Bill Clinton
2.Sarah Palin
3.Barack Obama
4.John McCain
5.Fred Thompson

Posted by: Anonymous | September 5, 2008 7:49 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

You do realize she was responding to questions about her being a mayor, right?

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Nothing could be more subjective.

Palin's speech was to the choir - the faithful in the room. It served the purpose of consolidating the right. It was excellent for what it was. But it was not a great speech.

BHO and McC gave better speeches to the @23% who are not yet finally decided. The other three you named, plus HRC and JB, deserve mention.

I am a complete sucker for McC's life story and I remember all the times he was a compelling figure in the Senate so I "liked" his speech. BHO was not up to the rhetoric of his best work, but his speech was still quite good for the purpose. FT gave the speech he should have given as a candidate. WJC and HRC left no doubt about their "loyalty".

But grading on unity, emphasis, and coherence, as we would have in Jr. HS speech class, I suspect WJC's speech was best. I would have to go back and read them.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | September 5, 2008 7:45 AM | Report abuse

I believe that most Republicans would say Palin gave a better speech than Obama and Bill Clinton, but what about Hillary and John McCain? She did what she had to in order to deliver as many of her supporters as possible, and he probably gave the best speech of his life (at least Obama didn't have to contend with hecklers ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I'll go with Obama and Bill on top. Both presented clear and cogent points to make their cases.

3 is McCain. Was surprisingly good, especially given the caricature of his speech in Kenner, LA a few months back. Attacked, but not as nasty as Palin. And was quite moving at the end. Palin preached to the choir. I think McCain moved some independents.

4) Palin - to me, she seemed a prick. To question Obama's time as a community organizer seems akin to if Obama were to make fun of McCain for being a crappy pilot. I admire McCain's service, but I understand that there is more than one way to serve one's country. That being said, she spoke well and did excite the base. McCain needed a risky pick. Obama is still threatening to run away with this thing and Palin is a high risk/high reward sort of pick. If she does manage to draw Hillary voters, then this will have been a brilliant political move on McCain's part. I think Hillary voters, Democrats at heart, will see the cynicism and the move will backfire.

That being said, is she going to continue to allow pundits to write her life story? Her speech did little to shore up the questions as to why she belongs in that slot and forcing Republican pundits to do some major stretching.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 5, 2008 7:37 AM | Report abuse

Well, Michael Reagan says that Sarah Palin is his Dad reborn.

Posted by: JakeD | September 5, 2008 7:36 AM | Report abuse

C'mon Chris. Palin gave a good speech, but she can't be ranked higher than Clinton and Obama. You said it yourself, the bar was set very low. As long as she didn't curl up in the fetal position she was going to impress everyone. Clinton and Obama went on to massive expectations, and exceeded them.

Posted by: Cambridge, MA | September 5, 2008 7:34 AM | Report abuse

Palin gave a better speech than Obama? Were you watching? Even Pat Buchanan thought Obama's speech was for the ages - You gave Palin bonus points because expectations were so low? You should change the name of you column from "the fix" to "fixed"

Posted by: rm-rf | September 5, 2008 7:09 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company