On the morning before the Palin debate
On the morning of the Sarah Palin debate, does anyone but an ideologue still believe that she is qualified to be President? No national politician has gone from wildly popular to so unpopular so rapidly. She’s become a drag on the Republican ticket, according to a consensus of the polls. Many conservative Republican intellectuals are writing that they wish she’d just go away. Just announce that her children need her, and go back to Alaska, they say.
About a month ago, at the height of the Palin boom, the Obama campaign told its followers to stop bashing Palin. McCain rejoices whenever Palin is the top story because no one is criticizing him, the message went. Each attack on Palin seemed to increase the sympathy and popularity she had, particularly among the white working class, which the Obama campaign can’t afford to lose badly
“In 1968, we defeated Spiro Agnew, and Nixon won the presidency,” one Obama e-mail told his supporters. “In 1988, we defeated Dan Quayle, and George H.W. Bush got elected. We can’t let that happen again. Sarah Palin is not running for president.”
That was then. When the McCain campaign could no longer hide her from the media, in live TV interviews with a couple of good journalists, Charles Gibson and particularly Katie Couric, she made herself look totally unqualified to sit a heartbeat away from the Presidency behind a 72-year-old who has had four outbreaks of cancer.
Predictably, McCain complained that the interviews were “gotcha” journalism.” He’s far from the only politician to attack the media when they report unfavorable news. Many people still blame the media, not the decision-makers, for losing the war in Vietnam, an example of media bashing that worked. She couldn’t even name a Supreme Court decision she disagreed with, or a national news publication she reads regularly. Gotcha journalism is asking a person – yes or no -- if he has ever committed adultery or stopped beating his wife.
This week, the McCain camp is pre-spinning the results, accusing tonight’s debate moderator, Gwinn Ifill, of being biased. Ifill has been a top-tier journalist nearly 40 years and has never been accused of bias. But this year, she is writing a book about young black politicians who do not march and protest like their parents did. They do what their parents could not do: get the kind of education that was not available to their parents and walk through doors that were closed to their parents. They realize as they do this that they are fulfilling Dr. King's dream, and their parents' dreams. The book focuses on four black elected officials, one of whom is Barack Obama.
It’s possible for a news reporter or analyst to keep their opinions separate from their news stories and analyses. In fact, it’s easier than most people think, a simple matter of editing.
What the Republicans are doing with this talk about Ifill is “working the ref.” They hope to raise enough fuss about bias that Ifill will bend over backward to give Palin every possible break. And if Palin does as poorly as many Republicans fear, they will have set the table to blame Palin’s failure on media bias.
Unless Palin falls completely on her face tonight, someone will say she "won."
Obama is a reader and a lifelong learner
I don't want to defend Obama, but two years in the Senate is better preparation than two years in a state smaller in population that Atlanta, GA. Obama is a curious, intellectually restless man.
In those live interviews, when she had to depart from the lines someone else wrote for her, she showed herself to be ignorant. She couldn't always get the scripted lines right. They often came out sounding like gibberish because she didn't really understand what they meant.
She seems to lack intellectual curiousity, which reminds me disturbingly of George W. Bush.
On The Morning Before The Palin Debate
Let me complete your headline, Ken.
"On the Morning Before The Palin Debate"....I spewed Left wing rhetoric, set womens rights back 50 years, added my pompous, arrogant, self congratulatory enlightened opinion while excoriating a decent woman and then......I got a hip ache!
Ken, a couple of weeks back you scolded me because I commented on 9-11 and how many people have forgotten. You called me a 'right winger' for what you determined was a terrible thought.
Look at what you wrote above. Read your words. Think about the hypocrisy of your comments. Mr. Braiterman, you have added many great blogs to this site and several are my favorites. You have stepped over the line on this one. Enough is enough.
Oh Brother!
"A curious intellectually restless man"
That definition would describe many men and women. Intellectual curiosity does not define success or leadership. Many intellectuals can not tie their shoes. I do not want to be led by an intellectual, I want to be led by a person with common sense.
Your assessment of Palin is exactly the one many of us have about uh-uh-um-uh-uh Obama. Obama is very scripted and when he is not, his message is not inspiring at all.
As far as a lack of intellectual curiosity, it is not surprising that those words come flowing out of your mouth as a former member of the left media.
Your comments are high brow, arrogant and pompous. Your premise shows that in this country the line has been drawn between ordinary people and those who feel intellectually enlightened, superior and entitled to be the ruling class.
It is evident from your rant that it truly is "US" against "THEM". Palin is "US", ordinary, honest, down to earth, plain spoken, common sensical and genuine.
You and your ilk are "THEM", self congratulatory on your assumed superior intellect, proud of your self enlightenment thinking that you know better, feeding lemmings a line of baloney about 'change' and 'hope'. Empty rhetoric on a road to wealth redistribution and a utopian society that most of us will only recognize as America SCREWED UP BEYOND ALL RECOGNITION!
Sarah Palin Kicked Booty
First, I must say I'm pleased with Ifill and her overall handling of the questions. I was pleasantly surprised to say she really was fair.
Sarah Palin was everything her detractors said she was not. Sorry Ken, thanks for reaffirrming my feelings about her. Sarah Palin is the VP this country needs - a breath of fresh air.
Joe made some misrepresentations, frowned quite a bit, and seemed to even be slurring his words at the end. He was hysterical. Great job Sarah!
More later..
"CHANGE" YOU CAN BELIEVE IN!!!!!!!
Joe Biden: "I've been in the Senate for 22? years and I am not going to change."
Now that is something we can all believe in! Kind of negates the Obama idea of "change".
Biden is an honorable man; so much more honorable than Obama . He was inaccurate factually on his points:
March 14th and June 4th Budget resolution increasing taxes, Joe says that Obama and McCain voted the same way. Untrue. Obama voted for increased taxes; McCain did not! Check the Congressional voting record.
Alaska does NOT have a windfall profits tax. The resolution that authorized the war in Iraq DID legally give war authority. The amendment that he quoted applies to the legislative branch, not the Senate.
Braiterman can eat his words, although his sense of self importance and self assigned intellect and superiority are probably attributed in his fantasy from a book he read.
Palin speaks to ordinary people, not those with a twisted view of societal inequities and special interests. She is a regular person and what we need in Washington, now more than ever, is a regular, plain spoken, ordinary person in Washington to offset legislators like Pelosi, Rangel, Hodes, Murtha, Feinstein and others.
Of course, hard Left zealots will never admit anything that resembles the truth without adding their agenda to the mix.
If McCain/Palin lose this election it won't be because about 50% of the population are in favor of a nanny culture similar to the one Braiterman and Obama support. It will be because the Left wing media's concerted attempt to paint a misleading picture were successful.
Braiterman is complicit in that attempt as a former journalist who marches in lockstep with the liberal press!
Let's Have Biden and Obama Read This!
The American dream is a privilege and responsibility that we must all respect by recognizing and living within our means. The delusion that some have that we can all have the same things in life is naïve. Otherwise, I too would have "Uncle Buffets" money and Richard Branson's lifestyle.
I would like to have Warren Buffet’s cash and Richard Branson’s airplanes (although not Steve Fossett’s flying skills). ;)
Sad days indeed...
The media seems oblivious to truth. We have candidate Biden claiming that Obama was pointing out these problems in the financial markets before he was even in office. We have candidate Obama claiming he was warning us against the war in Iraq before he was elected to any office that would matter. Perhaps he was telling Michelle... we have a media that is so enamoured of Barak Obama that it allows distortions and lies to stand uncontested.
The lynching of Sarah Palin by the elitists and towering intellects, like Chuckie Gibson and Katie Couric(you have to be joking) is made transparently clear by the lack of similar questions to her Vice Presidential opponent and to the democrats presidential nominee.
At the risk of repeating myself if the resumes of all the candidates for president were stripped of the names and could only contain their accomplishments, Barak Obama would not be in the top ten...never mind the top two!
Sexist, bigoted and condescending are just the first three adjectives that spring to mind when attempting to describe the conduct of the supposed protectors of liberty in the fourth estate. Several more occur to me but they are not used in polite conversation.
One last thing, like nails on a chalkboard, I find it incredibly irritating to read liberal rants about the intellect of conservatives. Neither George Bush nor Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney are intellectual light weights. Among your political peers and fellow Kool-Aid drinkers it may be fashionable to opine (offer an opinion...for you psuedo smarties) about those simple minded republicans. For you self described curious intellectuals here is a math question for you ? If we are about to assume $700 billion in questionable debt and your presidential ticket is proposing a trillion dollars in new spending, how do 95% of us wind up with a tax cut....HMMMMMM...must be new math!
Scott
If the debate was a prizefight
If the vice-presidential debate was a prizefight, the headline would be "Veteran wins on points; game challenger stays on her feet, goes the distance."
The bar was set so low for Sarah Palin in the build-up to the debate that she achieved one or her goals easily: she calmed growing fears in the Republican base that she would drag the ticket down.
Her other goal was a little higher, and early reactions and polls say she missed it. She did not convince the growing number of people who think she is not (yet) fit to be president to change their minds.
First, she said she had only been at this five weeks, and therefore was not going to answer the quetions. She would just speak directly to the American people.
Then, it emerged that Biden was more familiar with McCain's record and proposals than she was. She outlined McCain's $5,000 tax credit for health care, and Biden told the rest of the plan and picked it apart. Palin could say nothing in rebuttal because she had already said what she knew.
She did not know anything about the changes to the bankruptcy law, a pure hockey-mom issue that affects everybody with a mortgage or a credit card. What's more, Biden had supported the banks on that issue, not the ordinary Americans. One of the major credit card companies has its headquarters in Delaware. Palin didn't know about that, either, or she would have said something.
When the questioning turned to foreign affairs, she continued looking and sounding poised, but the quality of her answers got worse.
And by the way, being intellectually curious has nothing to do with being an intellectual. An intellectually curious person is one who is always looking to learn more about how the world works because he/she knows he will never know it all. I know some liberals think conservatives are stupid, but I've never said that and don't believe it for a minute. My first job was with one of the greatest conservative intellectuals in the 20th Century, U.S. Sen. Sam Ervin of Watergate fame.
Former Journalist (So-Called) "Loses on Analysis"
Oh Ken,
The bar was set so low for Palin? You folks have given her the shaft since she was announced. The once principled profession, journalism, raped by those whose character flaw is a lack of ethics, intellectually honesty and delivery absent of bias, has demeaned Palin and excoriated her on the color of the tissue that she uses.
You support an unqualified presidential candidate who would not have any of those answers if it were not for his handlers. Palin speaks very plainly and she has been in this only 5 weeks. She is genuine. Biden is entrenched in the elitist Washington leadership. Obama is a demagogue and a dangerous, shallow, empty soul who is the pied piper of the weak minded and special interests.
Biden was inaccurate (see post above) and twisted the facts like most politicians. It is time for a Mr. or Mrs. Smith to go to Washington, not just the wealthy who promise the world and deliver crumbs.
As far as intellectual curiosity is concerned, anyone with ambition and drive can be an intellectually curious. You have to want to excel. When you think you know everything, you stop learning. Obama has drive but no curiosity; his views are dogmatic and doctrinaire. Palin is a breath of fresh air with none of the obvious pretense or elitism evident in Braiterman's ridiculous post and Barack Obama's personality.
Joe Biden's 14 Debate Lies
Joe Biden's 14 Lies
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false
8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.
9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.
10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.
13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”
14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.
Trust either one of these guys? No way.
Sarah Palin is a bright ray of sunshine on the craggy GOP. Somewhere I hope Ronald Reagan is smiling.
FACTS do not matter to progressives...................,
Judy, progressives are interested in one thing: WIN AT ANY COST, ANY WAY.
They see the last eight years as a terrible time in our history due to the war and some perceived notion that somehow, their right to privacy has been violated (although it really has not). They also see those who work hard and have that drive leading to the intellectual curiosity (that Braiterman champions) as evil and greedy when it comes to building wealth.
Progressives do not understand that self reliance, self determination and taking RESPONSIBILITY for one's own choices and challenges is the spirit that built this great country.
Instead, they are constantly searching for the "Why?" when they perceive a problem. This paralysis by analysis leaves them mired in self impotency and societal introspection.
You hear progressives speak about "democracy" when our government, as designed by our forefathers is a "republic". The reason is that in a pure "democracy" the people would decide the type of government by popular vote and would determine the presidency by popular vote. One vote could determine one sector of the population imposing it's will on the other.
Progressives believe that one's success and wealth needs to be shared and this should be mandated by the government. Their understanding of competition, personal drive to attain goals and independence is minimal as they focus on the whole versus the individualism. Sounds a bit Orwellian, like something out of 1984.
Their constant push to be involved in people's bank accounts, behavior, thought process (political correctness) and choices flies in the face of their agenda supporting a woman's right to "choose". You have to hand it to them though, they are able to build consensus between fringe special interest groups and collect the naive, convincing them to unite because they are some sort of 'victim'.
The thing they do best is pit one group of people against another economically. Progressives are masters of nuclear political rhetoric as illustrated on this blog by Braiterman.
Most believe that they are above the rest of the population in their analysis of how we all should live.
Judy, you and I and about 50% of the population just want to live our lives, not be taxed to death, be free to make choices on everything from free speech to economic independence to defending ourselves. Progressives want to change the world to some vision of cradle to grave government nanny state where the government decides your destiny.
And that is it, Judy, DESTINY! Will we be allowed to forge our own path, make our own decisions, determine our futures or will our way of life, our self determination, our hearty individualism be morphed into sameness; the kind we saw in Beijing opening ceremonies, where mindless robots performed to precision in lockstep to a higher authority.
Your list is accurate. I doubt it will get more than a crickets response. Progressives are not interested in the truth, just the journey to HELL in a hand basket!
Thank you, Ken
I agree, she did well just because she did not do much damage. I personally, don't think that's enough to be vice president, but I have high standards. And it did bother me a lot when she said she didn't want to answer the questions, she wanted to talk to the American people. I think someone should have told her what a debate was before they put her in one. Talking directly to the American people is called a press conference, she should know the difference. A press conference is also different from an interview, which is not her strong suit, she is not good at answering questions. Whoever is in charge of that circus is not doing a very good job.
Also, I completely understand the "lack of intellectual curiosity." This is a natural human trait, how Palin and John McCain both managed to overcome it is beyond me. Take your average 5 year old studying a grasshopper, asking why, how, where, etc. That translates to an adult asking why is there climate change, how do we fix it, where can we look for more information. One of the best resources we have as adults is the internet - all the information in the world is here. Having a President that flatly refuses to learn to use one scares me. It comes across as "I know everything I need to know, I am not going to learn anymore."
My hips hurt too, Ken, that does not make us old. Refusing to learn, that would make us old.
Liberal Lovefest
What a liberal lovefest.
Show me how she lacks intellectual curiosity. The only people who I know that lack intellectual curiosity live for the moment or are elderly people who, for instance are afraid of a computer. I know people who are not intellectually curious, they generally fall in lockstep repeating well rehearsed talking points from a political point of view. You know, like: "Bush lied, people died" or "The World Trade Center was an inside job". I guess we could put a lot of Hollywood types in that category.
That is a broad generalization. Because Obama attended an ivy league institution, he is intellectually curious. That assumption is closed minded, elitist and exclusionary to others who may have taken 10 years to complete college due to other circumstances.
It means nothing. Because Palin did not name a particular periodical that she read means nothing as well.
I will tell you in my case that I read National Review, New Republic, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, Newsweek and US News & World Report as well as several newsletters from liberals and conservatives alike. It is difficult to read between the lines to see what is really the truth!
Obama has no more experience than Biden and he is at the top of the ticket. I never thought I would say this but I would rather see Hillary president than that demagogue!
Intellectually curious
You forgot those who don't need to learn anything new, because they already read their bible.
And all the 70 + year olds I know use a computer for communication and research. Do you really want a president who doesn't think he can learn?
Intellectual curiosity has nothing to do with what schools you went to, it is just there. Except with the Republican party this year, because they already know it all..
Intellectually curious
You forgot those who don't need to learn anything new, because they already read their bible.
And all the 70 + year olds I know use a computer for communication and research. Do you really want a president who doesn't think he can learn?
Intellectual curiosity has nothing to do with what schools you went to, it is just there. Except with the Republican party this year, because they already know it all..
I agree 100%. Matt Damon
I agree 100%. Matt Damon summed it up well in this video about it all sounding like a bad Disney movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anxkrm9uEJk
She is almost condescending in many of her interviews.
I love how she calls him "Charlie". I've never heard anyone call Charles Gibson "Charlie". She has no idea wtf the Bush Doctrine is, just tries to guess at the question, then he tells her wtf it is. She is a MORON. She does not answer his question, she skirts the issue (no pun intended here really). Charles Gibson says "I'm sorry, I got lost in a blizzard of words there..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z75QSExE0jU
This one is good too, has the other Gibson interviews, which she not only received the questions beforehand but was coached on the answers and you can tell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNPGnZurs1k
It frightens me that she could be President. People that say that she isn't running for President, but we need to be prepared for the VP to be the President. The odds that McCain would live through his first term are not so good. He's had how many bouts of cancer already? How old is he? Seriously.
Older Democrats and Republicans won't decide this election. It will be the young Independants.
It Frightens Me That.......
You are a voter and you think as you do, Daniel.
Obama is a bad conspiracy movie with all of the trappings of a constituency with that same gleam in their eye that you see in evangelicals or the Manson girls.
In a year when:
Their is an unpopular president in office; one that the other side has ridden rough shot on for 8 years.
- There is the worst economy since Jimmy Carter.
- There is a candidate like McCain with no charisma and a total lack of ability to make a speech,
- Gas and oil prices are through the roof
- There is a war that, albeit we are winning, was screwed up for the first three years.
- Democrats have run the most negative campaign in history
- Every wacko fringe group and left wing blogger spreads disinformation like herpes.
Obama should be leading 70%:30%. Instead it is a toss up or maybe Obama 52%:48% at the worst. It shows you that almost half of the population sees the radical demagoguery of Obama and the danger he poses to this country.
It appears that the truly clueless are gaining in numbers. Daniel, take your rightful place as part of the robotic uninformed culture of Obamamania! By the way, Matt Damon is far from "intellectually curious".
Oh My God..
Look out:
Young "Independants" who base their values on Hollywood's opinions? Daniel, that is truly frightening.
We are in SERIOUS trouble, if that's the case.
Palin condescending? I guess you enjoy being talked down to (and lectured) by Obama.
How telling that you pick
How telling that you pick one part of my post and attack just that, but you didn't read it. I agreed with Damon that it sounds like a bad Disney movie. Doesn't matter what I think about Matt Damon HE IS RIGHT.
How about the other videos I posted? What do you have to say about those interviews? How about this one?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMypXCUWMw
She can't hide behind her scripts anymore. Once she gets flustered she reboots like a computer and throws up whatever she was fed from her advisors. The younger generation can see this. I want someone that knows what they are talking about. Someone that I trust. I don't trust McCain anymore ( I voted for him the first time he ran for President btw ), and Palin sealed the deal. Say what you want about Obama, but at least he had the decency to address McCain as JOHN in the debate and actually look at him, while McCain didn't turnin his general direction once, not even when he was busy laughing at Obama. That tells me a lot about a person.
Again, Right Wingers taking
Again, Right Wingers taking something and twisting it. Just because I share a view on something doesn't mean I idolize Matt Damon. Give me a break.
Obama doesn't talk down to anyone. He is thorough and explains his train of thought and method of thinking. I like that. I think it's refreshing. I liken it to one of the best refs in all of football Ed Hochuli explaining his calls a bit more in detail to give fans more insight into what is going on.
Maybe you think he is talking down to you because you think you know it all. That wouldn't surprise me.
Oh, yeah, I'm such a "Right Winger..!"
Maybe you'd be able to breath Daniel, if there wasn't so much cake up your nose.
Selective Amnesia
I guess one of the many talents liberals possess is the ability to put aside the contradictions presented by their candidates while simultaneously pointing out the same shortcomings in the conservative.
Sarah Palin described by several people in their posts as a lightweight, seem to have forgotten Obama's UMM fest at the debate in front of evangelicals earlier this year. Who can forget his truly inspiring answer about when life begins...somewhere above his paygrade??? I think a president who can answer that question with conviction is a better choice.
The office of president has only a few constitutional requirements, but we the people should expect that the people who run for this office have the experience and moral courage to make tough decision, in other words it is not an office we should consider giving to someone who on the most important issues votes present. They say you should judge people by the company they keep and that actions speak louder than words. Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Frank Raines, Tony Reszko are these the people that should surround the next president?
If a Republican went to a church that promoted as a part of it's creed promotion of a god that only worked for the benefit of white people and suggested that our country deserved the evil perpetrated against us on 9/11 the outrage from the media and most americans for that type of bigotry, racism and unpatriotic behavior would be loud and unceasing. Yet why is there no outrage at the people surrounding Obama or condemnation for what amounts to a twenty year history of listening to wildly racist sermons...who is Barak Obama??? Someone needs to continue to ask these questions until we learn the truth!
Danny Boy
Your Obama opinion is not surprising. He does talk down to people and he wants cradle to grave entitlements for every fringe special interest group. I have viewed your website. It speaks volume about your maturity level when it comes to judgment.
I don't know it all but I do know that we can not allow zealots to run this country and take it to Hell in a hand basket. You appear to be a card carrying member in that club.
Grow Up Danny Boy!
Welcome Dan
As you will see there are a few who post here who consistently condescend. They are much wiser than you or me. The first time I met Senator Obama, I was blown away by how down to earth and common he was. What was not common was his interest in listening and taking the time to carry on discussions with anyone who was interested in engaging him. Of course, Bill and his ilk will tell you that he is condescending because they disagree with his views and think that there is a some huge media conspiracy to get him elected. We are all too stupid to think for ourselves so it must be the media forcing us to like Obama and what he wants to do.
So, we have someone who can effectively think and communicate and yearns to give people in our country the opportunity to succeed.
And then we have someone who has a strong history but has shown REALLY poor judgment over the last few months and has been erratic at best in sharing his vision for the future. Not to mention that his campaign has been filled with so many lies that even he is uncomfortable shaking Senator Obama's hand or making eye contact.
So, idealogies aside, which of those two people would capture your attention?
Oh- and don't take the Danny Boy comment too hard. They once commented that I must be 13 (username) since I did not agree with their views.
I don't think so...
Being the consummate inner circle kind of guy you say you are, I'm sure Barak is still somewhere in deep thought considering some of the more Zen aspects of the ideas and feelings you no doubt shared with this icon of American politics.But then again somehow...I don't think so! Your candidates greatest thoughts are how he can escape the next 25 days without explaining his questionable associations and limited resume until after the inauguration. The only good news is that if he wins, you will be stuck with him too!
Hmm
If he is spending the next 25 days focused on how he can avoid explaining to people his questionable associations, then he is a fraud. However, that point is moot since he has explained over and over again these associations. It will never be thorough enough for some people such as you, Scott, but it is what it is. Why is it that the vast majority of people on all sides of politics in Chicago have little to no issue with his relationships? Are they dimwitted?
I hope that he is focused on our economy and seeking advice from economists, historians and the global community on how best to tackle what is going on with this crisis. Then, come November 5th, if things have not stabilized, he had better be working with everyone to get things done, not waiting till January.
I agree with you that it is odd that Senator Obama is not leading 70/30 but I think it has more to do with people being wary of a democratically controlled gov't (getting Pelosi out of any position of power would sway things in a greater way for Obama than perhaps anything else- she is scary) than it is has to do with Obama's associations. Our country is cut between two different idealogies. That is fine. For those of us in the middle, we want leadership. That is what Senator Obama brings and clearly what Senator McCain lacks.
My Bad...
I assumed that being the consummate insider, you were aware of how crooked Chicago politics are. By the way you can't have a corrupt political system without the dirty politicians that make it all work and as you pointed out they are not troubled by Obama and business as usual.The more you know the less you like what you see....25 days and counting.
It is hard to say anything when you see this, except...........
Where is Boxer, Feinstein, Waters, Michelle Obama, Hillary and the rest of the hegirls.
Oh don't forget Shaheen and Shea-Porter. Come on Judy....get with the program and include the whole team of witches!
Welcome back tmiss
No, I did not say that you must be 13 because you did not agree with me. Check the post, it referred to the maturity of your demeanor. Let me give you an example:
"I was blown away by how down to earth and common he was". Good, you were blown away by fluffy rhetoric and what 'captures your attention'. Neato!
Bill
It is people like you that are the problem in today's society. You belittle, chastise and act so superior. Why don't you spend your time focusing on making our country a better place instead of playing the bully? Perhaps it is your sad life that leads you this way.
There is nothing wrong with a healthy debate on issues. But dealing with idiots who only attack people is silly and a waste of my time. Get a life.
Glass Houses...Timms
Perhaps you will recognize the words below...
"As you will see there are a few who post here who consistently condescend."
"They are much wiser than you or me. Of course, Bill and his ilk will tell you that he is condescending because they disagree with his views and think that there is a some huge media conspiracy to get him elected."
"We are all too stupid to think for ourselves so it must be the media forcing us to like Obama and what he wants to do.It will never be thorough enough for some people such as you, Scott..."
"It is people like you that are the problem in today's society. You belittle, chastise and act so superior. Why don't you spend your time focusing on making our country a better place instead of playing the bully? "
"Perhaps it is your sad life that leads you this way."
"There is nothing wrong with a healthy debate on issues. But dealing with idiots who only attack people is silly and a waste of my time. Get a life."
Timms, it is often easier to see the faults of others then the ones staring back at us in the mirror!
Too Funny
Scott,
I have enjoyed reading your comments in the past, even if I disagree with some of what you say. Howver, apparently you have taken a page from the two political campaigns by merging comments and creating your own context.
Here is what I wrote:
"If he is spending the next 25 days focused on how he can avoid explaining to people his questionable associations, then he is a fraud. However, that point is moot since he has explained over and over again these associations. It will never be thorough enough for some people such as you, Scott, but it is what it is."
Here is your edit:
"We are all too stupid to think for ourselves so it must be the media forcing us to like Obama and what he wants to do.It will never be thorough enough for some people such as you, Scott..."
Wow- that was good. I actually had to go back to my posts because I didn't remember chastising or belittlting you. As evidenced, I did not.
So, not sure what you are getting at here, Scott. The remainder of your comment was my comments directed at Bill. He deserved my heartfelt response. I did not deserve your cherry-picking.
So here is an important question for anyone to answer. Will you support whomever is elected as President and hope that they will effectively lead our nation?
Direct quotes unedited and untouched...
I did not alter your words or take them out of context. All of the quotes I used were cut and pasted directly from your posts. It seems the respect you wish conservatives to show you in these discussions is not something that comes easily to you either.You accuse others of spewing venom and engaging in malicious attacks. I just thought that review and reflection might be good for the soul...to answer your final question, when I agree with a president I say so, when I disagree, I reserve the right to do so with as much gusto and zeal as I am able to muster...
Scott
Words
So, in your opinion you did not edit my comments? If I recall, you were a history major so you must have had a lot of experience writing papers. What you did was editing. You put one sentence from one paragraph with another sentence from another paragraph and made them read as if they were in the same context. Sorry, I do not buy your argument.
That being said, I am a firm believer in review and reflection, so my apologies to you, Scott, if I seemed malicious towards you. That was not my intent. It was aimed at Bill.
And I voice support and disagreement as needed, too. What bugs me is the lack of respect given to our presidents and other leaders who believe they are acting in the best interest of our country. I do not agree with President Bush on much, but I will always treat him with respect because I believe that he honestly tried to do what was best for the country most of the time.
By the way, I am not calling you or anyone else out on this- just a topic for conversation.
I didn't put any words in your mouth...
I did select the quotes which best illustrate my point. They were in context and were word for word as you intended them. Although, if we were face to face I doubt you would speak to Bill or I in that fashion. Not one of the very bright people on this blog would speak to any other in the same fashion as we write. We all fall into a very sad trap in the blog world of perpetrating the same stereotypes we claim to abhor.
Many of the posts I admire most build a solid foundation of facts upon which an incontrovertible case is built. Bill is exceedingly good at making his case . Facts are facts, however, intelligent people can view a set of facts and come to very different conclusions. That is how the knowledge base of mankind continues to expand. For intellect to grow it is imperative to challenge what we know and believe. The problem is that it has become quite fashionable to ignore facts that are inconvenient or don't fit with the party line. It is at that point that intelligent conversation and in many cases behavior go right out the window.
Case in point...it is a fact that reductions in the marginal tax rates result in higher revenues to the government . This is a basic truth of dynamic economic principles. Obama's tax plan calls for the elimination of the Bush tax cuts which will result in an increase in marginal rates at a time when capital is in short supply. The result will be a contraction in revenue. Obama's plan further calls for tax cuts to people who pay no federal income tax. These are facts. Yet in interview after interview the lie that 95% of Americans will receive a tax cut is repeated verbatim. It is hard to understand how anyone with a lick of sense could repeat those words as facts. Further with nearly one trillion dollars proposed by Obama in new spending how can anyone make a case that this candidate understands how to reinvigorate our economy.
When challenged about the Obama tax plan we hear an endless litany of intellectually dishonest statements that go something like this... 8 years of Bush's economic policies of tax cuts for the rich have ruined our economy. The truth is revenues to the federal government are at an all time high. The ruination of our economy has been caused by republicans and democrats spending money as fast as they can print it. But I digress...good debate is point and counterpoint, to often today it has devolved into charge and counter charge.
Scott
Well Said
Other than the fact that I still disagree with how you used my statements, I think I agree with almost every other point you state. I am not voiting with Obama because I believe in his tax plan. I agree that those paying taxes who earn under $250k deserve a break. I also oppose going back to Clinton level taxes on the higher earners. Bottom line- cut all of the waste and we can tax everyone at a lower level.
Glass House....Get The Windex
Timms13,
I will tell you why I attack, because you start the attack. Read your post below:
"It is people like you that are the problem in today's society. You belittle, chastise and act so superior. Why don't you spend your time focusing on making our country a better place instead of playing the bully? Perhaps it is your sad life that leads you this way.
There is nothing wrong with a healthy debate on issues. But dealing with idiots who only attack people is silly and a waste of my time. Get a life."
Of course that is a balanced post that demonstrates your support of 'inclusion'. 'diversity of opinion' and 'tolerance'.
What have you done for your country????? How do you know what I have done?????
Then you go on to mention me in two more blog posts and your demeanor is that of a person with self assigned smug superiority.
What we can do to make our country a better place is to stop the whiners and 'victims' from ruining self determination and self reliance. What we can do for the country is to stop our ethic of hard work from falling into mediocrity and a malaise of feeling entitled.
Of course, that is the opinion of a person who you consider an "idiot". Read your words, look in the mirror and see yourself for what you are through your writing. Then I ask you......who is the bully????? Who is the intolerant one???? Read your words.
Angry much?
Clearly having an issue with the timeline here...
Bill,
You state that I started the attack. I commented after you once again attacked me. I read my post and it took place after once again you acted like a condescending jackass.
For all I know, you might be a good or even great person. But you sure act like an ass here when someone else disagrees with you. You attack the person first. Then, when you get called on it, you think that person has attacked you first. Read the timeline, Bill.
I called it like I saw it. The only communications I have had with you have started with you attacking me. Forgive me for not being a pushover and attacking back. You are right- that was wrong of me. I should have turned the other cheek but occassionally I get tired of people bullying.
So, if you want to have a healthy debate on issues, I'm game. If you want to tell me that my demeaner is that of a 13 year old or that my thoughts amount to "neato," then there is no point. That seems to be a common means for you dealing with people that disagree with you on these blogs.
As I stated to Scott, I did reflect and I agree that this is a waste of anger and is not healthy for me or anyone else for that matter. My apologies for attacking you even though it was in self-defense.
That’s the kicker, Ken. “Sarah Palin is not running for president.” Yet, this seems to be lost on many as they pick her apart for being unqualified.
She’s better qualified now than Obama himself will be in 4 years, and he’s running for President.
What Democrats have done (via the biased drive-by media) is to create a wave of sympathy for Ms. Palin that will redound mightily when she speaks tonight and reveals a character and ability that will put her adversaries to shame. Of course they have no shame, so it will be up to the public to chasten them – by choosing to no longer buy or listen to their brand of recycled horse manure.
I’m sure Ifill will be a fair and balanced moderator. Time will tell. Maybe she’ll only sneer at Gov. Palin like Couric did. Maybe we’ll get more questions about the Bush doctrine. In a related development, it was announced that Ted Kennedy would be the honorary judge at a debate between Association of American Distilleries and the Women’s Christian Temperance Union. (Yes, I borrowed this line).
CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. all elevate the inexperienced Obama to God like status – “He Who Does no Wrong, The Anointed One.” No, he didn’t mean anything at all by that lipstick on a pig remark. Media Bias? What Media Bias?