What else didn’t Sarah Palin know? It’s starting to leak out of the McCain camp now. Check out this site and Bill O’Reilly video. It shows that Sarah Palin was abhorrently uninformed about basic matters affecting national security and that John McCain was trying to commit a fraud on the American people by nonetheless presenting Palin as capable. When he chose Palin, and then failed to drop her when he knew that she would be dangerous for the country, John McCain was acting treasonously. “Treason” = disloyalty to one’s country. Shame on him. If you think this judgment is harsh, consider that McCain is probably covering up his medical condition too, which would make it more likely that he might have put Sarah Palin in charge of the United States. McCain treated the choice of Palin as if it was a silly game, as though it wouldn’t have endangered millions of Americans by giving them no leadership at a time of massive multi-front crises.
John McCain disgusts me for what he hid from Americans about Sarah Palin. He also disgusts me for what he tried to do to Barack Obama for the past year.
Last night, John McCain offered some cheap words of congratulations to Barack Obama. McCain’s low rent audience offered mostly derision to Obama in response. Again, shame on John McCain. This is what he gets for slandering a decent man, unjustly failing to call out our followers when they accuse Obama of being a Muslim, friend of terrorists, of highly suspect moral character and incompetent. This is what you reap for lying to your followers that Barack Obama’s policies were the opposite of what they are. Tons and tons of lies spewed at Obama over the past year and now McCain stands up and tells his deluded and misinformed followers that Obama is a fine man and will make a good President.
We can only hope that one of those people that McCain has gotten enraged through his countless lies doesn’t successfully assassinate Barack Obama. I will hold John McCain personally responsible if that happens.
McCain’s campaign is now, more than ever, certifiably without any class at all. For all I care, McCain can take all of those cheap words from last night and leave the national stage in total disgrace. History won’t be kind to McCain. Nor should it be.
Let's begin this discussion after four years of Democrats running this country.
Kana:
Instead of simply attacking the Democrats (I assure you that every person Obama appoints will have a rudimentary knowledge base), why don't you comment on the concerns that I raised in this post? Let me summarize: 1) Palin is shockingly ignorant and 2) McCain scammed us, pretending she was competent to be Vice President. Are you OK with all of this?
Would you be OK with an airline that assured you that the co-pilot was qualified, but where you then found out that the pilot was physically shaky (due to cancer and other issues) and that the co-pilot didn't even know where the cockpit was?
Let's continue this discussion in one month, when even more information about Palin's dangerous ignorance is in the public domain and when we have a track record about how many people enraged by McCain's lies try to do bodily harm to Barack Obama.
Andrew Sullivan weighs in on these same new revelations about McCain and Palin:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_d…
I have noticed that a politicial leader whose knowledge spans a broad array of topics and is humble enough to seek the council of well versed advisors when needed, is truly a rare bird. I feel that Obama to be such a leader.
It's my opnion that in recent years, the majority of our elected officials are specialists in the business of getting elected, but are sorely lacking in the generalized knowledge needed to make informed decisions about the effects, impact, and burdens of the legislation they are considering. In these cases, they seek the council from advisors, but often the advisors have conflicting interests, and the officials lack the general knowledge to spot the bad advice. In many cases, rather than decide between many diverse ideas, they delegate the policy-making to the advisors and rubberstamp their approval. This has obviously been the case with G.W. Bush.
To me Palin's knowledge seems to have a focus which excludes most of the topics which pertain to the presidency.
Unfortunately, Erich, I think it is somewhat improbable that these tons of lies and slander of President Obama will abate anytime soon. Especially when one considers the fact that the Republican Party is rife with morons, bigots, and all kinds of kooks. And they will not be disabused of all this untruth about Mr. Obama and his family.
In the words of my dearly departed brother: "Stupidity is a way of life."
GE
Shouldn't Palin be "over" as a national issue? Certainly don't forget the past. But should we be dwelling on it?
Dan: We just dodged a bullet. Had McCain been elected, Palin would be partially, if not totally running our country. She would have been in a position to launch nuclear tipped missiles and she could have been in charge of our economy.
Her election as Vice President would have further eroded the American way of life at a time when we are barely hanging on to what we have. If we don't understand the past, we will not be able to remember it and thus learn from it. I want to move on, and not dwell on how close Sarah Palin came to being our President. I want to make certain that we know how incredibly corrupt the Republican process was and how sheepish the media was about Palin. I predict that we will hear far more in the next month that will bring immensely more shame on John McCain. How dare he nominate a pretty face who knows about as much about government as a fourth grader.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it….This is the condition of children and barbarians, in whom instinct has learned nothing from experience."
George Santayana (1863-1952), Life of Reason, vol. 1, chap. 12, p. 284 (1905)
Dan, did you read this article about Palin?
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081…
That woman is not over yet. Mark my words. If she is running for president in four, eight or twelve years I will remind you with these words, "I told you so." 😀
I wanted to say she is not done yet.
I disagree on this one. I would like to give John and Sarah a big wet sloppy kiss for all they did to break the cracks in the Republican coalition wide open. I agree with something I read earlier today (sorry, don't remember where), that we need to keep our eyes on the financial crisis and on the lame duck in office, who can still do a lot of damage.
Palin doesn't need anyone's help to look like a fool. She has huge negatives for lots of Republicans, even her supposed religious base. I use my parents as an unscientific gauge for the opinions of older, traditional, non-charismatic* Christians, and they don't like her. As long as she remains in play, the Repubs have little chance of getting together again. That's my prediction, I may have to eat my words in 4 years.
Anyway, Sarah Palin is a symptom, not the problem. Maybe it's time to look at how we nominate presidential candidates. The present primary system was first conceived by the Populist Party and implemented by the Democratic progressives early in the last century. Before that, party machines appointed their candidates in the proverbial smoke-filled room. I don't think that the original goal of increasing public participation is really being served by the present system.
(Charismatic=speaking in tongues and generally getting out of your seat and acting weird in church. In my parents' church, you stand when you're supposed to stand, you sit down when you're supposed to stand, and you do not wave your hands around, speak in gibberish, or shout out like in Sarah's church. Also, "thou shalt be nice" is the 11th commandment. And being called "Joe Six-Pack" does not sit well with people who drink Welch's grape juice for Holy Communion. )
Oh sorry. That would be "sit down when you’re supposed to sit," not "sit down when you’re supposed to stand." Freudian slip of former fundamentalist rebel girl.
I'm hoping that the next few years will bring a dawn of real education that, in and of itself, would prevent a future Palin campaign.
I have noticed conservatives already girding to declare any non-reactionary propositions from our President Elect to be far-left ideology. Education, as Mr. "Is our children learning?" claimed to believe, really is the key.
Fool or not, Bush got voted twice. Anything is possible and I think Obama smartness lay in never underestimating the dirty tricks of his opponents; Kerry seemed a bit too nice to believe that anybody could stoop that low as Bush and Co. did in the previous election campaign.
Palin had admirers to the bitter end, that's a fact. In the end this is just about finding the right kind of manipulation. She has the persistence and the ego to go for what she wants, why should she give up?
I saw an interview of Palin last night in which she blamed the media for the poor showing she had in the campaign. She gave no specific examples, of course, but how could she? The truth doesn't matter for someone living in denial.
I almost forgot…the news last night also reported that Palin spent a LOT more on clothes than the $150k that was allocated to her by the RNC. Apparently, some wealthy Republican supporter gave her a credit card to shop with and was "shocked" when he got the bill. No word on whether those clothes will be donated to charity, nor did the news report give the amount of the bill, but it's just one more example of Palin grabbing for pork wherever she can get it.
Fox News on the knowledge and maturity of Sarah Palin:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MWZHTJsR4Bc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MWZHTJsR4Bc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
("Fox News: Palin didn't know Africa was a continent")
Now there's proof that Sarah Palin's venom provoked death threats against the Obama family:
The Secret Service warned the Obama family in mid October that they had seen a dramatic increase in the number of threats against the Democratic candidate, coinciding with Mrs Palin's attacks.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselec…
Read the full article.
The country club RINO's are looking for someone to blame for the Republican loss. The fact is Hillary or Obama would have won this year because of the abandonment of fiscal restraint on the part of the Republicans during the first four years of the Bush administration.
A war like the one we were involved in called for special considerations for how it would be financed. The financial cost wasn't reconciled and no one expected any kind of a crimp in their life styles. How can you give away money back to the people when the rest of government is in sore need of either being trimmed or more direct implicit funding designated.
When was the last time a budget and spending was corrected downward midsream in this nation?
Palin did interview with the major media. and of course she didn't fare as well as she could have. That was the campaigns mistake – they should have known that any major liberal network would go after her and then they would all repeat the same message that would hurt the Republican ticket. The advisors say Palin messed up – they messed up by allowing it to take place.
Obama didn't take questions at all from conservative news media. Bidden was not seriously heard from until the liberal news had its way one-on-one with Palin. Where anyone tried unannounced to ask unfavorable questions of Bidden, that news media was ostrasized. Seveal news media were dismissed from Obama's entourage because they were leaning the wrong way. Obama consistently bad mouthed conservative talk radio as do most liberal americans, even though they find it very entertaining.
It was four days before the Shearson Lehman bank failure that Katie Couric and the rest of the major news media trashed Palin and then Obama began to rise in the polls again. The financial collapse started as investors saw the handwriting on the wall.
A fairly good intentioned but blatant government tinkering with the markets "redistributionist" was going to be president. This would be very similar to Republican Herbert Hoovers ideas of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hoover
I'm not a one party kind of guy, I favor ideology that is conservative and/or the politician that isn't a social activist that could care less about the constitution or individual incentives and internal motivations.
Grumpy said:
"I almost forgot…the news last night also reported that Palin spent a LOT more on clothes than the $150k that was allocated to her by the RNC. Apparently, some wealthy Republican supporter gave her a credit card to shop with and was “shocked” when he got the bill. No word on whether those clothes will be donated to charity, nor did the news report give the amount of the bill, but it’s just one more example of Palin grabbing for pork wherever she can get it."
The country club RINO's shot themselves in the foot again – they have little sense and too much money for their own good. Sarah wasn't wise to take them up on their offer. That I'll agree with. All the clothes have been returned to the RNC.
Karl: I see that you read the RNC talking points, at least they way they existed prior to the election.
Once again you are highly informed. I'll give a couple examples, but your comment is full of unsubstantiated claims. You say that Obama didn't take any questions from conservative news media. Absolutely untrue. Obama sat for a long interview with Bill O'Reilly prior to the election.
You are in wild denial on Sarah Palin. There is no evidence that she is knowledgeable on any topic related to the post she sought. She is a certified liar, as set forth by this intelligent conservative, Andrew Sullivan. Palin hid from any media that would dare to ask her hard questions. McCain's own people are clearly disgusted with her.
The media is not liberal (though a few outlets are, such as DemocracyNow.org). If the mainstream media had been even moderate, this election would have been in Obama's favor 80-20.
"ll the clothes have been returned to the RNC."
Give me a break, Karl. You suggest that Palin had no idea that she was wearing $150,000 worth of clothing or that she had no control over her handlers.
"Can't control my handlers!" What kind of leader does this make McCain or Palin, who are BOTH are using this excuse? They wanted to be elected to be the two most powerful people in the U.S. and they blame OTHERS for their idiot choices? That's not leadership. Not even close.
So, how does it usually works with clothing at such campaigns? Do the candidates tell their staff how money they are supposed to spend for on this item? Who decides? Do the the candidates just get the clothes handed over? Is it normal to inform them about the amount of all spendings or does the chief strategist pick the most important ones?
Bill O'Reilly's definition of conservative suits is own interests and often those of the RINO Washington establishment. The interview was given after McCain's choice of Palin, I see him as part of the Queen of Hearts brigade. At that point Obama could count on O'Reilly to be somewhat in his corner. O'Reilly is first a good old boy Republican and secondly a conservative.
Proj: Good point. No one is raising it but you, unfortunately. I assume that ALL candidates are dolled up at considerable expense. I suspect, though, that no candidate has ever had a $150,000 clothing allowance.
Palin had it coming because she was acting as though she was a simple hockey mom and that Obama was an "elite." Further, the Republican's had made a HUGE deal about John Edwards supposedly getting a $400 haircut during the primary.