Framing Sarah Palin
[Note: I'm not going to get into the Palin baby story, as I personally am waiting to see how it plays out. So if you're looking for that sort of thing, don't bother reading any further.]
Before I get to Sarah Palin, I just have to point something out here first. John McCain is trying to score points off his party's restraint in postponing and toning down their convention out of deference to Hurricane Gustav, but there's a big fat steaming dose of hypocrisy here that the mainstream media is refusing to point out. Here's John McCain last Sunday on Fox News -- "it wouldn't be appropriate to have a festive occasion while a near tragedy or a terrible challenge is presented in the form of a natural disaster." Chris Wallace asked him about the convention again, and mentioned Katrina. McCain again responded: "I think, again, we don't want to appear in any way festive when you have that kind of tragedy possibly revisiting itself on the city of New Orleans and areas around it."
Now, from the White House website itself, the picture worth 10,000 words which puts this entire "we feel your pain" lie to the ultimate test. Here are George W. Bush and John McCain -- on the exact same day Katrina hit New Orleans -- celebrating what looks to me like the "festive occasion" of John McCain's birthday. Again, this was the day that Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans.
Please, someone in the mainstream media, please point this out. It's called "journalism."
With that out of the way, we turn to Sarah Palin.
Alaskan Governor (and designated Republican vice presidential nominee) Sarah Palin is going to have to answer some questions soon. She is obviously being held (to quote our current Vice President) in "an undisclosed location" every time the press gets near her. Think about it -- John McCain makes the big announcement Friday, and Palin doesn't appear on a single news show Sunday morning? We haven't had a press conference with her yet, or anything other than a few softball interviews. Oh, and it's rumored she's going to be on People magazine soon.
That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but it certainly doesn't go very far. Sooner or later Palin is going to have to stop cramming from briefing books and being given pop quizzes ("Quick: what's the capital of Pakistan?") and is going to have to strut her stuff in front of the national news media.
In a way, she's almost lucky that the baby story broke when it did, because whenever she does step out in front of the microphones, this will be the main thrust of the questions, at least for the first day or so. Sure, it's an embarassing family story, but it is going to detract from the real story the media should be following: Is this women ready to be president?
More to the point, was John McCain's choice of her putting "country first" (as his campaign slogan reads), or was it a hasty selection made because McCain was blocked by his own party from choosing who he really wanted, Joe Lieberman? And how hasty was that selection, anyway? Exactly what sort of vetting process did the McCain team put Sarah Palin through?
Because there are plenty of unanswered questions about her -- and her woefully thin political career -- that really need to be asked.
Democrats have a wonderful chance, because Palin (and McCain's campaign) is stonewalling the press on making her accessible. The Republican plan (no doubt) is to have her introduced to America at the convention, and to frame her and her story in such a positive light that any negatives discovered later won't matter.
Democrats need to get ahead of this curve for once, and start defining her in their own terms. They need to frame her before Republicans get a chance to.
Now, this is admittedly a minefield. She's a woman, and people are already wringing their hands that Joe Biden "is going to have to go easy on her" during the debates, lest he be seen as "beating up on" a woman. This is obviously nonsense (doesn't "equality" mean "actually being treated as an equal"?), but it is a valid media presentation point as far as sympathetic viewer reactions are concerned.
So mostly, Democrats should frame these things as "Why isn't the media asking about..." without getting into the answers themselves. Don't answer the question, in other words, just point out that the question exists and has not been asked.
So here is my advice for framing Sarah Palin.
(1) "I have no comment on the Palin family's personal problems."
(2) "If she's so ready to be Commander-in-Chief, why is she ducking the media? She's supposed to stand up to world leaders and she can't even handle the press?"
(3) "Sarah Palin got her start in politics by supporting a tax increase. Amazing how the Republicans haven't noticed this." (As mayor, Sarah Palin raised sales taxes and lowered property taxes.)
(4) "What exactly is Sarah Palin's relationship to the Alaska Independence Party -- a political party that wants Alaska to secede from the union, and who claims Sarah Palin as one of their own? Is Sarah Palin's motto 'Alaska First' (as the A.I.P. has on their website), or is it John McCain's 'country first'?"
(5a) "Sarah Palin was for the Bridge To Nowhere before she was against it. She campaigned on her support for the bridge to help her get elected governor, in fact."
(5b) "Sarah Palin may have stopped the Bridge To Nowhere, but she took the money anyway. So much for 'being against earmarks' as John McCain likes to claim. If she was against earmarks, she would have refused the money. She didn't."
(5c) "Sarah Palin built a road on the island to the Bridge To Nowhere that had been cancelled -- just so she wouldn't have to give the money back to the federal government. She spent $25 million federal tax dollars on a road to a bridge that isn't going to be built, rather than return it to the taxpayers in the other 49 states. Once again, so much for being 'against earmarks,' as John McCain claimed. Sounds more like 'Alaska first' than 'country first.'" (See the Anchorage Daily News for the whole Bridge To Nowhere saga.)
(6a) "Sarah Palin seems to have learned her personnel ethics from Alberto Gonzales. She has a history of firing people for political reasons -- exactly what got Attorney General Gonzales in so much trouble. While she was mayor, she fired the town's police chief for political reasons. He sued, and the judge had to tell him that by Alaskan law it was legal to be fired for political reasons."
(6b) "Then there was the state Creamery Board that wanted to shut down the unprofitable Matanuska Maid dairy. Palin wanted it kept open. So Palin sacked the entire Board of Agriculture and Conservation and installed her buddies. The new Ag Board then promptly fired the entire Creamery Board, declared itself the Creamery Board, and quickly approved keeping Matanuska Maid open. Later in the year, the dairy failed anyway. Sure shows Palin knows how to handle the entire American economy, doesn't it? It also shows how Palin deals with any political problem -- by firing everyone in sight who doesn't agree with her. And if you can't fire them, fire their boss. Haven't we had enough of that already under Bush and Cheney?"
(6c) "And then, in the scandal that Alaskans have come to know as 'Troopergate,' Sarah Palin is currently under investigation for firing a man who refused to fire the man she really wanted gone, who was her brother-in-law. Kind of reminds you of Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre," doesn't it? Or, like I said, the Bush Justice Department."
(7) "If Sarah Palin is such a 'maverick' and takes on her own party, then why was she on the board of a 527 group called 'Ted Stevens Excellence In Public Service, Inc.'? What exactly did she do for Stevens while leading this group? How much money was raised, and from whom exactly? Sounds like until Stevens' scandals broke into the news, they seem to have been pals."
(8) "The more we find out about Sarah Palin, the more you have to wonder how much she was vetted by John McCain. Is this a woman who is the best possible choice to be a heartbeat away from the Oval Office, or was this some hastily-made and not-very-well-thought-out gimmick to score a few political points? One has to wonder if McCain is really, as he says, putting 'country first' with this pick, or whether it was an impulsive reaction to his own party telling him he couldn't pick the man he wanted. Which, unfortunately, says something about McCain's judgment."
OK, with those out of the way, here are a few cautionary notes. Because there are a few things Democrats should not say when attacking Sarah Palin's credibility.
For instance -- stay away from the baby stories. Resist the urge to comment at all on it. Let the media do the muckraking. Take the high road, instead.
Also, don't mention the whole "beauty queen" thing. Leave this to the late-night comics -- they're better at it, and they don't have to take the heat for doing so. After all, she was awarded Miss Congeniality, and there's a convenient movie of the same name -- so the comics will be all over this one without any help whatsoever.
Likewise, stay away from the whole "small town" angle. Again, leave that to the media and to ordinary people to make up their minds on. It's so patently obvious that not every small-town mayor in America is qualified to be president that you don't even have to point this out. Because even the appearance of attacking "small towns" themselves is going to backfire. Remember Obama's "bitter" comments, if you need any proof. Most voters actually live in small towns -- never forget that.
Don't attack her charisma. In fact, play it up. "Sure Sarah Palin is a wonderful person and has a lot of charisma, but what does she feel about the situation in Georgia? Or Darfur? Or North Korea?"
And DO NOT under any circumstances mention how she looks. This is guaranteed to backfire. Leave all the "hottie" jokes alone. Don't even whisper them. Again, leave it to Leno and Letterman, as they will more than make up for your silence on the subject.
As I said, there is a small window open for Democrats to get ahead of the curve on framing Sarah Palin to the American public. Most of that window is going to be crammed with the baby stories, but eventually the media will tire of that and start looking for a new angle. Be ready with the new angle, and take the high road on the baby situation, and Sarah Palin may go down in history as the worst running mate ever selected.
But be careful as you do. The thing about "throwing a Hail Mary pass" (as John McCain has so obviously done with his running mate selection) is that even though it's a move born out of desperation, even though it is extremely risky, even though it will likely fail... every so often the spectacular catch is made in the endzone, and it turns into a game-winning move. Democrats need to help avoid this, and the earlier they start the better.
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
-- Chris Weigant
Aw man, no baby (hers and her daughters), no beauty queen, no small towner, and the true crusher, no VPILF?
Just what are we supposed to talk about her then?
@Bashi
Aw man, no baby (hers and her daughters), no beauty queen, no small towner, and the true crusher, no VPILF?
Just what are we supposed to talk about her then?
Ummmm.... Issues??
Just a thought..
@CW
Glad to see you don't jump down into the gutter like so many Dems are doing these days.. If anyone ever needed confirmation that, when it comes to hypocrisy, hatred, bigotry and pure vile bile (that rhymes and you know it!!)that there really isn't any difference between Dems and Republicans, then the rabid personal attacks from the Dems on Palin and her family would surely prove that beyond any doubt...
I do have to give credit where credit is due, however. Senator Obama, being his usual classy self, has stated in no uncertain terms that such personal and family attacks are completely off limits and are totally un-called for. It's too bad that the vast majority of Democrats can't show even an iota of class that Senator Obama has shown.
But I do have to point out one thing that I think Obama is doing wrong.. He and his campaign are falling all over themselves to make the case that he has more experience than Palin.. Personally, I don't think it's true, but that is neither here nor there...
The point is, Obama is falling over himself to try and make the case that he is more qualified to be President than Palin is to be VICE PRESIDENT.
Get that?? Obama is running against Palin right now. And that is a VERY stupid move on Obama's part. I don't recall an election EVER where the POTUS candidate tried to make the case that he is more qualified for POTUS than the VPOTUS candidate is for VPOTUS.
Obama should continue to speak out against the ruthless and tasteless attacks. Beyond that, he should ignore Palin. Any comparison between Obama & Palin MADE BY OBAMA only will serve to emphasis McCain's experience over Obama.
I don't view this as a HAIL MARY by the GOP.. It's a tactically brilliant move, made all the more brilliant by the fact that the GOP doesn't have to do anything. They can just sit back and let the Democrats eviscerate their own campaign.
It's more of a "Fake Punt" on fourth down (as Del Rio and the Jags are wont to do)that gives the ball to Fred Taylor to get some first down yardage.
And it's working perfectly..
Michale.....
8a. The pick of Palin just undercuts McCain's own talking point of being a "maverick" as it shows that he's far from being a maverick. McCain likes to talk about how he will go against his party when he thinks it's the best thing to do. That he isn't beholden to the far right of the GOP. Yet this pick demonstrates that he's no such thing.
John McCain wanted either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge. Both men are highly qualified for the VP position and would be strong candidates to stand up to Joe Biden based on record and experience. He was set on Joe Lieberman just days before his pick of Palin. But the far radical right proved they hold the reigns over McCain.
People like Rush, Hannity, and Dobson vetoed the pick of Lieberman (or Ridge) and demanded a far right conservative. McCain buckled under, showed his shoot from the hip reactionary side, and gave in to the extreme far right with his choice of an unqualified pick to satisfy the far right of his party.
@Blaws
But the far radical right proved they hold the reigns over McCain.
Is this your opinion?? Or do you have facts to back it up?
It seems to me that Palin enhances McCain's "maverick" streak, as she has been known to go after GOP'ers who have gone bad, just as McCain has done...
Personally, I would have liked to have seen a Joe Leiberman, just to see Dems go purple with apoplexy.
But, switching over to baseball, the Palin pick has thrown a different kind of curve to the Dems. And they aren't fielding it well at all..
Michale.....
All good points. I agree that Sen. Obama should avoid comparing hisself to Gov. Palin. I think that this should be framed as a judgement or decision making issue with regards to Sen. McCain who has shown (in my opinion) very bad judgement and decision making ability in his selection of Gov. Palin. It seems that when Sen. McCain can't get his own way he has a tendency to make rash or hasty decisions. Is that a quality we want in the next POTUS?
...Stan
"Ummmm…. Issues??"
Umm...humor? Coffee before internet?
Actually I think both the babygates should be looked at. If true, her flying from Texas to Alaska then driving to her home town all the while in the early stages of labor is a serious lack of judgment. Period.
Palin has stated not only is she against abortion to an extreme degree but also against sex-ed that includes curriculum on birth control. Instead prefers the teaching of abstinence-only. These are policies she has stated she will vote for her side and against the other side and will fund her side and not fund the other side as governor of Alaska. So seeing how these policies are working in her own family are definitely fair game IMO.
I don't think these issues should be addressed by the official campaigns but left to the press and blogs.
When experience is framed, I think it should be pointed out that 20 million people gave Obama a pass on his experience. One person gave Palin a pass on her's. That the democratic process should make these decisions much in the same way that a majority of republicans gave McCain a pass on his involvement in the Keating 5.
Actually I think both the babygates should be looked at. If true, her flying from Texas to Alaska then driving to her home town all the while in the early stages of labor is a serious lack of judgment. Period.
Hmmmmmmmm
So, you are saying that others should pass judgment on a woman's body? That it's not HER judgment that should prevail?
Interesting....
So seeing how these policies are working in her own family are definitely fair game IMO.
Again, interpreting what you are saying, if a parent believes in "abstaining" from murder and tries to instill that abstinence in their children and "fails" because one of their children goes out and commits murder, then it's "fair game" to attack said parent and said child?
I am going to have to go with Senator Obama on this one. He said that families are "off limits". Especially a candidates children.. I am with Senator Obama on that.
When experience is framed, I think it should be pointed out that 20 million people gave Obama a pass on his experience. One person gave Palin a pass on her's.
So, you agree that Obama WAS given a pass on his lack of experience.
Whether it's 1 person or 1 billion people, the simple fact is, Obama has ZERO experience in Washington.
That is EXACTLY what makes him an attractive candidate to me. He is not contaminated by politics. Neither is Palin, to a lesser extent by virtue of the remoteness of her governorship.
But, facts must be faced. When it comes to the type of experience needed to be President, Palin has more than Obama. And, if Obama can claim that growing up in Indonesia counts for "foreign policy" experience, then Palin can surely claim that governing a state that borders Canada AND Russia counts for a LOT more foreign policy experience.
That the democratic process should make these decisions much in the same way that a majority of republicans gave McCain a pass on his involvement in the Keating 5.
You mean the same way the majority of Democrats gave John Murtha a pass on HIS involvement in the Keating 5???
Don't get me wrong. I am still planning to vote Obama. I still think he will make the best President.
But, I call them as I see them.
And going out of bounds to personally attack Palin and her children is the biggest mistake the Democrats are making. Having Obama run against Palin is the SECOND biggest mistake the Democrats are making.
Michale.....
Good stuff! Should be required reading for any Democrat in this election. Though I'll miss commenting on the baby story :) ... kidding.
One of the most interesting things I've found in this story is that the McCain campaign seemed to forget that the election is not about John McCain. They've tried to make it an up-or-down vote against Obama with McCain a "lesser of two evils."
If they had followed this strategy, they would have picked a VP who wouldn't have generated much media coverage. Someone like Rob Portman. Lieberman or Ridge would both have generated a lot of coverage.
Coverage of any kind was the last thing McCain wanted.
I bring this up though not to critique Palin's selection, but to bring up a possible strategy for Obama. It basically comes down to, the more people know John McCain, the less likely they are to vote for him.
This is why I believe Obama should, while emphasizing his own policies, ask the American people to compare with John McCain. For example: "The McCain campaign seems to talk more about me than they do about what McCain would do for America. Why is that? What are they trying to hide?"
If people look at McCain and see what he is actually about, he looks an awful lot like George Bush. And he never looked more like George Bush than when he picked Sarah Palin, an obvious concession to the Christian wing of the party.
The maverick has left the building.
@akadjian
The problem I see with that avenue of approach is that, when Senator Obama & the Democrats invite the American public to take a really good look at John McCain, they run the very real risk of the American public LIKING what they see...
I know, I know..
As a Democrat, it's incomprehensible to you that political virgin Joe Q Public might actually LIKE what they see in McCain.
But it's the independents and middle of the road'ers (like me) that Obama must appeal to. And inviting those middle of the road'ers to look at the "real" John McCain may backfire.
an obvious concession to the Christian wing of the party.
Obviously.. :D
Maybe it was a pick designed to do exactly what it's doing. Completely exposing the Democrats for the hypocrites that they are..
Of course, that could just be a fortunate (for the GOP) by product of the pick..
Michale.....
Apologies if this is a repost..
I wasn't sure if I hit the SUBMIT button or not and my post is just being held in queue...
Excerpts from the Democratic Offensive Response Committee(DORC)
Scene: In a windowless conference room, a group of pale, somewhat glum men and women sit around a large table. Inspirational sayings from Barack Obama are posted on the walls, including the profound, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for,†the upbeat “Change we can believe in,†and the always popular, “Keep on truckin.'"
n older gentleman sifts through some loose papers spilling out of a file marked “Palin.†He absentmindedly pushes the papers around while speaking:
“Look, we’ve got to nip this in the bud … I mean, we got what, maybe a five point bump off the convention and now even that’s disappearing. McCain picks Mrs. Alaska here as the Veep and suddenly we can’t get Barack an interview on Nickelodeon. Seriously, we get it … she’s a female, way to go John … who cares.â€
Maureen, a newspaper columnist looks up from her Blackberry. “Look Spencer, don’t get all Cheney on us … she’s not a threat. She hasn’t even been on the Sunday morning talk shows. Do you honestly expect the American voters to go for someone that hasn’t been on the Sunday morning talk shows? Do you know how important those Sunday morning talk shows are to the average American outside of Washington? Nobody’s winning this campaign unless they’ve been on 'Meet the Press.'â€
A smallish man with a ferret-like appearance speaks up from one end of the table. “Maybe so, but we gotta be prepared. My boys have been doing a little Dumpster diving up there in Alaska and we got ourselves some pretty good dirt. Seems like her 17 year old daughter is pregnant …â€
Spencer the Strategist stares at the man. “We know that already, Fenster. Her hometown was aware of the situation, she advised McCain during the vetting process and she and her husband made a public statement about it on Monday.â€
Another strategist jumps in. “And Barack said it’s a non-issue … so did the other guy, uh…â€
“Joe Biden?†asked Maureen.
“Yeah, him.â€
Fenster seems unconcerned. “Right, whatever. OK … we got the husband on a DUI back in 1986 when he was 22. Law breakin’ dirtbag.â€
Spencer stands up slowly with a weary look. “Hmm … show of hands … who here has had a traffic violation or DUI?†He looks around. “OK, that’s roughly 80 percent of this room. What else you got, Fenster?â€
He opens up a small notebook and reads: “She’s only 44. She’s been governor of Alaska for two years and before that was mayor of a small town of maybe 8 or 9,000 people for six years. The Republicans want us to think she’s experienced enough to be VP?â€
Spencer puts his hand up to interrupt. “Uh, let’s not go down that road.â€
The others in the room nod in unison.
Maureen looks up. “How about the family thing?†She leans forward to explain. “I mean, here’s a woman with five kids and a husband. As a woman, I’m really concerned that she won’t have time to raise her family, cook a decent meal and be the Vice President of the United States. Honestly, I think she’s stretching herself too thin. It’s not good for her kids and it’s not good for the country.â€
Constance, an extra keen Obamatron and junior strategist looks at her. “But isn’t that what we fought for as feminists? The chance to have it all, to break the glass ceiling and prove we’re every bit as good as a man?â€
“Please, what are you, 23, maybe 24?†Maureen stands up and walks over to the selection of organic teas on the sideboard. “The feminist creed says that Democratic women are every bit as good as men. It doesn’t say anything about Republican women, that’s a different story.â€
Constance thinks for a minute. “So, we play up the fact that Palin has too much on her plate to be Vice President. She may be young, dynamic and talented, but she should put her family first, and if she doesn’t …â€
Spencer warms to the subject. “Then she’s a bad American with poor family values. Brilliant. Let’s get the talking points printed up and sent off to the New York Times, they’re standing by.â€
The Democrats talked a good game about change and a new political landscape leading up to the general election. What a load of crap. They’re aggravated that the race is almost a dead heat, irritated that they didn’t get a bigger bump from the Democratic Coronation party in Denver and really surly that the Republicans put a young woman on the ticket. From the Democrats perspective, the Republicans are peeing on their traditional territory. Palin’s husband is even a union member, dammit.
Reprinted from a Mike Baker commentary...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,415441,00.html
1. Who cares? This is her daughter's business and has nothing to do with how she tried to raise her.
2. McCain doesn't want a commander and cheif in the making he wants a vice-president that appeals the the masses. HEALTH ISSUES, OLDER IN AGE
3. The raise overall lowered taxes and was saw as a good thing. OBAMA has some of the same ideas.
4. Yes they want a vote. They want a vote because they never had the choice. The country was bought from Russia by America. However, Alaska has many transplants. AIP reads more like a libertarian party than one seeking independance. Many democrates fight on issue of imminent domain, the right to home school children, and the ability to elect judges and other officials.
5. Well I don't like people saying it was a bridge to nowhere. People live there it just cost more than what those people could afford. Take the Bay bridge for example. Caifornian's were just waiting for another disater because they did not want to pay for it but they did have the money. The fact that Palin took the money and didn't build the bridge is a sham. I want my bridge to nowhere. I WANT MY BRIDGE TO NOWHERE.
6. Hey the guy didn't do his job so he got fired.
7. Cut and run Palin never thought in a million years that she would be consider as vice president. Furthermore, if she had continued on her current path as governor she would have been fired, impeached, or jailed.
8. This hell marry pass with all of it sideshows and specticals is just what McCain needs. If we are so busy talking about someone who is not ever going to be president how can we talk about the person who might just be. I really like the way Karl Rove thinks.
By the way I love that picture.
Michale-
You love putting words in to peoples mouths they did not speak.
So, you are saying that others should pass judgment on a woman's body? That it's not HER judgment that should prevail?
Actually it's about airline regulations, health of the baby and ego. But go on with your fantasy...
Again, interpreting what you are saying, if a parent believes in "abstaining" from murder and tries to instill that abstinence in their children and "fails" because one of their children goes out and commits murder, then it's "fair game" to attack said parent and said child?
Attack? Funny I don't remember writing the word attack. could you point it out?
Mention the effectiveness of a questionable governmental policy within her own family, hell yes. I don't care one bit about her daughter having a kid at 17 and do not think less of her for doing so. But maybe teaching her about birth control might have had a different outcome? And preventing high schools from teaching about about birth control might produce a higher rate of the same outcome?
So, you agree that Obama WAS given a pass on his lack of experience.
No, I said he was given a pass on his level of experience. You seem to think it is a "lack", not me.
Whether it's 1 person or 1 billion people, the simple fact is, Obama has ZERO experience in Washington.
Funny, I was under the impression he is a sitting US Senator...
As for the dirty side of the campaign, that's a tough one. It should stay clean as long as possible. But I've seen too many democrats take the high road and be rewarded by not becoming president. Dirt works. Let McCain set the tone. If he stays mildly dirty, then keep it clean and cast him in a bad light. On the other hand if the Rove trained team gets as dirty as the Bush campaign, give him both barrels and take no prisoners!
@Bashi
You love putting words in to peoples mouths they did not speak.
No, I love pointing out how people's beliefs can be just so much hypocrisy..
Pro-choice people love to spout about how it's a woman's right to choose, etc etc... Right up until the time that the woman is someone who has different beliefs or the woman makes a choice they don't like.
You either support a woman's right to choose or you do not. In Palin's case, you appear to NOT support a woman's right to choose..
Funny, I was under the impression he is a sitting US Senator…
First term US Senator. He is still trying to remember where the bathrooms are..
But I've seen too many democrats take the high road and be rewarded by not becoming president. Dirt works
So, once again, we see the attitude put forth that Democrats must act like Republicans to win elections.
On the other hand if the Rove trained team gets as dirty as the Bush campaign, give him both barrels and take no prisoners!
In other words, the ends justifies the means...
If Democrats must act like Republicans to win elections, what could a logical and rational person deduce from that?
It tells me that the American voters prefer Republicans to Democrats.
Are you sure that THAT is the message you want to stand by??
Michale....
@Michale
I would invite a comparison between what Obama stands for and what John McCain stands for. It's John McCain who seems to be afraid of this comparison.
This is why his campaign has focused primarily on the negatives surrounding Obama - his so-called "celebrity" and his supposed "foreignness."
They have tried to make it about personality and not policy. Why? Because if the debate is about policy, I believe most Americans agree more with Obama's views.
So that would be my challenge to McCain. Let's keep this about what each would do for the country. Let's keep the pettiness out of the debate.
BashiBazouk -
Hey, I didn't say YOU couldn't talk about them, just that Dems giving interviews on TV shouldn't! Since (after watching the GOP convention) "lefty bloggers" are now the bete noir of the GOP, I guess that means we have a job to do. So please, feel free!!
(although I have to warn you, the bikini shot is fake, so don't even bother with that one...)
Michale -
See, I just KNEW it was the season for football metaphors to make a comeback!
Heh.
You raise a good point about the Obama v. Palin thing, as opposed to Obama v. McCain. There is a danger of this, you're right. But the dust may settle on the Palin thing after a few weeks, and most of the Obama v. Palin thing is coming from the media, so we'll see... interesting point, though.
BLaws -
That (your 8a) is a good framing job. Well done! The GOP ticket is being sold as "Maverick squared" (I'm not kidding), so attacking the "maverick" pick of Palin is definitely worth the effort. I see it as a petulant and impulsive pick "you won't let me have who I want? well, then I'm going to pick someone you don't want!!" -- but it's important to point out that it is a total suck-up to the religious right as well, which was supposed to be a big part of McCain's "maverick" image to begin with.
Michale -
The Palin pick was definitely a reaction to the hard right denying McCain who he wanted - Joe Lieberman. They threatened a floor fight during the roll call for veep, and warned him that this would LOSE him the election. McCain never likes being forced to do things, and usually lashes out as a result, hence Palin. This isn't rumor, it's been reported by many right-leaning pundits who talk to GOP bigwigs. In other words, if it's a rumor, it's coming from the right, not the left. I can dig up a link to one of these articles if you'd like, or try googling "Lieberman" "floor fight" and "McCain" for the past week or so.
Stan -
Exactly what I've been saying! Rash and hasty doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the ability to make good decisions as pres.
BashiBazouk -
"I don't think these issues should be addressed by the official campaigns but left to the press and blogs."
I agree, especially about the plane ride, but I agree with this comment 100%. This is one of those things that you just have to get the facts out there for people to decide on their own, and they will have the same questions we do.
That plane ride just makes no sense.
Michale -
The plane ride thing will strike many women as insane - "your water had broken, you gave a speech, then took an 8 hour plane ride and a 1 hour drive BEFORE you went to the hospital?" It goes straight to "judgment".
Murtha was in the Keating 5? Wow, I didn't know that. I will check it out. I thought everyone was retired from Congress except McCain, but I could be wrong, not really up on all the details.
akadjian -
See baby comment above to BashiBazouk -- feel free!
"The maverick has left the building." -- wow, that's a good slogan! Would make a dandy bumpersticker!
Michale -
Actually, from what I've seen so far (and astonishly enough), some of the mainstream media appears to be doing their job (somewhat) on Palin, and instead of (or, more like, in addition to) the baby stories, some of the facts about how Palin governs are getting out there.
They focus on odd things, but the "Bridge To Nowhere" story is getting a good solid look, as she obviously lied about being an "earmark buster" in her first speech. She was for it before she was against it, and SHE TOOK THE MONEY is actually getting reported on. Also, she hired a lobbyist to get earmarks for her town when she was mayor. So for once, some actual factual issues are being discussed in the MSM. These are core issues for how she is being presented to the public, and should be presented by the media. For once, they seem to be doing so. CBS especially, last night.
Yeah right -
3. She lowered taxes on property owners, which helps the well-off, and raised them on sales taxes, which hurts the poor worse. It's a valid issue, but it probably won't wash because taxes in AK are very strange. The state is almost full-on socialist, since it gets most of its money from oil taxes. With the price of oil at record highs, the state has been awash in money since Palin became gov.
4. Yeah, and Hawaii has a good argument about why it should become an independent kingdom again, too, but it ain't going to happen. The whole point is that it is shocking for the GOP voter to hear some of their anti-American slogans. The founder of the party refused to be buried in America, and was buried in Canada instead. "Alaska first" and all that. How will that go over with the uber-patriot crowd, do you think?
5. Yeah, the people on the island are REALLY annoyed at the term "bridge to nowhere" because, by definition, that makes them "nowhere"! I'd be annoyed too! I still think the whole point is not that she was for it before she was against it, but that SHE TOOK THE MONEY ANYWAY!
6. Which guy? She's fired so many for political reasons, it's hard to keep track. A new one even surfaced after I wrote this.
7. "...if she had continued on her current path as governor she would have been fired, impeached, or jailed." Hey, there's still time! :-)
I love the photo too. I even ran it Tuesday as well.
BashiBazouk -
Dirt works. But that's why God created 527s. Heh.
Michale -
I think the valid point in the baby thing is that Palin is against abortion in the case of rape or incest. Also, go see this article (use link at bottom) at HuffPost, there's an interesting comment about the language used by Palin in her statement by a poster called "echothebat." It's about whether Palin would let others even HAVE the choice they just made, not who chose what.
OK, this may have been the longest comment ever posted here, but I've been falling behind on replying to you guys, for which I apologize. Can't wait for the televised debates in a few weeks, that's all I've got to say!
Thanks to all for commenting, as always.
-CW
Michale-
You either support a woman's right to choose or you do not. In Palin's case, you appear to NOT support a woman's right to choose..
Uh...where am I not supporting a womans right to choose? I think you are way off on this one...
First term US Senator.
Some > ZERO
In other words, the ends justifies the means…
Yes.
This is politics. Morality is nice but losing puts you much further from the "end" than questionable means will.
@CW
You raise a good point about the Obama v. Palin thing, as opposed to Obama v. McCain. There is a danger of this, you're right. But the dust may settle on the Palin thing after a few weeks, and most of the Obama v. Palin thing is coming from the media, so we'll see… interesting point, though.
Actually, much of the comparison is coming from Obama himself, in response to McCain's ad...
McCain is playing the tune and Obama is dancing to it, hook line and sinker...
Oh my, I think I mixed my metaphors there.. :D
If Obama keeps dancing like this for a "few weeks" he can kiss the presidency good bye. As arrogant as it sounds, Obama needs to simply deign NOT to engage Palin in ANY kind of comparison. His attitude needs to be that such comparisons are ridiculously beneath him..
The plane ride thing will strike many women as insane - "your water had broken, you gave a speech, then took an 8 hour plane ride and a 1 hour drive BEFORE you went to the hospital?" It goes straight to "judgment".
But here again, it's the issue of someone substituting THEIR judgment about something they know NOTHING about..
If people are TRULY "pro choice" then they HAVE to allow Palin the right of her choice..
To put it another way, if Palin had been a Democrat would we even be HAVING this discussion?? Of course not..
And THAT is the trap that the Democrats are falling into... They are completely reversing their very foundational ideals, SOLELY based on partisan bigotry..
Murtha was in the Keating 5? Wow, I didn't know that. I will check it out. I thought everyone was retired from Congress except McCain, but I could be wrong, not really up on all the details.
Yea, it was widely reported back when the Dems first took control of Congress and Murtha was up for some leadership positions. He has disappeared from the public scene since then, but his complicity in the Keating 5 scandal was well-documented.
That is why I have always counseled to step cautiously when trying to hurl that "egg" at McCain.. Because it might result in collateral damage. As so many politically oriented scandals do these days.
I really don't have any problems with attacking Palin over issues.. But, when you see such "issue" oriented attacks laced with "bimbo" and "barbie doll" and "babe" type adjectives, I am sure ya'all would agree that it's nothing but sexist based attacks.
I won't even BOTHER getting into all the claims and questions of "How can Palin be a mother and a VP" type spewage that is floating around out there.. It's simply despicable, made all the more so by it's wide acceptance in Democrat circles..
@Bashi
Uh…where am I not supporting a womans right to choose? I think you are way off on this one…
When you castigate Palin's choice to take the plane ride. You weren't there. You didn't know the circumstances or the situation. It was HER choice to make.
Yet you feel qualified to question her on that choice.
Would you question Palin's choice if she was the DEM VP nominee?? Of course not. You would be defending it as "HER CHOICE"...
"In other words, the ends justifies the means…"
Yes.
This is politics. Morality is nice but losing puts you much further from the "end" than questionable means will.
Awesome. I'll probably quote you on that down the road...
Don't get me wrong. I firmly believe as you do.. That the end DOES justify the means..
It's just refreshing to hear someone from the other side of the aisle so boldly state the same philosophy..
I just find it ironic that it's widely accepted amongst Democrats that, to win elections, Democrats must act like Republicans.
So, in other words, it's OK to compromise one's principles to serve the greater good. In this case, winning elections.
We think very much alike, you and I.... :D
Don't worry.. That's NOT an insult, no matter what others may say... :D
Michale.....
3. So you mean to say that she is good for big oil and big business.
4. She is willing to say and do anything to get elected
5. She is a theif and a liar
6. She believe that she is all powerful
7. And if the people of Alaska make enough noise she might get impeached while running for office.
She sounds a lot like Bush.
@YeahRight
She has a nearly 80% approval rating in Alaska by Alaskans..
Obviously she is doing SOMETHING right..
Michale.....
There is no question that Alaska is a republican state. I wonder Georges approval is among republicans?
Strange..
Just recently in several columns here, it was being touted that Alaska holds some real possibilities for Democrats.
But now that the GOP VP nominee is the governor of Alaska, all of the sudden it's just another republican state.
Don't get me wrong. Polls are crap and usually have very little meaning.
But considering that this poll was taken long before it had any national relevance, I would say that it has some bearing.
Ignoring all political bigotry, it appears that Palin is a very capable government executive.
Michale....
It's incredibly late but I had to respond this:
"I don't care one bit about her daughter having a kid at 17 and do not think less of her for doing so. But maybe teaching her about birth control might have had a different outcome? And preventing high schools from teaching about about birth control might produce a higher rate of the same outcome"
Except she, Palin that is, actually supports teaching kids about contraception in schools, just that she also advocates teaching abstinence alongside. It's one of many myths about her conservative values that exist. For example she's not in favour of creationism being added to the curriculum, as was claimed, but thinks schools that WANT to teach it ought to be allowed to do so (and I can see her point; as far as I know American schools don't teach "religious education" like we do in the UK, so there's a place for creationist views to be put alongside evolution in class).
Incidentally I'm in agreement with both of those views (and I'm not in any way shape or form a creationist, I'm an agnostic and strong proponent of evolution). There's nothing wrong with encouraging abstinence, no birth control is foolproof and I don't think kids should think "oh well, I can just have an abortion", not because they shouldn't be able to have abortions, rather because it shouldn't be a "default position" for a teen thinking about whether and when to have sex.
Even if you want to believe "babygate", to state that Palin is an abstinence-only advocate when she's a member of a group that advocates teaching of contraception in schools is just patently incorrect. Her position isn't one of opposition to anything; she's IN FAVOUR of teaching abstinence in schools.
Huge difference.
There were other flaws with the babygate scandal (her water hadn't broken, in fact Trig was induced so they can't have broken; she was leaking fluid, it's in fact entirely possible to leak fluid for DAYS before giving birth. Sometimes the fluid even re-fill themselves!) but I don't really feel the need to go into a great deal of depth about it.
Incidentally her doctor also cleared her to take the flight. I'd trust my doctor, especially if I was feeling fine. Remember, she'd had four kids before, and it is her body; who knows her own body better than her? But still the rumours will persist on certain sites. Ah well, if people want to believe that, in spite of the overwhelming evidence against them, so be it.
For the record Chris, her family were home, her doctor was at home, and it was the same doctor that suggested that if she'd feel more comfortable at home, it was safe for her to fly back. The doctor was also appointed by Mrs Palin as the best family doctor in Alaska, so I don't blame her for trusting the woman implicitly. I guess it doesn't matter much now, as the rumours largely only exist on far-left nutjob blogs, but I thought you, as a guy who seems to pride himself on being well-informed would appreciate the vast amount of information I uncovered while researching the Palin baby story.