Election Central Sunday Roundup
McCain Campaign: No Palin Interviews Until She's Treated With "Deference"
McCain campaign manager Rick Davis told Fox News this morning that Sarah Palin won't be doing any media interviews "until the point in time when she'll be treated with respect and deference," and when Palin would be "comfortable" doing it. So far in this campaign, Palin has taken only one question, from a gushing Alaska reporter: "Governor, we feel like we're losing you -- are you still going to be there for Alaska?"
Obama And McCain Off The Trail, Biden In Montana
Barack Obama has no public events scheduled for today, but Joe Biden is hitting he trail in Montana. Biden has an event in Kalispell, scheduled to being at 4:30 p.m. ET. John McCain does not have any public events today.
Obama Mocks Palin For Earmark Flip-Flops
On Saturday, Barack Obama mocked Sarah Palin for aggressively seeking earmarks in Alaska and campaigning nationally as anti-pork, yet another sign that Palin has eclipsed John McCain as the real story on the Republican ticket. "I mean, words mean something," Obama said. "You can't just make stuff up."
Palin Sticking To The Teleprompter
Jonathan Martin reports that Sarah Palin's public appearances on the campaign trail remain scripted affairs. Palin is repeating the same applause lines she used at the Republican Convention -- and still using a teleprompter along the way.
Obama: Recession Could Delay Rescinding Of Bush Tax Cuts
In an interview on ABC's This Week, Barack Obama said that a recession could delay his plans to rescind some of the Bush tax cuts for top earners ahead of their scheduled expiration. "I think we've got to take a look and see where the economy is," Obama said.
Hillary Limits Criticism Of Palin
Hillary Clinton is thus far refraining from making any direct personal criticisms against Sarah Palin, telling reporters that it won't be a focus for her. "This election is about issues, and that's what's going to matter to people at the end of the day," said Clinton.
GOP Sen. Inhofe: Does Obama Really Love His Country?
Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma told the Tulsa World that the GOP can win this election because of questions about Barack Obama's patriotism: "Do you really want to have a guy as commander in chief of this country when you can question whether or not he really loves his country?"
Dem Convention Officials: Flag Story Is False -- GOP Stole Our Flags
Democratic Convention officials told the Huffington Post that Republican allegations are false that the Dems were throwing away miniature American flags left over from the Denver convention. Instead, they say, they were put in storage but then stolen by GOP-aligned vendors, who then turned around and used the story for their own political gains.
Sarah, come out to play-ay!
Republicans, come out to play-ay!
Sarah, come out to play-ay!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2312941173447863684
September 7, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
she will never do interviews shes an empty shell. And hillary need to get tough with palin
Palin’s Church: Video, Third Wave
September 7, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
actually I change that, she's going to give an interview with charlie gibson sometime this week in Alaska. Im sure they will be softball questions though.
Palin’s Church: Video, Third Wave
September 7, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Softball questions provided to the reporter immediately before the "interview."
September 7, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is MoveOn.org? This is the MOST important election of our generation and NOBODY is stepping up - where is the DNC?? They don't have to be slime ads to be effective - be factual and that will be enough!
This is killing me to see all these missed opportunities.
The lies from McCain's ads are working - the uninformed masses now believe that Obama is going to raise their taxes!!
They don't watch political shows, they don't read blogs, they don't read newspapers and barely watch the nightly news...they get their information from the local radio stations..and guess what? Most of those are Right-Wing! They are listening to Rush, Sean and Bill-o...and catching the McCain ads on TV during dinner..."Raise your taxes...Not ready to Lead".
Jesus H. Christ on a Cracker, will somebody PLEASE address this in the dinner hour - across middle America????
September 7, 2008 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak! Speak Sarah speak!
September 8, 2008 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Finally! What took you so long?
September 7, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Deference"?!!??? Seriously, who the hell does she think she is?
September 7, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen. I don't know why the Obama camp doesn't jump on this...
September 7, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Deference?"
You mean not asking why she's afraid to testify?
September 7, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deference? Who is she - Princess Sarah? Is she running for Queen?
September 7, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why aren't there ads out now, yesterday, about the bridge to nowhere lie?
Obama's campaign is repeating the failures of their predecessors. We can expect similar results.
We are so screwed.
September 7, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mother Mary.
September 7, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quick Study???
It took me 24 weeks of study to get an Air Traffic Control ticket, 4 years to get a BA, 3 years for a JD...
How come it only takes 2-3 weeks of study to get a VP?
September 7, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey it wasn't easy for her either. She went to 5 schools in 6 years. That's rough. Paid her dues as a sportscaster, PTA hockey mom before sharpening her elbows to get into politics.
She's a VP candidate because Steve Schmidt and Rick Davis think the old man can win with the Alaska firecracker dominating every news cycle until November. She'll be talking to the controlled crowds but not taking questions. There will be plenty of footage of her every day she's on the stump, more exposure than the campaign could ever buy. Even when she won't talk with the media, they continue to talk about her. It's a gamble that could work. She won't talk? It's like dirty basketball. Take some fouls for strategic advantage and run out the clock.
That's why Karl Rove is called turdblossom. He can grow a flower in a pile of shit. Since 2000, nobody's lost an election underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
September 7, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her acceptance speech as was only a few days ago, and this the first weekend after both conventions have been completed. To think that they'll be rehashing the pitbull with lipstick comment she made two weeks from now is crazy. She'll have to make "news" in order to get into the headlines on the MSM as the two on the top of the ticket go at. If she just keeps repeating the same thing this will become the story and it will erode the initial support she has gathered.
September 7, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barr threatening "serious legal consequences" about ballot in TX-
Although I'm not voting for Barr he appears to be on SOLID ground with the Texas law. Interesting dilema.
http://campaign.blog.bobbarr2008.com/2008/09/04/in-texas-the-evidence-is-clear
September 7, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no question that Barr has spoken more truth about the current regime than Obama will in a lifetime.
I see your "dilemma." There is no question in my mind that both major parties are driving us into the ground, as well as actively participating in the lawlessness we have seen throughout the Bush Era (a time of bipartisan criminality, although its main malefactors have been 'R's).
And Barr definitely knows there is a desperate need for a third party. I applaud him for that, and hope he gets on the ballot everywhere.
September 7, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew Sullivan, again, says it quite well:
Ferraro was being interviewed within four days of being announced. Dan Quayle gave an interview one day after being selected.
We are now on Day Nine for Palin and are told to expect another thirteen before she's ready.
This is a pitbull with lipstick? More like a cowering chihuahua.
September 7, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody liked Obama on George? What happened to him?
September 7, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama seems more cerebral in interviews than stump speeches and maybe that's a good balance.
I am spending the Sunday with my folks. My mother, who has become way more enthusiastic about the Obama candidacy after the RNC and her obvious dislike of Palin, thought Obama was being too defensive when he didn't really have anything to be defensive about.
But do you really think this will change anyone's mind?
September 7, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama wasn't his best on This Week.
I thought he could've answered the questions in a more savvy manner (plus that 'my Muslim faith' sound byte is going to send the right wing nuts into an orgasmic frenzy).
He looked kind of tired, though. Campaign trail fatique?
September 7, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also want to add that Joe Biden totally wiped the floor with Tom Brokaw today. I'm so proud that this man is going to be the next Vice President of the USA.
September 7, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen!! Just saw it and, even if you factor in my long-standing admiration for this man, he was awesome. And taking on the toughest questions -- charges of being a 'tool' of the credit card companies, etc. It's frightening to think that that mind and knowledge could be ours - directed to our toughest problems alongside another truly superior mind ..... and that the opportunity might be snatched away from us. But -- it hasn't happened yet. Yes We Can!!
September 7, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, as soon as I head the muslim remark, I said to myself "oh shyt".
September 8, 2008 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
That "deference" claim is absurd, and the media should grow a spine and slap it down.
When has she not been treated with deference by interviewers? Wait. We don't know, because she's never been interviewed.
What poppycock.
And why is it even appropriate that a major political party think the veep nominee can cram for the job?
WTF?
September 7, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
In some ways it might be just as well to set Sara up so that she'll simply refuse to be interviewed at all... while making it very clear why that would be so.
For example - we already know that she has extreme views about abortion (no rights), but to locate more material on her views about abstinence only policy and contraception (none) would open it up so that those questions would be forced into the discussion. Even if the final Question wasn't "personal" Like gee Gov how's that abstinence thing working out for you?
Do you think the current policy of abstinence only education should remain in place?
What are your views about education generally and science education in particular? Should the NCLB policies of the Bush administration be continued?
I just cannot imagine that an examination of her views of women's issues if looked at closely would win many votes, even with Republican Women.
September 7, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cmon, we all know what is going to happen when Palin finally gets in from of the press. The bar has been set so low that she will immediatly be hailed as qualified because she didn't puke on camera. Same with her debate with Biden.
This is just a replay of Bush politics with the exception being that she is more "real" than Bush and so his failures only serve to increase her appeal to that tribe. There is nothing rational about this election now and the sooner Democrats understand that the sooner they can deal with that reality.
September 7, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fact that she is a celebrity now, and with Gallop and Ras showing a bounce for McCain, in a sense they are no longer the underdog. The media goes through its spasms and will now start to go after Palin on issues like earmarks.
The bridge to nowwhere will become a bigger and bigger issue. Unless she can come out and defend her support, Obama's people will slowly and steadily wrap this around her. Obama's volley yesterday was just the beginning.
September 7, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
And she doesn't talk like she has shit in her mouth.
September 7, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's SEXISM. She's a walking example of SEXISM. She has no right to cry "Sexism" about anything. She was given that job by a man who promoted her in effect over far more qualified and experienced women and everyone knows it. That's not feminism - that's just SEXISM wrapped up in a guise that says: Don't you dare.
Well snap out of it! Women aren't stupid - we know what bullshit this is. Nobody lowered expectations for me and it is insulting that these old guys insist on making is so damned "easy for lovely Ms Sarah." They aren't fooling anyone except Democrats - who have become scared to so much as move an inch.
Snap out of it, please. Everyone is either scared to death of Sarah or dazzled by her looks and femininity. Snap out of it!
September 7, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The issue isn't about whether women will be duped by Sarah, but whether rural low-information voters will be duped by Sarah. I trust the Obama campaign that they will whittle away at her popularity which is as high as its going to be. No one now who hasn't been snookered by now will as more information is revealed will brought into the McCain camp.
September 7, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree completely. I am just pointing out that this is the same dynamic we saw in 2000 with Bush and we shouldn't be surprised when that happens. It's the hypocrasy of soft expectations and some Democrats are facilitating it. So how do we counter it?
Each side will come to their own conclusions as the media cowers in the corner. Democrats have to go around the media and crate their own news and stop reacting to it.
September 7, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Biden and Obama are doing a good job of RAISING expectations by calling her a skilled pol, formidable, etc.
I agreed with other commenters who said that instead of treating her as a lightweight moron, we should paint her more as a rightwing attack dog.
Then she will get no sympathy if she whines (only the GOP hordes will believe the fake outrage anyway) and expectations for "Sarah Cheney" will be high.
September 7, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Biden and Obama are handling it exactly right.
September 7, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I watched an interview with Christine Whitman on NOW Friday. Of course, I don't agree with her political stance but couldn't help but think how much better qualified she would have been if McCain had picked her instead of Palin (she is pro-choice however, so it would have been out of the question). One thing is certain, Whitman could have been out doing interviews the next day.
September 7, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you see - that was his problem. Name a fervently anti-choice (have decided that the term 'pro-life' simply has to go -- do they think those of us who support the availability of abortion are AGAINST life?)
Anyway, name a fervently anti-choice woman, in either party, of significant stature to be a legitimate VP choice.
September 7, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm trying to get a whispering campaign started: "The L is silent."
September 7, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, me and my old-fashioned ways! I still think respect and deference have to be earned.
September 7, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not for Cindersarah. Prince Ancient just handed her the fucking glass slipper, which did not fit by the way.
September 7, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hope she sliced the Hell out of her foot. Peasant feet, doncha know.
September 7, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deference and respect is something you earn, not learn. You get them when you deserve it, not demand it. A barking dog ain't getting no respect.
Palin also demanded "respect" and "support" from the chief of police when she took office as mayor. But the big guy spoke plainly and didn't suck up, and he was fired for not being supportive, and too tall and too loud and giving her "stern stares".
There is a lot of pettyness in this girl. All that firing because she is not secure and confident, and all for personal vendatta.
Unfortunately, the GOP is so good at shutting up the media that no one is calling Palin for what she is, a phony and a fraud. She has come close to using those same words on Obama. Why repay it with courtesy?
September 7, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you be any more naive?? Palin not talking to the press is a set up. They will wait until the press is in a frenzy about it then she will begin appearing on those safe networks, allowed to talk on and on about her positions without follow up questions or calling her out on her falsehoods. She will play the victim, that journalist just want to be mean to her and so the press will be oh so gentle and apologetic.
She's a politician who is used to being in front of a camera and used to lying. She's and ego maniac beauty queen who knows very well how to handle the press and is in the process of setting them up now. "Oh, I'm so new at this...please be gentle"...and they will...if they want access...who will be first?
September 7, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The issue is whether this will work with the MAJORITY of the undecideds, and whether independents who were leaning toward McCain may now have doubts. It's a strategy that has a lot of risks, but it was their only chance.
September 7, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, I am sure the bidding continues for the media "star" making the most concessions on the "topics to be avoided". When the frenzied headlines die down, then I suspect Palin will "graciously accept" a completely watered down interview.
September 7, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should all try and catch Biden on with Brokaw this morning. This is they type of interview Palin needs to have, not out of any partisan pining to prove that she isn't ready, but because America needs the opportunity to measure her, to hear he speak truthfully on the issues and not simply political rally talking points.
Brokaw mentioned that this was Biden's 42nd time on MTP, America knows him - for better or worse. Barack has been under the media microscope for 19 months, has appeared in 19 or so debates and has been interviewed by all the infotainment talking heads, including Fox News.
And now Rick Davis is saying she needs to be treated with deference? What a load of garbage. Is it because she's a far right fundamentalist and the campaign hopes that they can just continue selling the image of a reformer hockey mom? Is it because she doesn't have the indepth knowledge on many policy issues and hasn't thought deeply about personal issues that will be questioned?
What is so dangerous about allowing the country to get to know what Sarah Palin is really about? What is dangerous about Palin doing an hour long MTP interview with Tom Brokaw?
Barbara Boxer is also said to have handled surrogate duties really well on CNN's Late Edition.
September 7, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Boxer was magnificent.
Where are all the Repug women? I haven't heard or read that they are out there trying to talk people into voting for Cindersarah.
September 7, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think a dynamic at work that the media hasn't addressed is that while Sarah may have fired up the religious right base, she has tamped down the moderate conservative base. The latter is just as important in the long run, and can help Obama pull in many of these people who are looking for sanity in the administration, and not someone who will impose creationism in the schools.
September 7, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Biden was awesome. couldn't be drawn off track and called McCain/Palin's false statements* for what they are, (or as close as he could say it on TV) "malarkey".
[*the statements previously known as lies]
September 7, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought Browkaw's questions were good also -- not a softball among them. Hope he, and the other journalists, do as well in prepping and being direct when it comes time to question Palin.
Or -- what about one of those Saddleback situations. 1/2 hour of Biden then 1/2 or Palin answering the same questions (hey, they can even cheat and let her see the questions ahead of time - but she has to answer them for herself not play off of his answers).
Loved the quiet, almost subliminal, theme running through his responses about Palin -- "just don't know," "can't tell because her views aren't yet known," "have no idea what her thoughts are on those topics." Have a feeling this kind of comment will keep being chimed in until it's time for the punchline "Do you really want to take a 'roll of the dice' on this totally unknown person?"
When you think about those last-minute voters who veered in the direction of the 'known' Clinton during the primaries. I think on that factor - the sense that you know and can depend on the candidates -- the advantage is now with Team Obama. And that could be terribly important. --- Those who think they know McCain were probably taken aback by the selection of Palin, and Palin herself is a crapshoot in technicolor. So for those voters whose primary concern is a sense of confidence or security (arguably a large proportion of the still-undecideds) the VP selectoins may have been a game-changer.
September 7, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, could you be more naive? If it is a set-up, the way to defuse it is to demand to know what's going on.
September 7, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a setup that only works with those that actually watch the election beyond the headlines, and I would say that pretty much all of those are in the camp that they will be in. The undecideds are looking for answers to their questions. This tactic will not work with them.
September 7, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Plus, I don't think it's a set-up. She's just not bright and totally unprepared. She's nasty, she's mean - she's George Bush with ovaries. And less experience.
September 7, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I think she has that way of phrasing things with that particular tone of voice (as exhibited by the community organizer dig) that when done with the wrong topic will really do harm. I think they are spending as much time on the way she says things as they are with what she is saying.
September 7, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, Tena, get real. These media hotshots are all competing with one another to get a career making interview. Right now there's no incentive to do as you are suggesting.
When the current buzz begins to die, then Palin will accept interviews that will be chosen for her. Only then will the media stars who didn't get the interview start whacking away on how the VP candidate for the GOP should be granting interviews to all and sundry.
Or perhaps you have ideas on how to appy pressure to Palin to grant media interviews that you haven't shared?
September 7, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
"... Since 2000, nobody's lost an election underestimating the intelligence of the American people..."
Posted by jeffgee
Of course they have. Listening to Rove on being tough on national security etc. cost numerous reps and gov.s to lose their seats in '06. Thinking the people were too stupid to see what was really going on in Iraq or the corruption surrounding the Bush administration. Keep in mind also,...the polls don't include cell phones interviews just land lines.
Afew years ago Media Matters, Democracy Now, Move On and many other truth finders didn't exist. The internet grows everyday and we get more exposure to the truth than we ever had before. Once people become aware of how they have been played they go to great length not to get played again. Obama will win in a landslide, turd blossom tries to make his own shit smell good but is failing and one day will pay for his war crimes and did I mention, Obama will win in a landslide
September 7, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
And the most important factor that everybody but me seems to ignore because nobody thinks it means anything and I don't get that - the hell it doesn't:
We won big in '06.
Damn - does no one but me see that for the seachange it was?
September 7, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Reid et al. actually did what they were elected to do, I would agree that it was a seachange, but the Democratic leadership for the past two years has not been actually stellar. That is one of the reasons we so badly need Obama as the head of our party.
September 7, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This drives me nuts -
What did you expect? We had a 1 person majority and that `1 person was Joe Lieberman.
IT was either Joe as our swing vote or Cheney came in to break the tie.
What the hell did y'all expect? We had a very bare majority.
September 7, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand that, but what is important is the perception of Democrats as a whole with the American public which is not necessarily based on the nuance of reality. And from a marketing point of view, Reid is not best that Democrats could have to always be up front and center.
September 7, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was a midterm election and not as many people voted as in a general. The dem base was motivated and the republicans weren't.
We will know if it was a seachange this november. If it's a blow-out, then it was a seachange. If not, it is unfortunately business as usual with the masses voting against their interests or not voting at all.
September 7, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
And there is always the issue of race. Saw an article today that brought up a union campaigner lamenting how they keep running up against those who just won't for Obama because of his race.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080907_The_American_Debate__It_s_little_discussed__but_Obama_s_race_may_be_decider.html
September 7, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would agree, except for this, Michael - we threw out the incumbent party, big time.
That's always indicative of a big change.
September 7, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to go here, but actually the 2006 election really wasn't that big of a deal historically. Historically over the last 17 midterm elections the president's party lost an average of 28 house seats and 4 senate seats. The dems in 06 were just a little above average, 31 house seats and 6 senate seats. Again, it will depend on this november if there really is a sea change in this country. Check out this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midterm_election
Incidentally, look at 94, when the clintons were running the party. Dems lost 54 house seats and 8 senate seats. Now, that is a blow-out and the clintons remained in power for another term in 96. Unfortunately, what does that tell you? Also, I really wish that dems would remember the disaster of the clintons terms in office. The party totally atrophed and it took a hugely unpopular war to bring the dems back. Let's not blow it again with the clintons. Send em packing.
September 7, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goddamn it Michael -
I lived through the Reagan Massacre of 1984. I sat there and watched as Dallas Co. threw out every single Democratic judge and replaced them with Repugs. That heralded the real Repug takeover of Dallas Co. After that it was solid.
Until 2006. In one night we reversed the entire Reagan Massacre and that tells me that it did mean something.
September 7, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really hope that you are right. I think this year will tell us something.
Also, 94 was an unmitigated disaster for dems and heralded 14 years of nazi rule in the legislature in dc, which was reversed in 2006. Up until 94, it had been something like 50 years since the republicans controlled congress. They didn't even control it under the "great" b-movie actor's administration.
To repeat myself, I really hope that you are right, but we will see in november. I don't think that 2006, by itself, is dispositive.
September 7, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think it's dispositive, either, and I don't mean to suggest that. It gets ignored.
I recall, and used to have the link to, an article that ran in the WaPo of all places after the '04 election, of all things, showing pretty clearly how Texas was trending back towards blue.
In '06, we increased that trend. It's a factor - it's worth remembering. It's not the end all and be all - but it's not to be ignored, either.
September 7, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just curious, your being a Texas lawyer an' all, what's your take on the filing deadline clause that Barr's got his teeth sunk into?
September 7, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just saw a commercial for Obama to be on the David Letterman show on Wednesday. In this country, this is almost as important as the acceptance speech -- how many who will see this were those who vote but didn't really tune into the conventions and don't watch the pundits pontificate?
September 7, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is sooooo pathetic. After these bozos make millions and millions and millions off the backs of americans and american tax payers, they'll work for a dollar to keep making millions keeping down the american people and stealing their tax dollars. F'n hypocritial asses. I'm going to go hurl now.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080907/pl_politico/13216
September 7, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
That whole interview was pathetic. McCain thrown underhanded softballs while Biden is grilled on the other show.
September 7, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Inhofe is the third sitting member of the US Congress to smear Obama in the past week. He has been called "uppity", "having no thread of patriotism", and questioned on whether "he really loves his country".
Cynical comments by a party that has NOTHING to offer.
And thank goodness the media is showing a small modicum of balls. On Matthews this moring, saw Joe Klein, Heilemann, Mishelle Norris and Andrea Kramer (who I can't stand), and all were pretty critical of Palin. Klein in particular was great. Called the Republicans Orwellian and offensive. Heileman described McCain's switch to a change agent "wacky". Not a great segment for McCain and his former "base". Haha, asshole, you earned it by creating this ridiculous fight with the media.
September 7, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for telling us that - I don't watch that shit and depend on hearing about it here. lol
That isn't good news for McLame.
Klein's been pretty merciless ever since Prince Ancient handed the glass slipper to Cindersarah.
September 7, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are slowly wading into the criticism (whether they should be diving in or not), and this will pick up steam as the "uproar" over the treatment of her family begins to fade as all things do in this county.
September 7, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would just add that there are plenty of the media that she attacked in her acceptance speech that are just waiting for the "gotcha" moment while on the campaign trail. That's what the McCain knows. What she said in 2006 or 2005 just isn't as "newsworthy" than the gaffe caught live on the trail. Given everything McCain has said and stood for, it was the number of houses gaffe that did the most harm.
September 7, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
If anyone is interested in watching the 2006 Alaska Gubernatorial debate here you go:
http://gregransom.com/prestopundit/2008/09/sarah-palin-debates-tony-knowl.html
She's not a bad debater. They ask her a hypathetical about the pregnancy of one of her children.
She didn't answer the political question of whether or not she agreed with abortion in the case of rape. She said personally she would choose life.
September 7, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin has offered her first interview to ABC's Charlie Gibson that will take place this week sometime in Alaska.
I guess this is the reward for the Dem debate fiasco. Gibson must have kissed her ring, thus showing enough deference. She'll probably have the questions before hand as well.
September 7, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's funny... it seemed John McCain offered it to Bob Sheiffer this morning. They can count on enough "deference" from the Sheiff-ster
September 7, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting Palin ready for interview isn't all about learning the issues and talking points, which they are a part. It is about coming up with credible answers to these inconvenient questions.
1) As governor, you vetoed fundings for shelters for teenager mothers. Does your daughter's pregnancy change your view?
2) As governor, you cut fundings for education of those with special needs. Does the birth of your son with down syndrome change your view?
3) When your mother-in-law ran for the mayor job you vacater, you actually
September 7, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting Palin ready for interview isn't all about learning the issues and talking points, which they are a part. It is about coming up with credible answers to these inconvenient questions.
1) As governor, you vetoed fundings for shelters for teenager mothers. Does your daughter's pregnancy change your view?
2) As governor, you cut fundings for education of those with special needs. Does the birth of your son with down syndrome change your view?
3) When your mother-in-law ran for the mayor job you vacated, you ended up supporting her opponent. That must be a tough decision. Can you enlighten us on the wisdom behind it?
September 7, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Charlie Gibson is going to ask none of those types. It will be about being a hockey mom, moose burgers etc. It will be a human interest piece rather than a "Prove you're ready to be a heartbeat from the Presidency" piece...
September 7, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aw, c'mon, Hil. I know you've got your base to maintain, but couldn't we have one teeny-weeny little Sarah EarmarkQueen Palin? Pleaase?
September 7, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope. Don't hold your breath. It's 2012 or bust for the clintons. Obama should send them packing to timbuktu until after november. By the way, she didn't limit her criticism. She didn't say squat period. The funny thing is that the clintons won't win the primary in 2012 either, so they should either shut up or get on board.
September 7, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary is going to state for the press that she is going after Sarah. She's way to politically saavy for that. That doesn't mean the issues she is going to focus on, hmmmm let me think oh yeah, women's issue with a focus on health care.
September 7, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obviously I meant to say that she is NOT going to state to the press she is going after Palin. She needs to minimize the "Catfight!" headlines.
September 7, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Charlie Gibson caught the brass ring. He will be interviewing Palin in Alaska some time next week.
http://thinkprogress.org/
September 7, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
We'll see if deep down he is journalist or a hack. Everyone should email him and ask him to not only ask substantive questions but to ask the follow question to the initial spin. Let him know, the world is watching him as much as they watching her.
September 7, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gibson is a rightwing hack. I have no hope from a tough interview.
September 7, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's value is NOT in attacking Palin -- it is in whatever will keep the "Reagan Democrats" and others of a similar bent in the Democratic and Obama Orbit this November -- and this is more about drilling home the message of vote your interests than it is in any sort of emotional cat fight.
September 7, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope someone checks Palin for a hidden earpiece and receiver. Remember Bush's shoulder bulge?
September 7, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Biden and Palin never do have a TV debate. Such an event would be a lose-lose proposition for Democrats. If Biden shows her up, far too many people will get mad at him for doing it and she will get their sympathy. And, if she even holds her own against Biden, it will be seen by all, including the press as a runaway victory for her. The only tactic Biden could use that would offer the slightest hope for a positive outcome would be to talk against McCain and McCain only, at every opportunity, without once even mentioning Palin. However, that won't happen, because Joe always has to say how great he thinks McCain is and how much of a hero he is, before he ever gets around to even mentioning that McCain is always wrong about everything.
September 7, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree.
Plain is not a sympathetic figure, she is a divisive nasty attack dog. She brought that image on herself.
If she tries to whine, people will ask what happened to the pitbull with lipsitck?? And of course, only GOP diehards will believe the fake outrage.
September 7, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rick Davis' comments about Palin's meeting the press when "they" thought she was ready eerily reminded me of the husband of a colleague who replied, "You didn't ask my permission." when she told him she was going back to work. What century is this?
September 7, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
WHO IS SARAH PALIN and WHY IS SHE HIDING???
CHECK THIS OUT:
http://okwassup.blogspot.com/2008/09/who-is-sarah-palin.html
September 7, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where in the world is Carmen SarahPalin?
Layin' low, gettin' ready to lead V.I.L.E. on day one!
September 7, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Q. Where's the change?
A. In somebodies pocket.
Palin requests talks with oil executives
http://www.andrewhalcro.com/palin_requests_talks_with_oil_executives
It's certainly clear why the GOP loves her. Birds of a feather.
September 7, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
A reasonable first pick for her shakedown list.
September 7, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
From:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/5mbefu
Sunday, September 07, 2008
"Actual Responsibilities": If You Can't Manage a Hockey Rink, Can You Manage Economic Policy and National Security?
From the Wall Street Journal:
Palin's Hockey Rink Leads
To Legal Trouble in Town She Led >
By MICHAEL M. PHILLIPS
September 6, 2008; Page A5
WASILLA, Alaska -- The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.
The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla.
"It's too bad that the city of Wasilla didn't do their homework and secure the land before they began construction," said Kathy Wells, a longtime activist here. "She was not your ceremonial mayor; she was in charge of running the city. So it was her job to make sure things were done correctly."
Ms. Palin, now Alaska's governor and Republican Sen. John McCain's running mate, has pointed to her two terms as Wasilla's mayor, from 1996 to 2002, as evidence that she has enough executive experience to take on the presidency, should the need arise -- more than Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, who touts his own background as a community organizer in Chicago.
"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities," Ms. Palin said Wednesday in her acceptance speech at the Republican convention.
Litigation resulting from the dispute over Ms. Palin's sports-complex project is still in the courts, with the land's former owner seeking hundreds of thousands of additional dollars from the city.
Palin likes to say "Good judgment can make the difference between avoiding a crisis and managing a catastrophe."
Indeed.
Cite:
Head of State
http://tinyurl.com/5mbefu
September 7, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is a strategy for addressing Palin's lack of doing a press conference. Set up an ad like this...
"Even McCain's vice presidential pick is just like George Bush. She is not going to give interviews to the public "until we think she's ready." Doesn't this sound exactly like the philosophy of press conferences that Bush has pursued? The Republican bubble lives on. It's time to prick the bubble and introduce Republican to reality. Obama/Biden in 08. Ready without a tutorial."
September 7, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dreamt that I walked down every Main Street in America and everywhere that I glanced, there was a campaign sign: on front yard lawns, on the sides of buses, in storefront windows, on bus benches, way up high on billboards, on blimps overhead:
WHERE IS SARAH? was the message.
WHERE - IS - THAT - PITBULL? is NOW the message.
September 7, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Our country has a lot of serious decisions to make.
Not one serious issue is being discussed in this election.
Voters are distracted by frivolous nonsense - soap opera balderdash - scurrilous personal comments.
Are we going to start more wars with distant oil producers, then occupy them indefinitely ? Are the wars and occupations going to be financed by borrowing from China ?
Do you get a sense we are walking backwards toward the future, without a plan ?
September 7, 2008 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink