« Obama On Lipstick Controversy: Attacks Media, Says "Enough Is Enough" | Home | New McCain Ad Portrays Palin As Obama's Prey »
Palin Quoted Writer Who Once Lamented Failure To Assassinate FDR
Thomas Frank has an interesting little scooplet: It appears that during her convention speech, Sarah Palin quoted an anonymous writer who, it turns out, once lamented that Franklin D. Roosevelt's would-be assassin hit the wrong man.
Here's what Palin said in her her speech:
A writer observed: "We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity." I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman. I grew up with those people. They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America...
The anonymous writer who penned these words, it turns out, is the right-wing columnist Westbrook Pegler.
Pegler also wrote that it was "regrettable that Giuseppe Zangara hit the wrong man when he shot at Roosevelt in Miami."
As Tom Frank says, there's no evidence that Palin "shares the trademark Pegler bloodlust." But perhaps it's more evidence of her political influences and leanings?
Advertisement















This pig with lipstick just became a bunch of fired pork!
September 10, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Myself, bein from the South 'riginally, ah be partial to jiss bout any part of the pig personally
September 10, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used to think that the Republican ads tying Obama to Ayer's radical past were ridiculous .... but at least Obama had met the man. Tying Palin to every word of a long dead writer just comical.
As to the pig stuff, if you put lipstick on Obama, he'd still be a sexist pig, sweeie.
September 10, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama? A sexist pig? Go troll on another website, "Sweetie."
But first, why don't you do yourself a favor and take a look at Democratic party positions relating to Women and the Family. There's only one party that's progressive toward women, and it isn't the Republicans.
As the saying goes, "Everyone's entitled to their own opinion... they're just not entitled to their own facts."
Calling Obama a "sexist pig" is just plain making stuff up. Shame on you.
September 10, 2008 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, sweetie, I doubt that Obama is a pig --sexist or otherwise. On the other hand the demigod of honor -- John McCain -- left his handicapped wife at home while he was out having sex with strippers. Years later having found true love with a beer heiress, he managed to call her a cunt in public.
I don't know how to define sexism but I know it when I see it.
September 11, 2008 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh, Palin didn't write her speech.
September 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. If anything, this illustrates Republican sloppiness (like the Walter Reed green screen).
After losing two elections they shouldn't have lost, Dems have convinced themselves that GOP campaign operatives are wizards with supernatural powers. This is just another example that they're anything but.
September 10, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't deny the abilities of Dumblerove.
September 10, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
>> Dumblerove.
I think he's more of a Peeves, actually.
September 10, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The speechwriters probably got it from a book "Famous Quotes" and didn't know how to use The Google to check the background on the source.
September 10, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what makes the irony doubly poignant. Dumb-Ass small town know nothing reads words put in her mouth by city slicker elite speechwriter quoting another elite rightwing gadfly...about small town know-nothings.
September 10, 2008 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
ha. yep. sounds about right.
September 10, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hang it on her! Who cares if the speechwriter came up with the quote, hang it on her and all the Schmidt-heads.
We need the surrogates to start working the refs with this. Taste of their own poison.
September 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would LOVE it if Obama took the opportunity to educate the American people on our once-glorious history, and explain that when she says she "knows just who the author had in mind," she was CAN;T BE TRUSTED even on that- because the author advocated his assassination!
I have thought since I first heard it that her invocation of Harry S. Truman at a Republican hatefest was worse than ludicrous.
It reveals her ignorance and anti-Americanism.
Now I would love it if this were wrapped around her anti-American neck.
September 10, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, ommited the key clause. "Advocated the assassination of the man who appointed him."
September 10, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh, Palin didn't write her speech.
September 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
She said it, she endorsed it, she owns it.
September 10, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
She said it, she endorsed it, she owns it.
September 10, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she wants to use that as her defense ("Hey, I didn't write it, I only read it -- I had no idea what I was talking about!"), then by all means let her do so. She is thereby revealed as the puppet she is.
September 10, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except that Palin didn't write her speech.
September 10, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Holy duplicate posts, Batman, that is some wacky posting apparatus you got there!
September 10, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't matter. Ever hear of "The Buck Stops Here?"
September 10, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
MSMcain is running a story on Palin as victim. They are reporting on all the "lies" told about Palin on the Internet. They found comments on some blogs which were fictional, then extrapolated to stories that are true, and claimed they were also false.
Example:
"The rumor that as mayor she demanded books be banned is false."
These people have no shame.
September 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
ThinkProgress has been keeping track of how many times the McCain campaign is repeating this lie. Palin’s comments today bring the number to 27 lies:
http://thinkprogress.org/
September 10, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank god someone is counting the Lies to Nowhere!
September 10, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pegler also referred to Truman as a "thin-lipped hater" (Truman, in turn, called Pegler a "rat" and "gutter-snipe").
Is this the kind of bipartisanship we can look forward to in a McCain/Palin Administration?
September 10, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pegler was the Ann Coulter of his generation.
September 10, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cue the faux outrage....
September 10, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cue the faux outrage....
September 10, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone looked at The Page? Halperin is writing the whole thing off as crocodile tears by McCain.
September 10, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mrs Piglin, aren't big city 911 victims, their families, and first responders good people too?
September 10, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
She'd quote Hitler admiringly if a speechwriter threw it in there.
September 10, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you lend your name to things you don't agree with?
Do you say things you disagree with?
If I were doing a speech, first of all I'd want to write it myself. But if I had to deliver something, I'd make darned sure it was something I'd be willing to take responsibility for.
She's running for high office and we shouldn't hold her to a standard of responsibility?
Palin's candidacy is laughable and horrible at the same time!
September 10, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
An incredibly vile woman..perfect ticket.soulmates even
September 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The Soul-Mates from Hell!"
And I bet the NYTimes ad dept would be thrilled to deliver it!
September 10, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, Halperin has up a new ad saying that Obama is out to destroy Palin and his politics of hope are empty words. Complete with imagery of wolves (a pack of 30 lawyers up in Alaska to dig up dirt) and quotes from FactCheck.
September 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
seems to me I recall wolves from another ad of a long ago campaign.
These folks are sick! Just sick!
September 10, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
As I noted below (before I read this post) - The wolves are back! The wolves are back! The wolves are back!
September 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mark Halperin is like a stuck calendar; he's right about once a year. And yes, today by saying that McCain's faux outrage is just that, he's right for once.
September 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
THis is guilt by (very little association). I don't think we need to extrapolate her views from obscure texts- I think we can see her views in her actual words and deeds. Let's not go here. There are better places to go- the main place to go is McCain. Palin is the distraction- the red meat thrown at the journalists while the real story sneaks by.
There was a good post on Huffington on this a while back ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-gans/democrats-need-to-keep-th_b_123575.html.
September 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Enough already!
September 10, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
New McCain ad is up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK4oWay1VbE
September 10, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Preemptive attack.
They know Palin is waist deep in all kinds of ugly. It will be impossible to get all the media to ignore all of the Palin stories, so they make her the victim of the bad Obama campaign. This girl candidate portrayed victim strategy must play well with focus groups, but it ultimately didn't work for Hillary either.
It's ironic that the McCain campaign would run an ad calling attention to the fact that she wasn't vetted. Maybe McCain should have sent a team of lawyers to Alaska before he nominated "Miss Vally Trash and Proud of it."
September 10, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
This girl candidate portrayed victim strategy must play well with focus groups, but it ultimately didn't work for Hillary either."
Have to laugh, what the hell, the republicans could care less about female victims...though they will feign outrage for Sarah in public and laugh at her as they pull her strings behind the scenes.
They're sadistic and delight at what a sucker they hooked that swallowed it all, hook, line and sinker.
That Truman quote was interjected out of context, just like Cheney used to do, so probably yes, it was a signal to the base that she was "fully cooperating."
If she is a quick study, which to this point hasn't been evident in repeating the same speech over and over, McCain will have to watch his back.
If the handlers think they can use her easier than Mac, they'll be a danger to him.
Then we will discover that Sarah was a Mole, an underground democratic feminist, who is "outing" them all and running a radical far left agenda!
September 10, 2008 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
For what it's worth,,,,,, whilst at the local gro-sta this morning all the tabloids, the Enquirer being at the top of the food chain, had some banner headline about Palin's less endearing character flaws. People that read that stuff are McCain base voters so some good should come of it.
September 10, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg?
When is the commenting feature going to be fixed?
This is about to drive me away from Election Central. It takes forever for a comment to be posted, and many people are inadvertently posting their single comment multiple times.
It's tiresome, and detracts, significantly, from the quality of Election Central.
I (and many others, I suspect) would be more than willing to donate to get this fixed.
So what gives?
September 10, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg Sargent wrote: "As Tom Frank says, there's no evidence that Palin 'shares the trademark Pegler bloodlust.'"
On the contrary. Sarah Palin hunts wolves from helicopters. Here's how it works: wolves are chased by helicopters and shot at from the air. When the wolves are finally driven to exhaustion, the helicopter lands, and the occupants can simply walk over to a collapsed, exhausted wolf, and shoot her to death at point-blank range. This practice is condemned as reprehensible by most hunters.
I call that bloodlust.
Deliberate cruelty to animals has been shown to be a reliable predictor of psychopathic violent behavior towards human beings. Many serial killers, for example, started out by torturing animals to death.
Sarah Palin's enjoyment of cruelty towards animals is consistent with her record of vindictive abuse of power in office.
September 10, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does Palin herself actually hunt wolves from planes?
I knew that, as governor, she tried to provide a bounty (out of taxpayer funds) to aerial wolf hunters who could bring in the left front leg of a wolf -- tried, that is, until an Alaska court held that the proposed bounty was illegal.
To me, that's even worse than doing it herself, in that it plays up the porkbarrel spender aspects.
But I agree with you about the practice, and I know many hunters regard it as a disgusting practice as well.
September 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
In Alaska it's also legal to hunt bears and wolverines from a plane.
September 10, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I were hunting bears or wolverines, I'd probably be sitting in a plane too...
September 10, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does Palin herself actually hunt wolves from planes?
She prefers to hunt moose from planes. She advocates slaughtering wolves.
The difference is that one retrieves the meat from a hunt. One leaves a slaughtered animal to rot.
September 10, 2008 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
That reminds me of those scumbags that go on guided bear "hunts". Basically, the guide has dogs that help them to find some poor bear minding its own business. The dogs chase the poor thing up a tree only to have the "brave hunter" shoot it. Freud would have a field day with these people (Palin included).
September 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or the leanings of her McCain speechwriter...
September 10, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is perfectly valid. Surely, any pol worth their salt would ask a speechwriter who said that quote, right?
The reason I think this is significant is that it does show some ideological sympathies. How on earth would you know that quote if you weren't familiar with the guy's rightwing screeds? And even if you weren't, surely you would vet the guy's rep sicne it was a big speech, not an aside on the stump.
September 10, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just saw a new McCain ad on Halperin. The wolves are back! The wolves are back! I'm so excited! This time, though, they are not meant to represent the scary terrorists who will eat your babies if John Kerry is elected. In 2008, they are the Dem oppo researchers sent to Alaska to find out just who is this crazy person from Wasilla.
September 10, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shooting wolves or moose or anything at all from a helicopter is not considered good sportsmanship. It's just murder, basically.
September 10, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is perfectly valid. Surely, any pol worth their salt would ask a speechwriter who said that quote, right?
The reason I think this is significant is that it does show some ideological sympathies. How on earth would you know that quote if you weren't familiar with the guy's rightwing screeds? And even if you weren't, surely you would vet the guy's rep sicne it was a big speech, not an aside on the stump.
September 10, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no excusing the speaker for using someone else's text. If you're going to say it, you have to take responsibility for it. If you can't own what you say, you're no candidate for VP.
Being a fan of conspiracies, it seems to me the writer/speaker knew who said it and wanted to convey a message to the Reich that she's in agreement with their politics.
My hunch is that Dobson's next prayer request, if McCain is elected is to pray he dies shortly thereafter.
September 10, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Small crap like this means absolutely nothing.
Maybe it's fun for fans of minutia, but it changes no ones vote.
Thanks for filling up the page with space.
September 10, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't be so sure. Look at the "death by a thousand cuts" the right inflicted on Al Gore. None of the individual things they lobbed at him amounted to a hill of beans, either, but the cumulative effect of them was to sink his campaign. And they're working hard to do the same thing to Obama.
The main thing is not to take random pot shots, but to tie them into a pattern -- in this case, a pattern of associations with extremist thinking: the Alaskan separatists, her fundamentalist church, and now Westbrook Pegler.
You can be sure that if Obama quoted something that was seemingly innocuous from someone who had made highly controversial statements, however obscure, the GOP would immediately make it into a campaign ad.
September 10, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I make a similar point below (unfortunately, a few times). Make them spend their time defending little things, just as they are trying to do to Obama right now. And the fact that the issue ties in with an ongoing narrative means it has some chance of gaining traction in the narrow sights of the media.
September 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except they don't spend their time defending little things. They shoot crap out there, knowing it will hit fertile ground where it helps them, and knowing a few annoying little weeds here and there will pop up - such as here. Then they go about their day, looking for the next cheap shot they can wing out there.
Rove, reflecting Goebbels, knew it worked where intended, and that was good enough. That's the pity of it.
September 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
which would explain why it was described as an interesting little scooplet and not as a devastating bombshell game-changer.
September 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she has any idea where that quote comes from I will put on a pig suit and wear lipstcik in her honor.
I mean it. I will.
September 10, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Our entire MSM is conflicted. Nepotism.
revolving White House/MSM jobs. Deregulation for Rupert Murdoch. Totally Corrupt.
September 10, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's all remember: she didn't write that speech. Kudos to any reporter who can expose the Man Behind the Curtain.
September 10, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want to take this argument further, you start talking about who Pegler really was--think some combination of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and Drudge, but worse.
I can relate one historical episode that is especially resonant with our times. At the end of WWII, a group of veterans started their own organization after the war (the American Veterans Committee) to provide a liberal alternative to the Legion. They were in favor of full employment, internationalism, and first amendment freedoms, among other things. For such beliefs, Pegler vehemently attacked them as unpatriotic and as Communists. One of the veterans he targeted--and one who went toe-to-toe with him in print--is pretty famous. His name is Bill Mauldin. Is this really the person Palin (she gave the speech) wants to use as her inspiration? I think the American people and, more important, American veterans deserve an answer.
And to respond to those who think we shouldn't go there, this is exactly where we should be going. This is what going on offense is about--make McCain, Palin, and their surrogates spend their time defending her apparent affinity for the worst of Pegler's sins (William Ayers, anyone?). None of the above are lies, and Palin is the one who opened the doors to these associations by quoting (with admiration, I might add) the words of a hateful and, yes, truly anti-American historical figure. As I say, the American people and our veterans deserve some answers!
September 10, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want to take this argument further, you start talking about who Pegler really was--think some combination of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and Drudge, but worse.
I can relate one historical episode that is especially resonant with our times. At the end of WWII, a group of veterans started their own organization after the war (the American Veterans Committee) to provide a liberal alternative to the Legion. They were in favor of full employment, internationalism, and first amendment freedoms, among other things. For such beliefs, Pegler vehemently attacked them as unpatriotic and as Communists. One of the veterans he targeted--and one who went toe-to-toe with him in print--is pretty famous. His name is Bill Mauldin. Is this really the person Palin (she gave the speech) wants to use as her inspiration? I think the American people and, more important, American veterans deserve an answer.
And to respond to those who think we shouldn't go there, this is exactly where we should be going. This is what going on offense is about--make McCain, Palin, and their surrogates spend their time defending her apparent affinity for the worst of Pegler's sins (William Ayers, anyone?). None of the above are lies, and Palin is the one who opened the doors to these associations by quoting (with admiration, I might add) the words of a hateful and, yes, truly anti-American historical figure. As I say, the American people and our veterans deserve some answers!
September 10, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you want to take this argument further, you start talking about who Pegler really was--think some combination of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and Drudge, but worse.
I can relate one historical episode that is especially resonant with our times. At the end of WWII, a group of veterans started their own organization after the war (the American Veterans Committee) to provide a liberal alternative to the Legion. They were in favor of full employment, internationalism, and first amendment freedoms, among other things. For such beliefs, Pegler vehemently attacked them as unpatriotic and as Communists. One of the veterans he targeted--and one who went toe-to-toe with him in print--is pretty famous. His name is Bill Mauldin. Is this really the person Palin (she gave the speech) wants to use as her inspiration? I think the American people and, more important, American veterans deserve an answer.
And to respond to those who think we shouldn't go there, this is exactly where we should be going. This is what going on offense is about--make McCain, Palin, and their surrogates spend their time defending her apparent affinity for the worst of Pegler's sins (William Ayers, anyone?). None of the above are lies, and Palin is the one who opened the doors to these associations by quoting (with admiration, I might add) the words of a hateful and, yes, truly anti-American historical figure. As I say, the American people and our veterans deserve some answers!
September 10, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, it doesn't show her political influences because she doesn't give the impression that she has any enough political depth to have 'influences.' She has declared that she is guided by her faith, the faith of the Assembly of God sect.
It shows her political naivete that she would read a speech with quotes without checking the source.
September 10, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
'political naivete' gives her a bit too much credit. 'republican sockpuppet' seems more accurate.
September 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Trying to be nice. I always want to be sure that I attack her issues, her lies, her fraud but not her person. (hmm, now I'm not sure if that's possible.)
September 10, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pegler's reckless character assassination ended with his being sued for libel by writer Quentin Reynolds, who won the largest libel settlement awarded to that point. Pegler himself ended his career writing tracts for the John Birch Society, which believed Dwight Eisenhower was a "dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy". That's who Palin is quoting.
Peace,
Paul
September 10, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, and FWIW: in this instance, Pegler was talking through his hat, since he never lived in any place less populous than his native Minneapolis, which was far from a small town even when he was growing up there 100 years ago.
September 10, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I alone in thinking this is a non-issue? I mean, really. There are many issues surrounding Palin, to be sure, but how is this six-degrees-of-separation-game any better than the Rev. Wright smears Obama was getting a few months back?
September 10, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
which would explain why it was described as an interesting little scooplet and not as a devastating bombshell game-changer.
but what candidates say matters.
and who candidates quote matters.
September 10, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I alone in thinking this is a non-issue? I mean, really. There are many issues surrounding Palin, to be sure, but how is this six-degrees-of-separation-game any better than the Rev. Wright smears Obama was getting a few months back?
September 10, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it muddies the waters and weakens GOP attacks along those lines.
However, I think that Palin is a sideshow. We should be attacking McCain more.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/09/forget-palin-go-after-mccain.php
September 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin pal Pegler actually made similar comments about Bobby Kennedy months before he was murdered.
http://irishechoonline.blogspot.com/
September 10, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go now,
Don’t look back we've drawn the line,
Move on,
Its no good to go back in time,
We’ll never choose a frozen Maverick like you,
For happy endings we won’t be fooled,
With Obama and Biden,
Our dreams will come true
(Chorus)
Sarah, Sarah,
Change is brewing in our eyes,
Sarah,Sarah,
Anytime time is a good time for your goodbye!
September 10, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin pal Pegler actually made similar comments about Bobby Kennedy months before he was murdered.
http://irishechoonline.blogspot.com/
September 10, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go now,
Don’t look back we've drawn the line,
Move on,
Its no good to go back in time,
We’ll never choose a frozen Maverick like you,
For happy endings we won’t be fooled,
With Obama and Biden,
Our dreams will come true
(Chorus)
Sarah, Sarah,
Change is brewing in our eyes,
Sarah,Sarah,
Anytime time is a good time for your goodbye!
September 10, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans aren't shy about their longing for a time before the New Deal.
And I understand this for the very rich. But why do middle class Republican voters fall for the ruse? I'm from a small town full of middle class people who believe that "family values" and hard work created the American middle class--they deny the contribution of Social Security, Medicare, labor laws, the G.I. Bill, civil rights laws. It's illogical ... and disheartening.
September 10, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pegler especially detested Eleanor Roosevelt, both while FDR was alive and afterwards when she became the First Lady of the World for her work for human rights. He called her "The Widow."
September 11, 2008 12:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pegler especially detested Eleanor Roosevelt, both while FDR was alive and afterwards when she became the First Lady of the World for her work for human rights. He called her "The Widow."
September 11, 2008 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sidebar: Characteristically, the right wing can't be bothered with fact-checking. The assassination attempt on FDR took place in Chicago, not Miami. The mis-identification of the city appears as a quotation from Pegler in Time magazine's 1969 obit. It's not clear to me whether he made the mistake or Time did. Time certainly didn't flag the mistake if it was Pegler's.
September 11, 2008 4:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Correction of my last post. I guess left-wing fact checking could be better. But at least it gets done. I'm a Chicago boy, and since the man who got killed in the FDR assassination attempt was the mayor of Chicago, I always assumed that the attempt occurred in Chicago. In fact, the attempt was made in Miami after all. Sorry about that.
September 11, 2008 5:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, Palin didn't quote anyone. She read a script from a teleprompter. Let's stop pretending Sarah Palin had anything to do with her speech, alright? Let's stop pretending that this woman is anything but what she is: a sock puppet.
September 11, 2008 8:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's the matter BluGrass(should be changed to Liberal BluAss) can't stand it when your crap get's thrown back in you face so you tell someone to get off this site? I don't see where you own this site so on what authority do you throw around orders? I bet you can't tell me without looking it up what Tsalagi means with out being a Liberal Smartass.
September 12, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The teleprompter did not work while she was giving her speech, where do you idiots get the crap you are spewing, it certainly couldn't be coming from your brains because you obviously don't have any brains. When God was handing out brians tou Liberals thought he said trains and you missed yours.
September 12, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since it is clear that McCain speechwriters wrote this speech for her (Much was made of feminizing the speech that had already been written.), the McCain campaign should also be scolded for citing Pegler. Judging from Palin's answers to Gibson's questions and her answers in other interviews, she is very much Quick Draw Sarah, and doesn't really give much thought to her responses. My guess is that she didn't even spend much time reading the speech ahead of time. It was obvious from her reading of the teleprompter that she didn't "own" the words. What would be truly damning would be if she had inserted that quote on her own without knowing its provenance.
September 12, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink