Veep debate speculation

[Flounder]

I'm half-excited half-terrified to see how this all plays out.

One scenario:

Palin comes across like she did during the CBS interview, where she gets asked a question and you see this deer in headlights look cross her eyes as she searches her brain for the correct talking point, and then proceeds to spew forth forth some unintelligible frankenstein of various talking points her handlers have been trying to drill into her brain.

In this situation, I think Biden has to stay VERY even keel. Just make his points and don't seem condescending or attacking. Because in this situation, Palin's only hope would be sympathy. Just let her hang herself.

Another scenario:

Palin has been playing possum. Which seems a little doubtful. But on a related not, I think there's a decent chance she'll do significantly better than the Couric interview. The debate should lend itself to more focused, talking-point style answers, and I'm certainly not going to discount the possibility that she could pull that off with some aplomb in the debate. Topic, talking point, topic, talking point.

In this scenario, I think Biden has to be much more aggressive and attempt to press specifics out of Palin, hoping to draw her into a Couric-interview-style stretch of gobbledeegook.

Thoughts?

[jimmac]

I can see Russia from my house!I'm half-excited half-terrified to see how this all plays out.

One scenario:

Palin comes across like she did during the CBS interview, where she gets asked a question and you see this deer in headlights look cross her eyes as she searches her brain for the correct talking point, and then proceeds to spew forth forth some unintelligible frankenstein of various talking points her handlers have been trying to drill into her brain.

In this situation, I think Biden has to stay VERY even keel. Just make his points and don't seem condescending or attacking. Because in this situation, Palin's only hope would be sympathy. Just let her hang herself.

Another scenario:

Palin has been playing possum. Which seems a little doubtful. But on a related not, I think there's a decent chance she'll do significantly better than the Couric interview. The debate should lend itself to more focused, talking-point style answers, and I'm certainly not going to discount the possibility that she could pull that off with some aplomb in the debate. Topic, talking point, topic, talking point.

In this scenario, I think Biden has to be much more aggressive and attempt to press specifics out of Palin, hoping to draw her into a Couric-interview-style stretch of gobbledeegook.

Thoughts?

:lol: When Palin answers a question it's like getting one of those notes where all the words are cut out of a magazine.

[FloorJack]

Anyone want to take a bet on how many feet Biden can get in his mouth.

For or against "clean" coal?

Patriot tax hikes?

Hillary should be debating here and not me?

US sent diplomat to Tehran?

The difference between Palin and Biden is that is that Biden hasn't learned a thing for all his years in office.

[Flounder]

Anyone want to take a bet on how many feet Biden can get in his mouth.

For or against "clean" coal?

Patriot tax hikes?

Hillary should be debating here and not me?

US sent diplomat to Tehran?

The difference between Palin and Biden is that is that Biden hasn't learned a thing for all his years in office.

So how do you think the debate will proceed?

[Bergermeister]

I hope there are some questions about accessibility in a democracy, foreign policy experience, rape victim's rights, the problem of teen pregnancy, gifts, what the VP does all day, some of the basic functionings of the government such as how a bill is born and becomes law...

[FloorJack]

It's hard to say. If Palin holds her ground she wins. She's much more in touch with regular folks that Biden is. The left is so twitterpated with Palin that the expectations are low. If she comes off as likable that may be all she needs. Giving Biden an open mic' can be a disaster.

[Bergermeister]

After her last interview, I'm surprised that anyone would have high expectations.

[@_@ Artman]

I agree that Biden has had his history of face palms but there are moments where given the right platform and the right time, he is a killer.

Biden on Bush administration's policy on Iraq on the Senate floor (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1op8vwF5UA).

"Noun, verb, 9/11" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPOAKXBi9Pw)

"What can you talk about, when you have nothing to say? What can you talk about after 8 years of failure?" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAUSoXqr3yc)

[Mystic]

Does Palin get to bring her gun?
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b4/UfoPilot/moose.jpg

[hardeeharhar]

Palin will beat expectations, and thus win the debate.

[@_@ Artman]

Palin will beat expectations, and thus win the debate.

http://img370.imageshack.us/img370/455/thatshoulddofq8.jpg

[edit...you were being sarcastic...]

Sarah made a brief appearance here in Philly at the Irish Pub last night before the debates. Within an hour she was gone and after the debates...gone.

But Joe Biden was on. Everywhere. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/27/sara-palin-nowhere-to-be_n_129861.html)

Amusing moment on CNN just now. Wolf Blitzer, coming out of a commercial:

"We've been getting some emails from views out there wondering why we spent some time interviewing Joe Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and not Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee. We would have loved to interview--we'd still love to interview Sarah Palin. Unfortunately we asked, we didn't get that interview...We're hoping that Sarah Palin will join us at some point down the road."

I'm told that Biden appeared on every major network tonight except ABC (which only turned him down because Palin wasn't available, on an equal-time sort of basis).

It's pretty strange when a candidate can't trust his own running mate to be out there spinning on his behalf.

http://www.coldtoast.com/images/toastSliceWhiteBkgd.jpg

[@_@ Artman]

For or against "clean" coal?

Hah, I was sifting through some YouTubes and found this... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rXyTRT-NZg)take it for what it's worth. One thing about Joe, you ask a question he's in your face.

[franksargent]

http://www.rubinville.com/dailydave/uploaded_images/burnt_toast-724090.jpg

I don't think Biden needs to say a single word or even show up.

Let Palin talk as much as possible.

The only way Biden loses is if he laughs out loud or he laughs hysterically, on numerous occasions.

And that's really going to be tough for Biden not to do.

[Bergermeister]

For everybody not to do.

[groverat]

He just has to look better. He doesn't have to beat her up, he just has to seem like a knowledgeable statesman with a good sense of humor, which is what he is.

[franksargent]

For everybody not to do.

They ought to keep a camera on the moderator anytime Palin speaks, to see the moderator's various puzzled expressions.

Palin speaks.

Moderator: OMFG!

Palin speaks again.

Moderator: WTF?

Palin speaks some more.

Moderator: ROTFLMFAO!

[hardeeharhar]

Hah, I was sifting through some YouTubes and found this... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rXyTRT-NZg)take it for what it's worth. One thing about Joe, you ask a question he's in your face.
i am scared.

[jimmac]

It's hard to say. If Palin holds her ground she wins. She's much more in touch with regular folks that Biden is. The left is so twitterpated with Palin that the expectations are low. If she comes off as likable that may be all she needs. Giving Biden an open mic' can be a disaster.


Hold her ground?:lol:

In most interviews she can barely hold a thought she's so busy looking through her list of prepared responses!:lol:

[jimmac]

Does Palin get to bring her gun?
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b4/UfoPilot/moose.jpg


:lol: Priceless!:lol:

Oh god! My side hurts!:lol:

[addabox]

It's hard to say. If Palin holds her ground she wins. She's much more in touch with regular folks that Biden is. The left is so twitterpated with Palin that the expectations are low. If she comes off as likable that may be all she needs. Giving Biden an open mic' can be a disaster.

So you're saying that regular folks are fucking morons? That seems rather uncharitable.

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's assume that "the average American" actually gives a shit if their elected officials know anything substantiative about the issues of the day, can string three words together into a coherent sentence, and can refrain from lying about virtually everything that crosses their mind.

I'm kinda getting tired of hearing from the lease curious, least intellectual capable, least informed, least ethical people in the country that they, and they alone, represent "real Americans."

[addabox]

The difference between Palin and Biden is that is that Biden hasn't learned a thing for all his years in office.

In the sense that the difference between a potted plant and a senator is that the senator hasn't mastered photosynthesis.

[midwinter]

He just has to look better. He doesn't have to beat her up, he just has to seem like a knowledgeable statesman with a good sense of humor, which is what he is.

I'm actually fairly concerned that Biden simply can't win this one. This debate, in the end, isn't a debate. It's a referendum on Palin, and so Biden's presence there only puts him in position to look like a fifth wheel, a mean man, a bully, or a know-it-all.

Of course, I think Biden ought to just come out and destroy her. What's that bit from the West Wing? If your guy's gonna lose, might as well take a few bodies out.

[addabox]

I'm actually fairly concerned that Biden simply can't win this one. This debate, in the end, isn't a debate. It's a referendum on Palin, and so Biden's presence there only puts him in position to look like a fifth wheel, a mean man, a bully, or a know-it-all.

Of course, I think Biden ought to just come out and destroy her. What's that bit from the West Wing? If your guy's gonna lose, might as well take a few bodies out.

My guess is that he's being coached to more-or-less ignore Palin and just respond to questions in ways that show off his command of the issues. He can't win any back and forth since he'll just look like a bully, and he certainly can't afford to imply anything at all about what a freaking dim-bulb his opponent is, or allude to that fact in any way. I think that's kinda her job, at this point.

I would also guess that Palin is being provided with self-contained speeches, with perhaps a few attacks on Biden designed to lure him into an impolitic response. Other than that, I would expect her to do the stump speech thing, regardless of the question at hand. She's better off appearing to ignore the question and saying her lines than attempting to answer it and getting lost.

Whether Biden is capable of sticking to a script or even a strategy, I have no idea.

[groverat]

midwinter:

You have a good point about that debate being a referendum on Palin, and that's exactly why Biden should try to make it the Joe Biden Show by being funny and independent and avoiding completely taking shots at her for being an embarrassing neophyte.

He can attack her. I disagree with the idea that he can't attack her for fear of looking like a bully. He just has to make sure the attack is about substance and not her as a person/candidate; and he can also attack her by attacking John McCain.

He has to reinforce the narrative of her ineptitude without making it obvious that that is what he is doing. He has to come off as gracious and breezy while dismantling whatever strategy she has to spew talking points. He needs to be prepared to kill those talking points with facts and context that make it clear he knows his shit and that she is a pretender.

Let's say the conversation is about the financial crisis and the bailout, here's Biden's gameplan...
- Offer some historical context. (This reminds the viewer that Palin is a newbie and a nobody.)
- Reference his longstanding relationship with McCain. (This reminds the viewer that Palin and McCain are relative strangers and that their relationship is one of pure political necessity, not work and service.)
- Soberly attack McCain's record of supporting Bush's fiscal policies. (This weakens Palin's one skill, which is to parrot McCain's stump speech.)
- Do it with sincere gravitas with a demeanor that says, "This is a serious issue and I am a serious man who understands this."

He destroys Palin by attacking McCain, looking presidential, and capturing the narrative on issues (keeping the message where he wants it).

The Obama campaign is a lot smarter than me. They have a black man named "Hussein" ahead of a decorated conservative POW in a national election and they already beat Hillary Clinton. I'm confident that they've got this well in hand.

[addabox]

midwinter:

You have a good point about that debate being a referendum on Palin, and that's exactly why Biden should try to make it the Joe Biden Show by being funny and independent and avoiding completely taking shots at her for being an embarrassing neophyte.

He can attack her. I disagree with the idea that he can't attack her for fear of looking like a bully. He just has to make sure the attack is about substance and not her as a person/candidate; and he can also attack her by attacking John McCain.

He has to reinforce the narrative of her ineptitude without making it obvious that that is what he is doing. He has to come off as gracious and breezy while dismantling whatever strategy she has to spew talking points. He needs to be prepared to kill those talking points with facts and context that make it clear he knows his shit and that she is a pretender.

Let's say the conversation is about the financial crisis and the bailout, here's Biden's gameplan...
- Offer some historical context. (This reminds the viewer that Palin is a newbie and a nobody.)
- Reference his longstanding relationship with McCain. (This reminds the viewer that Palin and McCain are relative strangers and that their relationship is one of pure political necessity, not work and service.)
- Soberly attack McCain's record of supporting Bush's fiscal policies. (This weakens Palin's one skill, which is to parrot McCain's stump speech.)
- Do it with sincere gravitas with a demeanor that says, "This is a serious issue and I am a serious man who understands this."

He destroys Palin by attacking McCain, looking presidential, and capturing the narrative on issues (keeping the message where he wants it).

The Obama campaign is a lot smarter than me. They have a black man named "Hussein" ahead of a decorated conservative POW in a national election and they already beat Hillary Clinton. I'm confident that they've got this well in hand.

I agree with the "gravitas" thing. I think he needs to be dead serious and focused on the issues.

The trouble with "breezy" is that when Biden does it, he tends to come off as smarmy and smug. I really don't think he can afford to do the "this is so obvious a 10 year old could grasp it" bit, or act incredulous, or make pointed jokes, or anything like that. Obama has enough graciousness and charm for the two them. Let Biden be Mr. Spock. If he can.

[Gilsch]

I really don't think he can afford to do the "this is so obvious a 10 year old could grasp it" bit, or act incredulous, or make pointed jokes, or anything like that. Obama has enough graciousness and charm for the two them. Let Biden be Mr. Spock. If he can.

That's what concerns me. It could be an amazing test of will not to react to Palin's memorized BS. I don't know if Biden can. Personally charlatans drive me f-ing insane. lol In the video of the Miss Teen USA girl the dude holding the microphone was about to burst out laughing and that only lasted 20 seconds. Now imagine having to endure 90 minutes of that!

This country is such that Palin not embarrassing herself will be perceived as a MAJOR victory. :no:

It's gonna be tricky.

[FloorJack]

One line that Palin could take is to question if Obama and Biden are going to be willing to go against their own party when they need too. Barack's line that he's bipartisan and an isle crosser is laughable. I don't think he has the balls to stick up to Pelosi and Reed. She comes in as an "outsider" and says she and The Maverick are going to stick to their guns against the rest of 'em. Maybe that would work?

[addabox]

One line that Palin could take is to question if Obama and Biden are going to be willing to go against their own party when they need too. Barack's line that he's bipartisan and an isle crosser is laughable. I don't think he has the balls to stick up to Pelosi and Reed. She comes in as an "outsider" and says she and The Maverick are going to stick to their guns against the rest of 'em. Maybe that would work?

McCain has had a few points of disagreement with his Republican brethren (immigration, torture, campaign finance reform), all of which he has abandoned in order to shore up the base for his presidential aspirations. I don't think there's a single major issue that McCain hasn't flatly contradicted himself on in the last few years.

I would dare say Biden is aware of that.

I'm also sure that Biden would be more than happy to discuss Governor Palin's mavericky relationship to earmarks and wasteful spending.

I think that, as this point, the whole "just a couple of mavericks" sounds stupid to most people. I think most people realize that if you go around calling yourself a maverick you're probably not.

[franksargent]

One that refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group; a dissenter.

An independent individual who does not go along with a group or party.

A person who takes an independent stand, as in politics, from that of a party or group.

In opposition, in revolt, contentious, aberrant, nonconformist; see also quarrelsome, radical, unusual, dissenter, malcontent, extremist.

Just the type of individual needed to work against both parties in the legislature. :rolleyes:

[Flounder]

Seriously, I love Tina Fey.

The best part about the opening sketch they just did was that the answer to the bailout question was almost Palin's exact words from the Couric interview. They were so hilarious that they didn't need changing!

[midwinter]

McCain has had a few points of disagreement with his Republican brethren (immigration, torture, campaign finance reform), all of which he has abandoned in order to shore up the base for his presidential aspirations. I don't think there's a single major issue that McCain hasn't flatly contradicted himself on in the last few years.

I would dare say Biden is aware of that.

I'm also sure that Biden would be more than happy to discuss Governor Palin's mavericky relationship to earmarks and wasteful spending.

I think that, as this point, the whole "just a couple of mavericks" sounds stupid to most people. I think most people realize that if you go around calling yourself a maverick you're probably not.

My friend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmUBwQybFKo)s, what addabox doesn't understand is that, you see, maverick (http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u232/duballstar1983/top_gun_maverick_tom_cruise_suited.jpg), it is very serious business here that we're, and John McCain has much (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=mccain+rino&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8), ah, and you can't do it, my friend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWOZKeOauNI&eurl=http://sensico.wordpress.com/2008/08/22/video-mccain-americans-wont-pick-lettuce-for-50hr/). You can't do it. Veterans.

[FloorJack]

Do you guys think Obama and Biden will stand up to their own party? I'm guessing :no:

[addabox]

Do you guys think Obama and Biden will stand up to their own party? I'm guessing :no:

I don't know what "stand up to their own party" means. Do you mean when a Democratic controlled Senate votes for mandatory abortions? When Nancy Pelosi goes to war with China? Do you expect Obama to join hands with minority Republicans and "stand up to his party" by privatizing social security? What?

[midwinter]

I don't know what "stand up to their own party" means. Do you mean when a Democratic controlled Senate votes for mandatory abortions? When Nancy Pelosi goes to war with China? Do you expect Obama to join hands with minority Republicans and "stand up to his party" by privatizing social security? What?

My friends, maverick (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/13/mccain-waterboarding-fail/). Maverick (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/08/AR2008060801689.html). Maverick (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/mccain_didnt_really_suspend_hi.php).

[addabox]

My friends, maverick (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/13/mccain-waterboarding-fail/). Maverick (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/08/AR2008060801689.html). Maverick (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/mccain_didnt_really_suspend_hi.php).

Man, that's some mavericky goodness. POW!

[midwinter]

Man, that's some mavericky goodness. POW!

The SNL skit tonight was pretty good, too. Whenever his party has needed him, he hasn't been there. He cannot be counted on.

[FloorJack]

The SNL skit tonight was pretty good, too. Whenever his party has needed him, he hasn't been there. He cannot be counted on.

I missed the intro skit. The debate skit was crap and weekend update was funny.

[groverat]

What are Obama and Biden supposed to stand up to Democrats on?

You seem to be asserting that the Republicans and Democrats have bad ideas an equal amount of the time.

[Bergermeister]

I missed the intro skit. The debate skit was crap and weekend update was funny.

The intro skit is online; it is hilarious.

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/categories/2000s/25066/

Couric / Palin Open

[FloorJack]

I just watched it Hulu. It was pretty funny.

[groverat]

I liked it.

Obama's kind of a hard man to make fun of, not in a "how dare you!" sense, but he's just not a ridiculous character. I think the SNL person portraying him should have giant prosthetic ears.

The race card bit with KJI was funny.

I also liked the "I just don't care anymore".

[jimmac]

Do you guys think Obama and Biden will stand up to their own party? I'm guessing :no:

If need be but I don't think they'll have to that much.

Democrats in the Whitehouse and the Senate could in theory be a well oiled machine.

Exactly what we need if there's any hope to fix the mess Bush has left us all with.

[FloorJack]

If need be but I don't think they'll have to that much.

Democrats in the Whitehouse and the Senate could in theory be a well oiled machine.

Exactly what we need if there's any hope to fix the mess Bush has left us all with.

I guess what you look forward to is what I don't. I don't think Obama is like Clinton. I think we'll see even more of an explosion of spending. You'll see "card check" union voting put in place creating work place intimidation. You'll see special forces reading miranda right to terrorists in afghanistan (and pakistan) and KSM set free on a technicality.

[Harald]

I guess what you look forward to is what I don't. I don't think Obama is like Clinton. I think we'll see even more of an explosion of spending. You'll see "card check" union voting put in place creating work place intimidation. You'll see special forces reading miranda right to terrorists in afghanistan (and pakistan) and KSM set free on a technicality.

Ad-hom removed.

There you go Lundy, saved you the bother.

[addabox]

I guess what you look forward to is what I don't. I don't think Obama is like Clinton. I think we'll see even more of an explosion of spending. You'll see "card check" union voting put in place creating work place intimidation. You'll see special forces reading miranda right to terrorists in afghanistan (and pakistan) and KSM set free on a technicality.

Since what you're not looking forward to ranges from cartoonish distortion to ludicrous, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Not that that likely puts your mind at ease.

[FloorJack]

Since what you're not looking forward to ranges from cartoonish distortion to ludicrous, you probably don't have that much to worry about.

Not that that likely puts your mind at ease.

Well see. For sure secrete ballot union organization is a gonner. Spending may or may not go up.

The rest is an extreme example but if Barack shuts down gitmo and puts everyone worth charging into the federal court system then ... some dangerous people could get sprung.

We'll see what's going to happen.

[FloorJack]

Palin did have a big blunder when she was talking about the great depression and FDR.


Say What?: Sarah Palin, FDR & the TV
(http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/say-what-joe-biden-fdr-the-tv/)
“When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. She said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”

There are, of course, a few historical inaccuracies there. First, Herbert Hoover was president when the stock market crashed, in 1929. Roosevelt did not take office until March of 1933.

When he did, Roosevelt communicated to the people over radio — not television.

Hard to shake off the dim witted beauty queen (http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/biden.jpg) image when you say stuff like that.

[groverat]

Biden says stupid things pretty much all the time.

What makes it a "gaffe" and not an "indicator of ineptitude" is that Biden has a long and respected record of policy experience and expertise.

There's a difference between an inept person and a capable person who shoots his mouth off.

[Bergermeister]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden#Works

Can we have a list of works by Sara?

"How to kill a moose"
"How to interrupt a proceeding for political gain"
"Alaska Defends US from Evil Russia"
"Every Girl's Guide to Teenage Pregnancy"
"The Similarities Between Pit-Bulls and Hockey Moms"
"Bridge Design & Support"
"Openness"
"How to Avoid the Public: A Guide for Aspiring Politicians"
"I Get Back to Ya"

[FloorJack]

Biden says stupid things pretty much all the time.

What makes it a "gaffe" and not an "indicator of ineptitude" is that Biden has a long and respected record of policy experience and expertise.

There's a difference between an inept person and a capable person who shoots his mouth off.

Well Biden has no excuse. He's been at it a long long time and still is a bungling idiot. Presidential material for sure. Palin at least is a newbie.

One has to wonder how well vetted Biden was. Clearly this calls Obama's competence into question.

[addabox]

Well Biden has no excuse. He's been at it a long long time and still is a bungling idiot. Presidential material for sure. Palin at least is a newbie.

One has to wonder how well vetted Biden was. Clearly this calls Obama's competence into question.

Yeah, that's fun, and all, but only in the fantasies of the partisan does Joe Biden ever come off as a blithering half-wit the way Palin has.

It's kind of funny: the right was all set to talk up Obama and Biden's "gaffes", when Palin came along and taught us that gaffe is so old school compared to "sustained gibberish."

She's totally moved the goal posts.

[hardeeharhar]

Well Biden has no excuse. He's been at it a long long time and still is a bungling idiot. Presidential material for sure. Palin at least is a newbie.

One has to wonder how well vetted Biden was. Clearly this calls Obama's competence into question.
mydo, er, scott, it's interesting that you even have to justify this -- palin isn't making gaffs. a gaff isn't sustained incomprehensible gooblygook.

[pfflam]

mydo, er, scott, it's interesting that you even have to justify this -- palin isn't making gaffs. a gaff isn't sustained incomprehensible gooblygook.

Wow . . . 'scott'? is it really? . . . now those are the good old days

But seriously, Palin said Roosevelt went on TV to address the Stock Marjet Crash?! . . . . HAHAHAHAHHA
gasp
HAHAHAHAHAHA

[pfflam]

Wow . . . 'scott'? is it really? . . . now those are the good old days

But seriously, Palin said Roosevelt went on TV to address the Stock Marjet Crash?! . . . . HAHAHAHAHHA
gasp
HAHAHAHAHAHA

oops . . . . apparently Biden said it.

THough I can only find it in freeper style websites . . . so perhaps its an equal value gaff

[addabox]

oops . . . . apparently Biden said it.

THough I can only find it in freeper style websites . . . so perhaps its an equal value gaff

Yeah, it's a Biden lapse. In typical Freeper style, they're absolutely sure that this is proof that Biden is pretty much retarded and all those liberals laughing at Sarah Palin must now eat vast amounts of crow.

Because typical Freeper style is hilariously clueless.

Next up: a great deal of teeth gnashing over how the liberal media are deliberately burying this damning evidence of the man's retardation, with much dark muttering over the terrible price they'll all pay, one day.

[midwinter]

The McCain campaign is very upset at the unfairness of the Veep debate (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MENUu--lTS4). Before it's happened.

Didn't McPalin do this already? Didn't they say that they weren't going to allow Palin to do interviews because they were very upset with the kind of questions she'd be asked? Before they've asked them.

[BRussell]

I think Palin will do great. Not because I think Palin will do great, but because the media will think Palin did great.

If you look at the history of debates, what matters is whether there is a good zinger that takes 10 seconds for the media to play on the news over and over. Like "you're no JFK." And she'll definitely have some of those. Those kinds of one-liners are all that come out of her mouth: Pitbulls and lipstick. "Thanks but no thanks." "A mayor is like a community organizer with real responsibilities." Etc.

And the standards aren't exactly high. "You're no JFK" wasn't bad, but when Reagan said "there you go again" to Carter in 1980 it was supposedly a devastating blow that almost single-handedly won the election. WTF? "There you go again?" Is that supposed to be clever or witty or a slicing insult? And then Mondale said "where's the beef?" to Reagan. Wow, a line from a TV ad. Hillary's "no way, no how, no McCain" was supposedly this incredible devastating one-liner. :err:

But that's all that matters. It's why the media didn't really know what to make of the first Obama-McCain debate - there were no stand-out one-liners. Palin will mumble through the debate with nonsense, but have one dumb prepared zinger that the media will play up as a crushing blow, and say she beat expectations and won the debate.

[Outsider]

How the media will see the debate:

Biden: Charlie Brown-esque adult trumpet sounds in answer to a question.

Moderator: Governor Palin, would you like to respond to Senator Biden's response?

(after a 5 second deer-in-headlights moment she blurts out)

Palin: That's what she said!

Media has a ROFLMAO moment.

[@_@ Artman]

If you look at the history of debates, what matters is whether there is a good zinger that takes 10 seconds for the media to play on the news over and over. Like "you're no JFK." And she'll definitely have some of those.

You do understand that Bentson (D) said this to Quayle (R) and it mattered naught. Bush 41 won.

Watching the full segment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_85K_ayRIU) up to the quote is important too.

This doesn't pobably mean anything, but to others here who haven't seen this, much less Quayle's ineptitude (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYJVfd5WRhE), they should and make up their own minds.

Palin has gender on her side though...

[Northgate]

I think Palin will do great. Not because I think Palin will do great, but because the media will think Palin did great.

If you look at the history of debates, what matters is whether there is a good zinger that takes 10 seconds for the media to play on the news over and over. Like "you're no JFK." And she'll definitely have some of those. Those kinds of one-liners are all that come out of her mouth: Pitbulls and lipstick. "Thanks but no thanks." "A mayor is like a community organizer with real responsibilities." Etc.

And the standards aren't exactly high. "You're no JFK" wasn't bad, but when Reagan said "there you go again" to Carter in 1980 it was supposedly a devastating blow that almost single-handedly won the election. WTF? "There you go again?" Is that supposed to be clever or witty or a slicing insult? And then Mondale said "where's the beef?" to Reagan. Wow, a line from a TV ad. Hillary's "no way, no how, no McCain" was supposedly this incredible devastating one-liner. :err:

But that's all that matters. It's why the media didn't really know what to make of the first Obama-McCain debate - there were no stand-out one-liners. Palin will mumble through the debate with nonsense, but have one dumb prepared zinger that the media will play up as a crushing blow, and say she beat expectations and won the debate.

Yup, yup. That the traditional media for ya'. Which is why I laugh my ass off every-time I hear a winger scream bloody murder about the media. Tankity tank tank. They just don't get. They never will.

However, I think this voting on the bailout nonsense, if it continues throughout the week, will be used by the McCain camp to pull more shenanigans. I will be very surprised if we see the VP debate this week. I think the concept of canceling the last debate was their way of trying to force the debate to the VP time-slot. That didn't work out so well. I'm sure they'll try it again. Palin has got to have them very very worried.

Also, let's not forget Biden's penchant for witty one-liners. "A noun, a verb, and 9/11" was a great line because it allowed everyone to encapsulate Rudy Giuliani's nasty habit of constantly referring to it. And I think it played a small part on Giuliani's unravelling.

[midwinter]

Well, considering how low expectations are, Palin only needs to not vomit on herself, and she's won.

[Northgate]

Well, considering how low expectations are, Palin only needs to not vomit on herself, and she's won.

And if Biden even turns around and looks at her he'll be a "sexist".

[SpamSandwich]

I'm kinda getting tired of hearing from the lease curious, least intellectual capable, least informed, least ethical people in the country that they, and they alone, represent "real Americans."

There's really no defense. She will either debate issues from a position of strength, knowledge and experience, or not.

I heard a story on NPR that put forth the idea that Biden will be in a very difficult spot not because he is debating a powerful rival, but because he will be debating an incapable one. He could come off looking like he's beating a cute kitten to the American public. It will look very ugly and could gain her even more sympathy. It was a brilliant, sadistic strategic move on McCain's part to have Palin as his VP. He's even more twisted than we knew.

There has been talk on the Republican side of replacing Palin. If this unlikely event were to occur, Obama would be wise to ask Biden to step down and bring back Hillary.

[@_@ Artman]

Memo to Joe Biden: Let Palin Do the Talking at Thursday's Debate (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/memo-to-joe-biden-let-palin-talk.html)

Joe Biden doesn't need to do much in this debate. Everyone, Republicans included, knows the guy knows policy detail and foreign relations cold. He really doesn't need to do much to prove he has mastery.

Normally, "time of possession" is a key signifier in football of which team is likeliest to win the game, but in this case the opposite seems true. Think of it -- all anyone cares about in this debate is what Sarah Palin says.

The Republican base wants to hear her because they like her and identify with her -- we've heard this chorus countless times on the road in McCain volunteer offices. She warms Republican base hearts. On the other hand, Democrats believe they're about to witness an epic train wreck. So does the media. The expectations could not possibly be lower for this one.

Can't agree more. He should just answer the questions smartly, distinctly and with conviction. Let her take the debate train off the rails herself.

But I don't know, I heard she is cramming pretty hard for this debate (http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/palin_brushing_up_on?utm_source=onion_rss_daily). ;)

[FloorJack]

WSJ (of course) has a good dissection of the disaster known as Biden.


Debate Questions for Joe Biden
Softballs for the foreign policy 'expert.' (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122273074990088147.html)


Here's the last one...

"In the same spirit, Sen. Biden, and as a longstanding leader of the Foreign Relations Committee, can you give us the names of the prime minister of France and the president of Germany? Just to be clear here, senator, I am not referring to President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel."

[Bergermeister]

Just a wild guess but, Fillon and Köhler?

The WSJ will have to do better than that.

[FloorJack]

Just a wild guess but, Fillon and Köhler?

The WSJ will have to do better than that.

Well you read the whole thing of course?

[Bergermeister]

Well you read the whole thing of course?

Sure did. As I said, the WSJ will need to do better.

What is the conservative mind-set this week with gotcha-questions (to quote McCain)?

[gastroboy]

I'm half-excited half-terrified to see how this all plays out.

One scenario:

Palin comes across like she did during the CBS interview, where she gets asked a question and you see this deer in headlights look cross her eyes as she searches her brain for the correct talking point, and then proceeds to spew forth forth some unintelligible frankenstein of various talking points her handlers have been trying to drill into her brain.

In this situation, I think Biden has to stay VERY even keel. Just make his points and don't seem condescending or attacking. Because in this situation, Palin's only hope would be sympathy. Just let her hang herself.

Another scenario:

Palin has been playing possum. Which seems a little doubtful. But on a related not, I think there's a decent chance she'll do significantly better than the Couric interview. The debate should lend itself to more focused, talking-point style answers, and I'm certainly not going to discount the possibility that she could pull that off with some aplomb in the debate. Topic, talking point, topic, talking point.

In this scenario, I think Biden has to be much more aggressive and attempt to press specifics out of Palin, hoping to draw her into a Couric-interview-style stretch of gobbledeegook.

Thoughts?

Having tried an idiot for 8 years, it seems the Republican Party wants a deputy idiot for another 4.

God she's hot! Foreign policy? What foreign policy? Just look at those tits!

[Bergermeister]

The New Yorker cover image looks at Palin's foreign policy credentials.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/new-yorker-cover-mocks-pa_n_130423.html

Palin can only name one Supreme Court case: Roe vs Wade.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/latest-palin-gaffe-cant-n_n_130395.html

Did she go to high school?

The ones I remember, and I am just a couple of years younger than Palin and have never dreamed of pursuing public office:

Marbury, US vs Nixon, Amistad, Dred Scott, Fletcher vs Peck, Fergusson, Brown, Abington, Gideon, Miranda, Cherokee Nation, Dempsey, Chisholm

[franksargent]

WSJ (of course) has a good dissection of the disaster known as Biden.


Debate Questions for Joe Biden
Softballs for the foreign policy 'expert.' (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122273074990088147.html)


Here's the last one...

Yeah, like the biased with intent WSJ op-ed people would ever be given a chance at ever moderating a debate. :lol::lol:

Oh and since the entire set of questions are asked to both candidated, wonder how Palin would answer these very same questions? "I'll use another lifeline'" would be her standard rote answer. :wow:

The real joke here is the WSJ itself, since they don't even have a clue as to the format of these debates, that being asking the same questions to both parties present. :p

[@_@ Artman]

You have no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Flashes of Billy Madson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqITmC8fPS8&NR=1)...:lol:

BUT WAIT, there's more...

It's like watching Daddy defend his prom-queen daughter (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=9RywhPtebuM&eurl=http://www.google.com/reader/view/).

How is a question from a voter a "gotcha"?

The McCain definition of "gotcha journalism" is any question asked of his VP that she can't answer.

[Tauron]

It will be like watching Mike Tyson beat the crap out of Clay Aiken for crowd entertainment.

[Tauron]

The only way Palin can win this debate is by flashing her tits on Joe Biden when the camera pans out to the moderator.

[FloorJack]

It will be like watching Mike Tyson beat the crap out of Clay Aiken for crowd entertainment.

I think it's more like Ryan Seacrest vs Clay Aiken. One of those two has a real talent.

[BRussell]

Yup, yup. That the traditional media for ya'.

My favorite media debate moment of all time was the Dukakis "what if your wife was raped" question. He was roundly condemned by the media for not being genuine. Why? Because he failed to fake an emotional response to a hypothetical question. :err:

That's the level of debate analysis in our media, and it's why on Friday morning I think Palin will be said to have won.

[@_@ Artman]

"!!!OMGWTFMILF!!!"
http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/SP-JM-CK-34.jpg
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Bergermeister]

Are we supposed to provide captions???

[@_@ Artman]

Sorry, context... (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shaw/reading-the-pictures-emfi_b_130536.html)

It's one thing to watch interviewers respond to Sarah Palin's odd mixture of bravado and gibberish. It's another to observe McCain along for the ride. As such, I offer you a breakdown of McCain's "micro reactions" in the first first forty-four seconds of last night's interview with Katie Couric.

Off the bat, Couric asks Palin about her statement, made over the weekend, that "the U.S. should absolutely launch cross-border attacks from Afghanistan into Pakistan" given McCain's admonition that you don't say that kind of thing out loud.

In the first shot, McCain McCain's eyes bulge, then he shoots a glance to someone off camera, after Palin quickly and presumptuously launches in with: "We had a great discussion with President Zardari..."

:wow:

[Tauron]

Look:

Everyone knows Palin is mentally retarded and Joe Biden is the friggin Albert Einstein of politics compared to her.

So if Palin doesn't make a complete fool of herself she will be praised and sang as victorious. Why?

Because Americans don't want to confront the reality and seriousness of the situation, to them is just another episode of big brother or any reality TV show.

It is sad, because the consequences of Palin as VP will be dire to say the least.

[Northgate]

My favorite media debate moment of all time was the Dukakis "what if your wife was raped" question. He was roundly condemned by the media for not being genuine. Why? Because he failed to fake an emotional response to a hypothetical question. :err:

That's the level of debate analysis in our media, and it's why on Friday morning I think Palin will be said to have won.

Exactly. I'm not sure why Republicans are running around with their hair on fire regarding Palin's inability to debate Biden.

All she has to do is make one good Tina Fey joke and she's won the whole goddamned thing. Sad. But unfortunately true. Speaks volumes about the massive vapidity of our voters, no?

[addabox]

Well, maybe, but there are a couple of wild cards to bear in mind:

1) I don't think a major party has ever fielded a candidate so breathtakingly ignorant. At least not in my lifetime.

All the analogous examples that are being cited have one stark point of divergence with the case at hand-- all the "winners" and "losers" and "zinger-getter-inners" in prior debates had a passing familiarity with, well, something beyond the narrow, parochial bounds of their personal experience.

Remember, the Sarah Palin that couldn't begin to formulate a coherent answer for Couric wasn't "unprepared", she wasn't "ambushed" it wasn't a "hostile" interview, and the questions she got asked were pretty much exactly what we, and the McCain campaign, could have expected.

But asked the absolutely inevitable bailout question, she was incapable of making a lick of sense. That's what a carefully coached Sarah Palin actually sounds like-- I can't see how it was any kind of anomaly.

If she can't memorize a few lines in response to a question everyone knows is coming, why would we expect her to fair any better in a debate?

2) There's talk of the McCain people deciding that the problem is that she's been "over-coached" and they should let "Sarah be Sarah."

However, as far as a national audience is concerned, there is no "Sarah" beyond exactly two data points: her convention speech, and her disastrous interviews.

Problem being that her convention speech, which is apparently serving as a benchmark for the "real Sarah" that wingers fell in love with, was a speech written for someone else, lightly tweaked for gender, and read from a teleprompter.

That Sarah doesn't exist. Beyond that, the endearing plucky lady who is just like you comes down to some biographical details and an accent.

So how does that Sarah show up for a debate? More pitbull, less lipstick? Turn it into the talent segment of a beauty contest? Respond to every question with cute homilies about moose huntin' and child rearin'?

If everything were going swimmingly, coming off as a nice lady with common sense and a down-home demeanor might be enough, but now? I'm thinking not so much.

3) Sarah Palin is a national joke. That train has left the station. There may be a certain amount of sympathy for her, at this point, but rooting for the hopelessly-in-over-her-head lady is different from getting excited about her as vice president.

My sense is that America will be a little relieved is she doesn't make a complete fool out of herself. They may even give her the benefit of the doubt and declare that she "won." And that that won't do the McCain ticket any good at all.

Look, it comes down to this: the McCain people know what a political hit they've taken for keeping her under wraps. That means that they talked her, coached her, and made a strategic decision that that political hit was the lesser of two evils.

They couldn't get out of the debate, so they've decided to just let it roll, and let Palin say whatever comes to her mind. Because they actually have no choice. She can't memorize her lines. So, madlibs it is.

Maybe, just maybe that will be a winning performance. But I wouldn't want to be her handlers, now.

[Tauron]

Moderator: Sarah Palin, what would you wish to make the world a better place?

Palin: World peace.

[Applauses]

Then she walks down the isle with her beautiful dress waving in a satin glove.

LOL!

[FloorJack]

She'll have her hits and misses. She'll jam Biden on energy. On the econ' she can side with the middle class. On foreign policy she can stick to core beliefs. It all comes down to when they try to jam her up. She may opossum or not. If she comes out okay then expect her handlers to loosen up.

I think the caricature the left has dreamed up (lied about?) for her wont be validated by the debate.

[shetline]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v641/twotimes/story.jpg

[@_@ Artman]

“Oh no, it's nothing negative at all. He's got a lot of experience and just stating the fact there, that we've been hearing his speeches for all these years. So he's got a tremendous amount of experience and, you know, I'm the new energy, the new face, the new ideas and he's got the experience based on many many years in the Senate. And voters are gonna have a choice there of what it is that they want in these next four years.”

Stumped? The answer (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/30/politics/horserace/entry4490368.shtml).

She's the energy, the noocleear energy this country needs...:\:rolleyes::no:

[@_@ Artman]

She'll have her hits and misses. She'll jam Biden on energy. On the econ' she can side with the middle class. On foreign policy she can stick to core beliefs. It all comes down to when they try to jam her up. She may opossum or not. If she comes out okay then expect her handlers to loosen up.

I think the caricature the left has dreamed up (lied about?) for her wont be validated by the debate.

I don't agree with this. She's not some master of deception and persuasion who is capable of hiding her flaws as this article suggests (http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html).

When she says stupid shit, I realize it. You (should?) realize it. Katie Couric realizes it, the McCain campaign realizes it, even SNL realizes it.

[@_@ Artman]

She doesn't know because she doesn't care (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/09/she-doesnt-care.html).

[FloorJack]

I don't agree with this. She's not some master of deception and persuasion who is capable of hiding her flaws as this article suggests (http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1001/p09s01-coop.html).

When she says stupid shit, I realize it. You (should?) realize it. Katie Couric realizes it, the McCain campaign realizes it, even SNL realizes it.

Stupid shit sure. They all say stupid shit from time to time. Good thing Biden is graded on a curve. We know what he meant to say.

[shetline]

Stupid shit sure. They all say stupid shit from time to time. Good thing Biden is graded on a curve. We know what he meant to say.
Biden's stupid shit stems from a bad case of intermittent foot-in-mouth disease, and I don't deny he's got a problem there, but at least his inept remarks are usually found amid many intelligent comments and answers being delivered at the same time.

There's a big difference between that and saying stupid things because you're unprepared and literally don't have anything intelligent to say.

[addabox]

You know you've just pointed out what could be a very interesting and ironic development in this campaign. The media has heaped their hatred, disdain and ridicule on Palin. They've painted her as an utter moronic nutjob. This is the picture we have now.

If she comes across as even reasonably normal, intelligent and "with it" in the debate there seem to be a couple of possible results:

1. The electorate's (justifiable) distrust of the media grows and they simply ignore anything else they have to say.

2. Palin looks like an underdog, a victim, an unfair recipient of criticism (and the electorate sympathetically sides with her).

3. Palin looks like a genius in comparison to the portrait painted of her (and the electorate think, "Shit, she ain't as bad as all that." and sides with her).

The real irony here is that if Palin is as vapid and worthless as she's been portrayed then it would have been better for the media to treat her with kid gloves, even praiseful, and let her fall on her face during the nationally televised debate. But by tearing her down, the risk is that she can only look good (even great) if even if she's only average.

Which media is it that is "portraying" her as "vapid and worthless"?

In what sense were her entirely nonsensical answers to the entirely predictable questions asked by Couric a matter of media portrayal? Do you think that asking her about the bailout was some kind of super mean liberal media trick?

How is it that the McCain campaign thinks it's better to keep her hidden, and take their lumps for that, than allow her to interact with the press? Can you name another vice-presidential candidate who has been handled this way?

I can't even begin to wrap my head around the world view that posits "it would have been better" for the media to treat her with kid gloves so that she could fall on her face in the debate, as if it were a given that "the media" are holding strategy sessions on how to best put Sarah Palin in a negative light. Jesus.

Finally, what evidence can you offer that Palin is anything other than what she appears to be: deeply ignorant, incurious and not very good at thinking on her feet?

Her scripted convention speech? Her scripted campaign rally speeches? Half the people in the country could read their lines as well, and, if they had a southern accent and were hunters 'n shit, they'd probably be exactly as popular, with exactly the same people.

Were you following her career in Alaska, and were won over by her candor? We only have this little bit of Ms. Palin speaking without a script, and it ain't good, so from where are you getting your sense of who this woman is?

[addabox]

Stupid shit sure. They all say stupid shit from time to time. Good thing Biden is graded on a curve. We know what he meant to say.

I believe this would be a case of straining "Republican equivalency dementia" to the breaking point.

Anything is just like anything if you're willing to get general enough. 9/11 is just like my car breaking down, because they both caused me distress.

I therefore demand a national day of mourning for my car.

[shetline]

If it happens, Obama wins instantly (though I expect he wins anyway...but this would hit it out of the park).
Not only does that seem unlikely (which we agree), I don't see how that could be positive. It would make Obama look indecisive, people would be screaming about a "bait and switch", there would be legal questions (real or not) raised about changing ballots, people already having voted for Obama/BIDEN in early voting, etc. Yes, I can see some tactical upside to switching to Hillary, but not enough to counterbalance the stink such a move would cause.

It's the same reason McCain is stuck with Palin, no matter how toxic she becomes -- any attempt to replace her would likely be more damaging that her remaining on the ticket.

Of course, if McCain truly believed in the slogan "Country First" he'd dump Palin, regardless of the damage to his campaign, and spare us all any chance of that woman ever taking the office of the Presidency.

[@_@ Artman]

Quick, more lipstick! (http://www.themudflats.net/2008/09/30/troopergate-witness-flips-like-a-pancake/)

[BRussell]

But by tearing her down, the risk is that she can only look good (even great) if even if she's only average. The "expectations game" is just another one of those stupid media narratives that dominates the debate analysis, and it's another reason why I think, come Friday, Palin will be said to have won the debate. Of course, expectations play no rational role in who actually does better in the debate, but they always seem to work against Democrats in the media narrative.

[Tauron]

The "expectations game" is just another one of those stupid media narratives that dominates the debate analysis, and it's another reason why I think, come Friday, Palin will be said to have won the debate. Of course, expectations play no rational role in who actually does better in the debate, but they always seem to work against Democrats in the media narrative.

It works against the Dems to the point it is beyond ridiculous.

Just count the number of gaffes, I think McCain must be leading 50 to 1 in number of gaffes vs. Obama. But we all know that if Obama urinates one milimeter to the left he gets nailed to the wall. In the meantime McCain gets a relatively free pass from saying we will be 100 years in Iraq, from slandering his ass off to the point even Karl Rove said he was "not 100% true", etc.

[BRussell]

Stupid or not, politics (in this day and age especially) is about images, impressions, expectations and perceptions. It is about feelings and emotions more than it is about logic, reason and rationality. Those (candidates especially) who deny or ignore this do so at their own peril. Surely Mr. Obama understands (and has capitalized on) this quite well.

Absolutely, which is why Obama has avoided Palin like the plague. And it's why all the candidates spend so much time complementing their opponents before debates.

[midwinter]

John Kerry is the best debater since Cicero (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=john+kerry+best+debater+since+cicero&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)! Barack Obama is the Messiah (http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=barack+obama+messiah&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8)!

[screener]

So why, in this thread, are the light weights of the right posting?

Where are those that had such regard for her that they decided to side with McCain because of his choice.

Where are these posters that cause so much indignation to those on the left.

I see them lurking and then disappearing without commenting, defending.

Do they see the folly of attempting to defend their decision and hope it will be forgotten?

Have they gone to MacNN where the atmosphere is more in line with their beliefs?

Where the fuck are they?

[jimmac]

She'll have her hits and misses. She'll jam Biden on energy. On the econ' she can side with the middle class. On foreign policy she can stick to core beliefs. It all comes down to when they try to jam her up. She may opossum or not. If she comes out okay then expect her handlers to loosen up.

I think the caricature the left has dreamed up (lied about?) for her wont be validated by the debate.

There's nothing made up about her. Everyone can see the interviews Floorjack and it's frightenly real!

I say just let her do the talking. After everyone's eyes glass over they'll beg her to stop!:lol:

[addabox]

If Sarah Palin showed up for an interview with a dead moose under her arm and threatened to shoot the producer, that would immediately become part of the "negative mythology" that "the liberal media" is trying to foist upon Palin.

Jesus Christ, Palin fans: we have eyes and ears. We're not talking about some remote figure of history and competing interpretations. The woman couldn't answer a simple question without appearing to be having a stroke.

Nobody made that up. It's not a fucking figment of the liberal imagination. At some point, win or lose, you're going to have to confront the reality of the person John McCain chose for his running mate, and what it means for Republican politics.

The whole fucking world isn't made of liberal conspiracies.

[hardeeharhar]

I don't know what magazines/news papers i have read. wait. yes i do.

how could you not know how to answer that question?

[Northgate]

if sarah palin showed up for an interview with a dead moose under her arm and threatened to shoot the producer, that would immediately become part of the "negative mythology" that "the liberal media" is trying to foist upon palin.

Jesus christ, palin fans: We have eyes and ears. We're not talking about some remote figure of history and competing interpretations. The woman couldn't answer a simple question without appearing to be having a stroke.

Nobody made that up. It's not a fucking figment of the liberal imagination. At some point, win or lose, you're going to have to confront the reality of the person john mccain chose for his running mate, and what it means for republican politics.

The whole fucking world isn't made of liberal conspiracies.

bingo!!!!

[Northgate]

I don't know what magazines/news papers i have read. wait. yes i do.

how could you not know how to answer that question?

I think they've got her afraid to answer any question, even if she knows it. For instance, what if she admitted she read the Times. Uh oh.

[hardeeharhar]

palin will win by her spunkiness. yay! spunk.

[addabox]

palin will win by her spunkiness. yay! spunk.

Just as long as she doesn't get any in her eye.

[FloorJack]

Well let's hope Biden is under control.

[FloorJack]

There's nothing made up about her. Everyone can see the interviews Floorjack and it's frightenly real!

I say just let her do the talking. After everyone's eyes glass over they'll beg her to stop!:lol:

The interviews are what they are. "Troopergate" is way over blown. She didn't say the war was a mission from god. She didn't try to fire anyone for not banning books. People even hacked into her personal email and found not a fucking thing.

[FloorJack]

I believe this would be a case of straining "Republican equivalency dementia" to the breaking point.

Anything is just like anything if you're willing to get general enough. 9/11 is just like my car breaking down, because they both caused me distress.

I therefore demand a national day of mourning for my car.

I'll make a reflecting pool in my back yard for it.

[hardeeharhar]

The interviews are what they are. "Troopergate" is way over blown. She didn't say the war was a mission from god. She didn't try to fire anyone for not banning books. People even hacked into her personal email and found not a fucking thing.
Troopergate actually reflects on her sense of what appropriate uses of power are. It doesn't bode well for her or the nation that she is so clearly personal in her politicking...

[FloorJack]

Troopergate actually reflects on her sense of what appropriate uses of power are. It doesn't bode well for her or the nation that she is so clearly personal in her politicking...

She fired someone that she has the power to fire. She says she did it because he wasn't doing the job to her liking for reason not related to her ex brother in law. There's not much there there.

[hardeeharhar]

She fired someone that she has the power to fire. She says she did it because he wasn't doing the job to her liking for reason not related to her ex brother in law. There's not much there there.
We'll see.

[addabox]

I'll make a reflecting pool in my back yard for it.

Well, it's a start. I'm somewhat mollified.

[addabox]

She fired someone that she has the power to fire. She says she did it because he wasn't doing the job to her liking for reason not related to her ex brother in law. There's not much there there.

Sure, that's what she says. However, there seems to be a fair amount of evidence that that isn't true.

Whether there's enough of a real investigation for anything to come of it, I can't say. I'd guess that if McCain wins, we'll here nothing more about it. If not..... she's not been making any friends in Alaska, lately, since the McCain team came in and started running things.

[Bergermeister]

She fired someone that she has the power to fire. She says she did it because he wasn't doing the job to her liking for reason not related to her ex brother in law. There's not much there there.

That explanation came later, after there were doubts about the original sin.

Haven't there been a couple of new explanations?

There is plenty of there there.

Losing friends:

http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/541124.html

[jimmac]

The interviews are what they are. "Troopergate" is way over blown. She didn't say the war was a mission from god. She didn't try to fire anyone for not banning books. People even hacked into her personal email and found not a fucking thing.


Yes they are what they are. Very telling.:rolleyes:

[Tauron]

If Sarah Palin showed up for an interview with a dead moose under her arm and threatened to shoot the producer, that would immediately become part of the "negative mythology" that "the liberal media" is trying to foist upon Palin.

Jesus Christ, Palin fans: we have eyes and ears. We're not talking about some remote figure of history and competing interpretations. The woman couldn't answer a simple question without appearing to be having a stroke.

Nobody made that up. It's not a fucking figment of the liberal imagination. At some point, win or lose, you're going to have to confront the reality of the person John McCain chose for his running mate, and what it means for Republican politics.

The whole fucking world isn't made of liberal conspiracies.

If everyone were smart and reasonable McCain and Palin wouldn't even be running for president.

[Flounder]

My final prediction is that Palin will manage to keep her talking points straight and not have any horrific blunders.

Then we can be treated to a thread about how the liberal media - in their voracious zeal to tear Palin down - only wound up helping Palin and McCain, because the MSM is hopelessly biased towards liberals and stupid to boot.

[FloorJack]

I read that if Palin has her hair down at the debate then she may be wearing a wire.

[Northgate]

I read that if Palin has her hair down at the debate then she may be wearing a wire.

Well, if she wears her hair down, tilts her head forward, eyes up, lips puckered .... WIN!!!

:lol::lol::lol:

:mad:

[@_@ Artman]

I read that if Palin has her hair down at the debate then she may be wearing a wire.

http://images.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/29/bulge/story.jpg

Ah yeah, the good times...:rolleyes:

[hardeeharhar]

honestly, i think she is going to be convincing enough...

[Bergermeister]

They have gotten smaller over the years. Something the size of a hearing aid would do...

They could even install it IN her hair bob with the clear sound tube running in her glasses.

[midwinter]

I actually think she'll be fine. Nevertheless, she really can't "lose." Biden, of course, can't win.

[FloorJack]

She can lose. So can Biden. It'll be fun either way. Watch for this to get higher ratings than McCain v Obama.

[Bergermeister]

She can lose. So can Biden. It'll be fun either way. Watch for this to get higher ratings than McCain v Obama.

Not out of serious interest, but for the potential comedy. She has done soo badly as of late and has been in the public eye so little (despite this being a democracy) that people's morbid interests have been piqued.

[hardeeharhar]

She can lose. So can Biden. It'll be fun either way. Watch for this to get higher ratings than McCain v Obama.
oh absolutely, if my brief and frightening foray (yes it sounds french) onto free republic was any indication, the conservative set consider this Palin's election to president, which for practical purposes it is.

[FloorJack]

oh absolutely, if my brief and frightening foray (yes it sounds french) onto free republic was any indication, the conservative set consider this Palin's election to president, which for practical purposes it is.

Yea. If elected she has 4 to 8 years to study for the final.

[hardeeharhar]

Yea. If elected she has 4 to 8 years to study for the final.
You hope that.

[FloorJack]

You hope that.

There's a lot of other good up and comers.

[hardeeharhar]

There's a lot of other good up and comers.
I am not sure there are a lot of intellectual conservatives that connect with people in a politically significant way. This is not to say there aren't intellectual conservatives, there are (or at least were when I last had the will to check), but rather that hard nosed intellectual conservatism is antithetical to the down to earth desires of conservative voters -- they want someone they can connect to in a way that is meaningful in personal life (read religion) rather than someone who knows the intricacies of the Chicago School economic theory.

This is to say look at the last set of Republican presidents and see how they were liked by the American public...

[jimmac]

There's a lot of other good up and comers.


She's not one of them.;)

[Gilsch]

She'll be more than fine. She can't possibly be as bad as her tv interviews can she? Therefore it's a win win win situation for her and the Reps as long as she sticks to the memorized talking points.

[Bergermeister]

Yea. If elected she has 4 to 8 years to study for the final.

How many years did it take her to graduated from college? How many schools?

Her ain't an greatester students; me am thinks her will needing moore time.

[midwinter]

She'll be more than fine. She can't possibly be as bad as her tv interviews can she? Therefore it's a win win win situation for her and the Reps as long as she sticks to the memorized talking points.

Oh, no. She doesn't even have to do that. As long as she uses words that are/have been/may be/can be interpreted as English, she wins.

[hardeeharhar]

psh. middy. think creatively. if she starts yammering off in some non-sensical syllabic string the mccain campaign could simply suggest that she was speaking an inuit language so as not to put off her own constituents.

[Bergermeister]

tongues

[FloorJack]

How many years did it take her to graduated from college? How many schools?

Her ain't an greatester students; me am thinks her will needing moore time.

How many papers did Biden plagiarize when he was in law school?

[Hassan i Sabbah]

How many papers did Biden plagiarize when he was in law school?

Apparently Barack Obama lied to his mother once. :no:

[addabox]

How many papers did Biden plagiarize when he was in law school?

Yeah! This is a fun game!

Sarah Palin can't locate Europe on a map; but, Joe Biden has misspelled Azerbaijan!

Sarah Palin is unaware of the Crimean War; but, Joe Biden totally mischaracterized Lord Stratford's role in precipitating hostilities!

Sarah Palin thinks the pancreas is a type of cheese; but, Joe Biden can't diagnose acute pancreatitis!

Sarah Palin believes the world to be 6,000 years old, but, Joe Biden once made a speech in the Senate that seemed to go on for 6.000 years!

And so you see, ladies and gentlemen, there is experience, and there is ignorance, and there is OMG LOOK OVER THERE A DOG WITH A HAT LOL!!!!

[midwinter]

http://dogblog.dogster.com/uploads/2006/06/Belgian%20with%20hat.jpg

Now that I think about it...are we sure that Sarah Palin is a US citizen? Have we actually seen her birth certificate?

[franksargent]

Will Palin's "Dancing With The Stars" performance tonight save the McCain-Palin dancing dunce duo?

Americans tune in tonight to watch as Palin shows us all how she toes the party line, that only she can get their base into a single unified line dance of ditto dunces.

[FloorJack]

Yeah! This is a fun game!

Sarah Palin can't locate Europe on a map; but, Joe Biden has misspelled Azerbaijan!

Sarah Palin is unaware of the Crimean War; but, Joe Biden totally mischaracterized Lord Stratford's role in precipitating hostilities!

Sarah Palin thinks the pancreas is a type of cheese; but, Joe Biden can't diagnose acute pancreatitis!

Sarah Palin believes the world to be 6,000 years old, but, Joe Biden once made a speech in the Senate that seemed to go on for 6.000 years!

And so you see, ladies and gentlemen, there is experience, and there is ignorance, and there is OMG LOOK OVER THERE A DOG WITH A HAT LOL!!!!

I didn't start this game. But to only focus on one candidate's weakness and ignore the other is stupid. I'm supposed to get upset about Palin's $25,000 in disclosed gifts but ignore the shady land deal Obama had with Rezko?

It's a double standard on your part. Biden thinks TV was around during the great depression. What a fucking moron!

[Outsider]

I didn't start this game. But to only focus on one candidate's weakness and ignore the other is stupid. I'm supposed to get upset about Palin's $25,000 in disclosed gifts but ignore the shady land deal Obama had with Rezko?

It's a double standard on your part. Biden thinks TV was around during the great depression. What a fucking moron!

Please. Broadcast television was being developed in the late 30's (commercially). The GD was from 1929-1939. It's not like he was off by BILLIONS of years like Palin is regarding the history of life on earth.

[@_@ Artman]

I didn't start this game. But to only focus on one candidate's weakness and ignore the other is stupid. I'm supposed to get upset about Palin's $25,000 in disclosed gifts but ignore the shady land deal Obama had with Rezko?
8 things you need to know about Obama and Rezko (http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.article)All of a sudden, seems as if everybody's talking about Barack Obama and Tony Rezko. Even Jay Leno.

Rezko already was a big story in Chicago, accused of influence-peddling in the Blagojevich administration and set to face trial Feb. 25.

But Monday, he became national news -- and an issue in the presidential race. That's when Hillary Clinton blasted Obama for having represented "your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago."

Having a hard time keeping track of the facts? Here are eight things to know:

1. They met in 1990. Obama was a student at Harvard Law School and got an unsolicited job offer from Rezko, then a low-income housing developer in Chicago. Obama turned it down.

2. Obama took a job in 1993 with a small Chicago law firm, Davis Miner Barnhill, that represents developers -- primarily not-for-profit groups -- building low-income housing with government funds.

3. One of the firm's not-for-profit clients -- the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corp., co-founded by Obama's then-boss Allison Davis -- was partners with Rezko's company in a 1995 deal to convert an abandoned nursing home at 61st and Drexel into low-income apartments. Altogether, Obama spent 32 hours on the project, according to the firm. Only five hours of that came after Rezko and WPIC became partners, the firm says. The rest of the future senator's time was helping WPIC strike the deal with Rezko. Rezko's company, Rezmar Corp., also partnered with the firm's clients in four later deals -- none of which involved Obama, according to the firm. In each deal, Rezmar "made the decisions for the joint venture," says William Miceli, an attorney with the firm.

4. In 1995, Obama began campaigning for a seat in the Illinois Senate. Among his earliest supporters: Rezko. Two Rezko companies donated a total of $2,000. Obama was elected in 1996 -- representing a district that included 11 of Rezko's 30 low-income housing projects.

5. Rezko's low-income housing empire began crumbling in 2001, when his company stopped making mortgage payments on the old nursing home that had been converted into apartments. The state foreclosed on the building -- which was in Obama's Illinois Senate district.

6. In 2003, Obama announced he was running for the U.S. Senate, and Rezko -- a member of his campaign finance committee -- held a lavish fund-raiser June 27, 2003, at his Wilmette mansion.

7. A few months after Obama became a U.S. senator, he and Rezko's wife, Rita, bought adjacent pieces of property from a doctor in Chicago's Kenwood neighborhood -- a deal that has dogged Obama the last two years. The doctor sold the mansion to Obama for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price. Rezko's wife paid full price -- $625,000 -- for the adjacent vacant lot. The deals closed in June 2005. Six months later, Obama paid Rezko's wife $104,500 for a strip of her land, so he could have a bigger yard. At the time, it had been widely reported that Tony Rezko was under federal investigation. Questioned later about the timing of the Rezko deal, Obama called it "boneheaded" because people might think the Rezkos had done him a favor.

8. Eight months later -- in October 2006 -- Rezko was indicted on charges he solicited kickbacks from companies seeking state pension business under his friend Gov. Blagojevich. Federal prosecutors maintain that $10,000 from the alleged kickback scheme was donated to Obama's run for the U.S. Senate. Obama has given the money to charity.

DON'T force me link this again. I'm tired of bringing it up.

It's a double standard on your part. Biden thinks TV was around during the great depression. What a fucking moron!

This is so lame. Honestly, there are other gaffes to cite and worth arguing but this one is so lame. A 63 year old man misplaced one form technology with another. Oh the humanity. At least he didn't confuse the communicative medium with a chisel and stone.

Honestly, PO has lost it's conservative All-Stars, all we have now are relief pitchers.

[FloorJack]

Oh it was "boneheaded" well that's all we need to know. Yea and Ayers is "just some guy" in his neighborhood. PALIN PALIN PALIN PALIN!

Honestly Obama hasn't been under the microscope as much as Palin. The press never realy vetted him well. Now when WGN has a guest on the radio to talk about Obama the Thug Squad comes out to intimidate the media into not talking about Obama's past. How very democratic.

[FloorJack]

This is so lame. Honestly, there are other gaffes to cite and worth arguing but this one is so lame. A 63 year old man misplaced one form technology with another. Oh the humanity. At least he didn't confuse the communicative medium with a chisel and stone.

Honestly, PO has lost it's conservative All-Stars, all we have now are relief pitchers.

If his age is getting in the way of him remembering what technology and what president was in the white house at the time then maybe he should get a medical deferment for his VP service.

[franksargent]

Honestly Obama hasn't been under the microscope as much as Palin. The press never realy vetted him well. Now when WGN has a guest on the radio to talk about Obama the Thug Squad comes out to intimidate the media into not talking about Obama's past. How very democratic.

That's simply not true.

[@_@ Artman]

If his age is getting in the way of him remembering what technology and what president was in the white house at the time then maybe he should get a medical deferment for his VP service.

I just have more respect for Joe Biden now that he's a steampunk fan. But cut Joe some slack. He was just repeating the childhood memories McCain told him in the Senate cafeteria.

It wasn't like television wasn't around in them days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_television#Electromechanical_television ) either. ;)

However, Herbert E. Ives of Bell Labs gave the most dramatic demonstration of television yet on April 7, 1927, when he field tested reflected-light television systems using small-scale (2 by 2.5 inches) and large-scale (24 by 30 inches) viewing screens over a wire link from Washington to New York City, and over-the-air broadcast from Whippany, New Jersey. The subjects, who included Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, were illuminated by a flying-spot scanner beam that was scanned by a 50-aperture disk at 16 pictures per minute.

Lest we also forget John "droopy" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gqTf37-MGc) McCain's Robert Novak moment yesterday (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60dcD1s6mhE). :wow::no:

[screener]

That's simply not true.
Selective memory I guess.

Granted some may have been early in judging Palin, but you gotta admit, the Couric interviews gave credence to earlier impressions.

The idea that she was peppered by gotcha questions is ridiculous.
If the McCain campaign, and supporters continue down this road it just shows how unprepared they are, including Palin, even when expecting the expected.

Another 4 years of "who knew".

As for Obama not being subjected to the same scrutiny, you can't really believe that.
If there was a Whitewater, I'm sure it would have been heralded by now.

Then again, because you know someone that'a a crook seems to be enough for some.
Ken Lay and Bush anyone?

[FloorJack]

That's simply not true.

Prove it!

Honestly. Obama was in the market for a house and Rezko was in the market for an empty lot that wont get developed and ... kismet! The found a seller that has just what they were looking for! What a qawinkydink!


Ayers? Just some guy in his neighborhood? Kicking around Hyde Park running for office and ... here's some guy's house to hold a fund raiser in. Never really shared ideas. That whole time they were working for the same nonprofit.

Rev' Wright? Never really heard any of that fiery stuff. Just lookin' for Jesus in highly politically active church. Which I don't care if they are involved in politics, freedom of speech is great, but Obama never heard all that US KKK of A stuff just he just wasn't around for that. Wrights not the guy he knew.


I'm calling BULLSHIT on all of it. I hope those guys stay under the bus these last few weeks.

[Fellowship]

For those of you who think Sarah Palin is not qualified in matters of foreign policy..

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/palin_brushing_up_on

LOL :lol:

Fellows

[giant]

That's simply not true.
This is what scott refers to when he says the "Thug Squad comes out to intimidate the media" (http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/WGNstandards)

[hardeeharhar]

Prove it!

Honestly. Obama was in the market for a house and Rezko was in the market for an empty lot that wont get developed and ... kismet! The found a seller that has just what they were looking for! What a qawinkydink!


Ayers? Just some guy in his neighborhood? Kicking around Hyde Park running for office and ... here's some guy's house to hold a fund raiser in. Never really shared ideas. That whole time they were working for the same nonprofit.

Rev' Wright? Never really heard any of that fiery stuff. Just lookin' for Jesus in highly politically active church. Which I don't care if they are involved in politics, freedom of speech is great, but Obama never heard all that US KKK of A stuff just he just wasn't around for that. Wrights not the guy he knew.


I'm calling BULLSHIT on all of it.

I hope those guys stay under the bus these last few weeks.

scott, you're a scientist (or were), you know full well that the burden of proof lies on the person making the positive claim of knowledge. so, it is actually up to you to prove something unseemly...

[FloorJack]

This is what scott refers to when he says the "Thug Squad comes out to intimidate the media" (http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/WGNstandards)

It's telling that Obama gives his robots the talking points they need. It's too bad that Obama hasn't been completely honest in his answers about the topic. The page you link to is a lie of omission at best. When Obama says Ayers is "just some guy in the neighborhood" it's a flat out lie.

[addabox]

So I guess you've been agitating for the removal of all the Republican office-holders and pillars of the community that routinely interacted with Ayers and let him sit in the same room with them and everything? Going to shut down the University of Illinois, are we? Maybe we should question all the willing terror dupes who have taken his classes over the years?

Because, you know, everybody in Chicago was terrified that Ayers, who customarily walked around with a bomb strapped to his chest, was going to kill them all, and then along comes Obama, a-knockin' at the door of Ayer's woodland shack, coaxing him to come out.

It's a major, major scandal, and I think you should talk about it all the time, because everyone is really, really impressed.

[@_@ Artman]

it's telling that obama gives his robots the talking points they need. It's too bad that obama hasn't been completely honest in his answers about the topic. The page you link to is a lie of omission at best. When obama says ayers is "just some guy in the neighborhood" it's a flat out lie.


Prove. It.

[FloorJack]

Prove. It.

Obama and Ayers
Pushed Radicalism
On Schools (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html)

Obama Should Come Clean
On Ayers, Rezko
And the Iraqi Billionaire (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122005063234084813.html)

Be sure to read all of it. It's kinda long.

So Ayers is not just some guy in the neighborhood. Sure Obama was a kid when Ayers did his worst but this about everything since Obama and Ayers met. Obama is lying about this because the connection hurts his candidacy.

[screener]

Guilt by association, so what.

Bush and Ken Lay.
Cheney Haliburton.
And on and on.

Heard it before and you kept repeating it to the point that Artman lost it and got banned.

CAC was sponsored by Walter Annenberg, a friend of Reagan, guilt by association, right?
If you don't know who he is, here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Annenberg

Any criminal activity on Obama's part in regards to Resko?
The best part of Frum's attempt was trying to link Obama to the Iraqi billionaire, slimy at best.

But I suppose when Obama is elected, we can appoint a special prosecutor, what's Starr up to?

[FloorJack]

No guilt per se. It would be good to hear from Obama just what the association is or was. Clearly Obama's explanation of "just some guy" is a lie. Ayers has some rather extreme views and the two worked together to accomplish common goals. The only way to know is for Ayers and Obama is tell us. But they wont.

[screener]

No guilt per se. It would be good to hear from Obama just what the association is or was. Clearly Obama's explanation of "just some guy" is a lie. Ayers has some rather extreme views and the two worked together to accomplish common goals. The only way to know is for Ayers and Obama is tell us. But they wont.
I believe the full quote is,

"This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis."

Makes a difference when it's all there doesn't it.

CAC may have been derailed from it's initial objective but it was in no way promoting terrorism which is what's implied by repeating Ayers' claim to fame.

As far as I read it, one aim was for minorities, disenfranchised, to not just roll over but instead stand up for your rights.
I guess that's anti American for some people.

Point is, if Ayers was such a bogey man, what the fuck was he doing free?

[FloorJack]

The full quote doesn't add anything. From it you'd never know that these two worked for the same non-profits. The Obama was hired by a non-profit that Ayers was on the board of. These two dolled out a lot money across Chicago for education and community organizing. But they wont speak of it. Why not?

[screener]

The full quote doesn't add anything. From it you'd never know that these two worked for the same non-profits. The Obama was hired by a non-profit that Ayers was on the board of. These two dolled out a lot money across Chicago for education and community organizing. But they wont speak of it. Why not?
I see where you're going, little bit of skimming huh?

Obama handled the money, Ayers handled policy.
Obama the thief, Ayers the bomber.

Don't you think someone other than the anti Obama crowd would have come up with something by now?
Like the foundation that gave the money asking for an accounting?

This is starting to smell like before Clinton became president.
Introduce the trollops soon and it'll be dejavu.

You're beating a dead horse and if Artman was around he'd provide the pic.