Why the Press Claims, Falsely, that Sarah Palin Wasn’t Vetted: Because Unlike You, They Don’t Read Beldar, So They Got Surprised by the Pick. And They Don’t Like Being Surprised.
I think I know exactly why we’re hearing all this utter nonsense about how Palin supposedly wasn’t vetted.
The spoiled little children in the media are throwing a widdle tantrum because they weren’t kept in the loop.
So if they didn’t know anything about Sarah Palin, and if they didn’t expect McCain to pick Palin, then it stands to reason that McCain didn’t know anything about Sarah Palin, and McCain didn’t expect himself to pick her.
Guess what, media? Some of us had heard of Sarah Palin before, and were hoping that she was exactly who John McCain would pick.
Back in June, Beldar had a prescient post in which he said: “I’ve spent several hours now reading about, and watching video clips of, 44-year-old Alaska governor Sarah Heath Palin.” I linked that post and tossed off the obvious cheap jokes that that line invites, given that Beldar is a middle-aged guy talking about spending hours watching clips of an attractive middle-aged woman.
But beneath the gentle ribbing, I linked that post for a genuine reason: I read what Beldar had to say, and I, too, was impressed.
I was impressed by the story of a person who courageously took on the entrenched political establishment in Alaska, at risk to her own political career — and won, and became enormously popular. I was impressed by the story of someone who seemed to be a political success, yet comes from a slice of middle America, as opposed to the moneyed elite from which most politicians spring. (I still think this aspect of her story is going to prove to be enormously powerful, in a way few expect. Americans will relate to Sarah Palin.) I was excited by the idea of someone who could bring life to a tired Republican ticket.
Back in July, I met someone who had worked with Romney closely when he was governor. This person had given money to McCain’s campaign. He told me he thought Romney was a fraud.
“So who do you think should be the VP nominee?” I asked. He said he thought Lieberman would really shake things up. He asked me the same question.
“Sarah Palin,” I said. “No doubt about it. In my opinion, she’s McCain’s only chance to win. McCain he won’t be smart enough to pick her. But she would be the ideal pick.”
My friend hadn’t heard of Palin. But readers of Beldar had. And readers of my site had.
So when I was on vacation, woke up in Curry Village at Yosemite, fired up the Treo, and saw that McCain had picked Palin, I was thrilled.
But at the same time, most of the press was saying: “Huh? Who dat?” To their detriment, they don’t read Beldar. So while you and I and Beldar were immediately rejoicing, the press corps — which considers itself the ultimate insiders — felt left out in the cold.
You see, McCain had valued secrecy so much, he didn’t let a trusted circle of journalists in on the pick.
And now they’re pissed off.
The unhinged bleating from the likes of Power-Glutes Sullivan is nothing but a reflection of the outrage felt by this self-appointed group of insiders at being kept outside the tent during the process.
There is no evidence that the vetting was actually light in any significant sense.
Yesterday the Washington Post ran a detailed article about the vetting process. The splashy headline is Aides Say Team Interviewed Palin Late in the Process. But if you read the whole thing, you learn that the vetting process was by no means lightweight:
The search process started in the spring. McCain’s vetting team was given a list of 20 names and Culvahouse’s group prepared lengthy background books on each candidate, based primarily on a search of public records. Ultimately, the list of 20 was pared to six serious finalists, then to two, and finally to Palin. According to several campaign sources, Palin was on the list from the start.
“Culvahouse” is A.B. Culvahouse, who “knows how to vet,” according to Jan Crawford Greenburg. Greenburg says Culvahouse participated in vetting Supreme Court nominees in the Reagan administration, and after he got burned by the marijuana revelations of Douglas Ginsburg, he developed an unbelievably detailed series of inquiries, which he first applied to Anthony Kennedy. Greenburg gives graphic details of the sorts of questions Culvahouse would ask:
After Ginsburg was forced to withdraw in 1988, Culvahouse subjected the next nominee–federal appeals court Judge Anthony Kennedy–to several hundred intrusive, deeply personal, cringe-inducing questions, focusing largely on sex, drugs and money. Did you have sex in junior high? High school? College? If so, how many different partners? Where? Did you use contraception? Were there any pregnancies? Any abortions? Did you contract venereal disease? Ever engage in any aberrational sexual activity? Has your wife ever had an abortion? Have the two of you engaged in “kinky sex?”
These were all actual questions posed to a nominee to the Supreme Court. And after all the detailed questions about mental health and drugs and money–and weird inquiries like, “have you ever engaged in cruelty to animals,” there were big catch-alls. Culvahouse and the legal team asked Kennedy what was the most unpleasant or embarrassing thing that ever happened to him in high school. In college. In law school. As an adult. Then they turned to his family. What are the answers for your wife to the questions asked of you? For your children? Your siblings?
Those types of questions, if put to Palin, would have turned up things like her teenaged daughter’s pregnancy and her husband’s DUI. The campaign says it knew these things.
The Washington Post article agrees, and provides details on when these items were disclosed.
McCain officials said that questionnaire and the personal interview revealed three new facts previously unknown to the team: Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy, the arrest of her husband two decades ago for driving while intoxicated, and a fine Palin paid for fishing without proper identification.
“We made a political determination that the American people would not object to a female candidate with a 17-year-old daughter who was pregnant,” Schmidt said Tuesday. “We believed that parents all over America would understand that life happens. The team made a recommendation to the senator that these issues were not disqualifying.”
I think that’s a perfectly reasonable decision — and once the American public sees that Sarah Palin is a quick-witted and highly competent individual, I think there will be a huge backlash against the sorts of attacks we’ve seen over the past weekend and since.
The WaPo article makes it clear that the McCain camp knew all along that it would be making the final decision in the two weeks or so after Obama made his selection, and that those weeks would be “frantic” no matter what. But Palin was on the list from the beginning, and the campaign had detailed information about her. She was perfectly forthcoming about everything that has emerged, and there is not a shred of evidence that McCain’s camp was caught flat-footed by any of the so-called “revelations” that have come out.
What you’re seeing is a press corps that got surprised. These Professional Journalists don’t like being surprised, and they’re throwing a little hissy fit about it. That fit is emerging in the form of attacks on the vetting.
Guys, next time, read Beldar. You won’t be caught so flat-footed.
No matter if Palin was vetted or not, the Obama-Kos slime machine went into full slime mode the instant she was picked. Look at the Obots in the press slime along with Kos and the trolls.
PCD (5c49b0) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:03 amI also think they were surprised by the outpouring of support when Palin’s name was announced. The money, the internet buzz. A lot of conservatives knew who she was and responded with joy. Not only did they not know, but a lot of other people knew lot. Gatekeepers don’t like it when people find a hole in the fence.
And McCain was the only candidate who would have been bold enough to pick Palin.
MartyH (00ac40) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:05 amKudos to Beldar, but with all due respect, some of us had seen that clip on Palin on the Late Show with Craig Ferguson even earlier – that vid had become viral as soon as it aired. Quite popular, mostly because it was funny, without being nasty.
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:05 amGreat post, and not just because I agree with you 100%. Gov. Palin has executive experience, energy experience, political skills and accomplishments that dwarf those of BHO – and of course he is running for Pres. while she has the VP slot. I’ve been wondering whether the McCain campaign has the political skills to take Sen. Obama’s lack of experience and character head on. I’m still wondering, but the secrecy and timing of the VP selection announcement was politically perfect. Go McCain-Palin!
rfy (0f1c61) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:07 amNone of the issues the McCain team discovered would raise an eyebrow, anway. GWB had a DUI, Cheney’s daughter is an open lesbian (which I imagine is a greater sin than teen pregnancy, if there are greater and lesser sins). Fishing without a license doesn’t even qualify as an issue.
By the way, why are you so obsessed with Andrew Sullivan’s butt? First you show us a video of him sensually caressing it, and now you’re calling him “Power-Glutes Sullivan”?
Phil (6d9f2f) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:08 amFrankly, I think the “late in the game interview” was done to keep it quiet…
The more time after you do something, the better the chances that it will leak.
McCain was likely already pretty sure she was his pick before the chat, and the interview just cinched it.
Timing was perfect, as the KosKids and all on the left were completely blind-sided…
Vote for Gov Palin!!!!
And the old guy…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:09 amWhile I know it blows your darling little mind, we don’t actually hate gays…
Certain gay people, sure – who among us doesn’t loath Andy Dick, I ask you! – but not gays…
Just like we don’t hate the poor, blue-collar folks, or minorities.
The knee-jerk hate is something I usually only see from the left.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:11 amI’ve been posting comments about Palin for months, too. I couldn’t believe he would actually pick her and I posted a comment somewhere last week that the “troopergate” story probably would keep her off the ticket. As I have learned more about the story, I see why McCain wasn’t put off even if the Democrats in Alaska are trying for an “October surprise.” The guy doing the “investigation” is a partisan Democrat and political enemy of hers. I think the tasering of the stepson will cut through the crap they are planning to throw.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:14 amI agree that this is in large part an elitist hissy fit by the media.
But the other reasons the media is pushing the bogus “no vetting” angle are: (1) the left needs to attack McCain, not Palin, because VP picks rarely affect the outcome of an election; and (2) the left thinks the “no vetting” frame will fool people into missing just how shrill and hysterical their sexist attacks on Palin are.
Karl (1b4668) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:18 amYeah… they just have to repeat “Tasered a 13-year old” over and over…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:18 am“Cheney’s daughter is an open lesbian (which I imagine is a greater sin than teen pregnancy, if there are greater and lesser sins).”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:21 amThat’s the problem with people of your ilk, you are constantly imagining how and what people believe rather than lower your anointed progressive selves and deign to actually speak to someone and find out how people live, what they think and believe, and how the latter informs the former. It would probably end up disappointing you that your worst fantasies of rabid, intolerant, seething, 17th century Salem moralistic busybodies are just that, ludicrous fantasies that you conjure to convince yourself that your worldview is superior.
By the way, why are you so obsessed with Andrew Sullivan’s butt? First you show us a video of him sensually caressing it, and now you’re calling him “Power-Glutes Sullivan”?
That’s a self-description.
Maybe you don’t know the details. I’m reserving them for the next time he inappropriately delves into the private life of someone close to Palin.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:27 amThe details are, of course, already public. They’re just somewhat moldy. Reminders can be good.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:28 amHow many of the people complaining that Palin overstepped her authority in “troopergate” have previously complained about a police “good old boys” network that prevents police misconduct from being punished?
ROA (f7cdf8) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:32 amExactly!
“She wasn’t vetted” is code for “picking a woman isn’t in line with our caricature of Republicans and now our ears are ringing with all the cognitive dissonance.”
I’m not sure there has ever been more evidence that the left is compromised of emotionally stunted people. It doesn’t take a parent to recognize a toddler-inspired tantrum. From the violent “protests” to the cries that “they did it first!” to the ugly emotional outcries of “she’s not qualified and she needs to get back into the kitchen,” it is obvious that half of this country needs some serious therapy to help them actualize into emotionally healthy adults.
w3bgrrl (5b8906) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:33 amOr ignored “Travelgate”? 🙂
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:34 amI read through the Dan Balz article and was comforted by the extensiveness of the vetting process and felt that the structure of the article was giving readers a false impression that the pick of Palin was rushed. I took the info from that article and put together a timeline here, which shows that McCain hadn’t just met Palin a few days or weeks ago, but rather back in February and was thoroughly impressed.
When it’s put in a timeline such as this, it’s ridiculous to assert that this is some sort of unvetted candidate. No FBI check? THAT’S BECAUSE THE FBI DOESN’T DO BACKGROUND CHECKS OF VP CANDIDATES!!!!
Great post, Patterico!
Regards,
St Wendeler (e77c75) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:34 amSt Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy
Which would make it kinda crowded, since her husband does the cooking… 🙂
God knows *I* hate it when people watch me work…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:35 amw3bgrrl – YOU…ARE…AWESOME!!!!
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:46 am“I’m not sure there has ever been more evidence that the left is compromised of emotionally stunted people.”
Yes, but as we’ve seen here yesterday, many of the Trolls have amazing life credentials, such as Russell – who apparently had studied advanced chemistry in college, manages the family business’s books, also has in – depth knowledge of the inner recesses of McCain’s economic team’s policies and formulations, and volunteers in his spare time as head of the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago. When you consider that others have also received degrees from Harvard (although they missed some of the finer points of English Comp 101), how can you argue with their superior logic and powers of prognostication?
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:47 amWhat’s also become obvious now .. is why Obama, while traveling to all 57 states, wasn’t allowed to go to Alaska.
Neo (cba5df) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:49 amI liked “Harvard” guy. He was fun. I particularly enjoy the ones who throw in “…and I’m a lifelong Republican but…” Even the most shrill and ridiculous trolls that have been coming here in droves have been sort of fun to swat like flies. James is a total idiot but even he is infinitely more tolerable to banter with than that fungus Levi.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:52 amhttp://fightthepalinsmears.com/
http://fightthepalinsmears.com/
We need to start posting the lefty blog social security numbers and their identities and their relatives every move, as only fire can play with fire…
enough (fb32fc) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:52 amWell, dmac, I just do what I normally do. I ignore the appeal to authority and take apart their arguments point-by-point. It usually results in an ad hominem attack, the left’s equivalent of crying, “Uncle!”
w3bgrrl (5b8906) — 9/3/2008 @ 7:58 amAlso known as “playing to their strengths”…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:01 amDead on.
X_LA_Native (e7740a) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:02 amBehold the wrath of Keith, Chrissy, et al scorned.
And I LOVE it.
“It usually results in an ad hominem attack”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:02 amAnd that’s the best time to give them nothing more than a wide grin that basically says without words, “Sucks to lose an argument doesn’t it?” You can always tell which people live in a total echo chamber and never have their boilerplate views questioned – they’re the ones that go most ballistic in a way worthy of a toddler who got his binky taken away.
Good for you – but as you peruse the previous day’s volume of postings, one quickly deduces that appeals to logic and dissembling their balsa – wood style arguments have no effect on their shrieks. Panic is indeed setting in among the moonbats, and it’s a beautiful thing to behold.
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:03 amOn here you can tell when the KO punch has been delivered because the references to trailer parks and Fox News start to come out.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:03 amCase in point? Comment on Kos:
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:05 am“”If health insurance for all, an end to the Iraq War, an end to torture and illegal wiretapping, and a sane energy policy can be obtained at the price of destroying one teenage girl, her family, and the surrendering our self-respect I see that as a cheap trade.”
Retort to Obama’s ridiculous attack on the mayor’s 12M budget person payroll vs. Obama’s presidential campaign? How about Alaska’s $18B budget vs. his puny campaign budget.
Retort to Todd Palin’s DUI when he was 22? Obama’s “blow” problem…
Just saying…
St Wendeler (e77c75) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:06 amI don’t care if they are right…
the fact that they would willingly toss to the wolves a 17 year old girl, and abandon their self respect in order to win tells me that they should never, ever be allowed to win.
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:08 amHow funny because the LAT tells me today,
“The lack of mainstream media attacks on Bristol Palin didn’t stop true believers from uncorking on a favorite straw man.”
Hm. Obviously they live and breathe in an alternate universe. That they haven’t keeled over from their own noxious fumes is remarkable.
Dana (b4a26c) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:13 am31. And so many of their ilk reveal with every little display of how they really feel, the undeniable latent fascistic tendencies they possess. They are such pathologically deranged children at the core that are SEETHING at their lack of power and they taste blood at the chance to get their hands on it.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:13 amYes, the party of “change” and “hope” has (as usual) regressed to their own true selves once again – the party of slime merchants, false rumors, and smearing innuendoes. “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” You weren’t waiting on anyone, Messiah – you guys never left in the first place.
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:14 amThe “Team interviewed Palin Late” headline is a lie. The truth is neatly concealed in the second paragraph:
interviewed by Culverhouse. Which is not the same thing as saying that this was her first interview with the campaign. That questionnaire did not lay under a pile of paper on his desk. Culverhouse heads a team that was doing the grunt work. The Culverhouse interview was likely the last perfunctory step before offering her the slot and would not likely have happened had the decision to pick her not already been made.
Pablo (99243e) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:19 amMarc Ambinder is saying “it seems to be true” that…
Tell me this is good for McCain. I sure hope this “seems to be true” is more like “totally false”.
Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:21 am“…I see that as a cheap trade.”
Again the left’s utter and complete lack of respect for the intrinsic value of human life – whether inside the womb or outside the womb.
Dana (b4a26c) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:22 amScott Jacobs:
Bingo. Now do you see why I have so little patience for those who would throw their vote away rather than casting their vote for an imperfect Republican to stop them?
Xrlq (b71926) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:23 amI see, and I always understood…
Rest assured, I’m voting because he picked a good VP.
I’m still pissed as hell with the man himself…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:26 amThe tectonic shift in the polity is shaking the drive-bys to their very core. They do not understand to this day why they have been shunned by so many readers/watchers but they intuitively understand that the huge burst of support/energy around Palin is from the same source.
They look around and they they see how they are shrinking in numbers and instead of accommodating their readers/viewers, they have decided to act out and abandon whatever principles to which they once may have adhered. They know they are on the way out the door, so they figure they may as well enjoy themselves before they get the boot.
Ed (f35a20) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:27 amDana,
I guess it depends on what the definition of “attacks” is, right?
w3bgrrl (5b8906) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:28 amw3bgrrl, well now thats the real question. isn’t it? What does it mean right this minute or last night or what will it mean tonight after Palin speaks? Because everything coming from the MSM is subject to change, subject to a morphing of definition, subject to the current meme the talking heads decide to feed the masses scrounging for their next meal…or cheap thrills… Hope & change, hope and change.
Dana (b4a26c) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:31 amThanks P – that was my assessment as well.
Add to that annoyance with the fact that there now is a prominent and likable conservative female.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:36 amI can understand that, as he’s hardly my first choice, either. As I said in the earlier thread and will reiterate now, the day the Democrats nominate someone better is the day I vote Democrat. And believe me, there are Democrats out there who I think would be a lot better than McCain; it’s just that the Party of Kos is in no danger of nominating them.
Xrlq (b71926) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:39 amAs I said… the “Eh, not my first choice, but he’ll do I guess” camp…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:40 amI do find it interesting how bloggers on the right and left never tire of talking about how odious the other side is.
They get just as excited every time a new example of hypocracy/stupidity by someone on the other side reveals itself.
It’s as if they’re discovering that they’re right and the other side is wrong all over again, for the first time.
Phil (6d9f2f) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:41 am“If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat“
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:41 amIt’s been pointed out more than once that reporters regularly read (and often interact with) the leftist blogs, but don’t read the conservative blogs. So the MSM is routinely “in the loop” of what is bubbling up in the main channels and side sewers of the left, but doesn’t have a clue what other Americans are thinking and doing.
For the record, PrestoPundit started pushing the Palin nomination in February.
PrestoPundit (ff5e16) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:43 amCheney’s daughter is an open lesbian (which I imagine is a greater sin than teen pregnancy, if there are greater and lesser sins).”
That’s the problem with people of your ilk, you are constantly imagining how and what people believe rather than lower your anointed progressive selves and deign to actually speak to someone and find out how people live, what they think and believe, and how the latter informs the former. It would probably end up disappointing you that your worst fantasies of rabid, intolerant, seething, 17th century Salem moralistic busybodies are just that, ludicrous fantasies that you conjure to convince yourself that your worldview is superior.
Comment by Jack Klompus — 9/3/2008 @ 7:21 am
Joe - Dallas (70513b) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:44 amPhil’s comment was only pointing out the lack of seriousness of the complaints against Palin, I see no evidence of the homophobia you are displaying.
“I see no evidence of the homophobia you are displaying.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:48 amYou ARE joking, right?
Phil is correct about hypocricy being an equal opportunity personality trait – but this recent stuff is wayyy beyond a simple “pox on both of their houses” schtick. No one in the MSM went after any prominent Dem’s children – ever. Not Gore’s son caught smoking the weed and his drunk driving conviction, not Chelsea’s sexual activities while the Clintons were in the WH, and so on. But instead we got breathless reports about Bush’s daughters actually drinking in a bar(eeek! The horror, the horror!), and now this. It’s beyond the pale of all reason, and the MSM’s incredible complicity in the Edwards’ affair is only hastening their inevitable demise. Do not ask who the La Brea Tar Pits calls for, it calls for thee.
If Barney “my own home was used as a rental – sex orgy by my lover” says that Palin’s children are fair game, then by all means, let’s have that discussion with everything on the table.
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:58 amIf the MSM wants to look at experience, Palin kills Obama. See:
J. Raymond Wright (d83ab3) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:09 amhttp://jraymondwright.blogspot.com/2008/09/compare-two-palin-obama.html
for a somewhat complete analysis of the two.
Compare and contrast the demeanor of Olberasshat and Mathews at the Dem and Rep conventions. In Denver, Olby had a perpetual Olbergasm. Last night, he was quibbling with messages, trying to find inconsistencies, doing his version of fact checking, and in general, just making shit up.
They, including Robinson, Mad Cow, and Buchanon, must have said she was not vetted 40 times. Mad Cow was good for tossing out almost every single discredited talking point.
JD (5f0e11) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:11 amYou know, I checked with my editors at Pajamas Media about this and just confirmed Palin has been on our Veepstakes promotion since the first week.
It’s easy to be surprised if you aren’t paying attention.
Charlie (Colorado) (9d6d4b) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:17 amHey, how about we quit using the term “Troopergate” to refer to this manufactured scandal?
That name is already taken.
Troopergate was when the Cigar Shover was getting the Arkansas state cops to bring young ladies up to his hotel room to polish the Goobernatorial knob.
Dave (fdc1e8) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:17 amI get a daily e-mail newsletter from Mike Allen at Politico. Today it contained every attack on Palin but not one of the replies, such as the Buchanan lie which was quickly refuted. Here is his lead:
62 days – Cover girl: Palin gets a hug from People and a spanking from US Weekly: ‘BABIES, LIES & SCANDAL … New embarrassing surprises’
By: MIKE ALLEN
Sep 03, 2008 09:18 AM EST
Among other things, there is no mention that US Weekly is owned by a rabid Obama supporter. I e-mailed him that if he does that again, I’m unsubscribing. It is an illustration of the MSM’s role. It isn’t just bloggers.
Plus David Frum had some letters from country club RINOs complaining. “My family has been Republican since… blah, blah blah.” Of course, they will vote for Obama.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:19 amWhile I find your restraint admirable, I’d really like someone besides Ace to post Randy Andi’s craptacular “nothing every disappears from the Internet” posts. Suffice it to say that the stuff is personal and, according to his own nonsense, should disqualify him from ever being considered a serious columnist again.
I remember Ace saying that he felt horribly dirty pulling that stuff out of the wayback machine. I don’t think anyone on the right is likely to feel too bad about doing it this time.
physics geek (6669a4) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:19 amMcClatchy:
If she was so well-vetted, why was the leadout soundbite of her first speech–that she opposed the “bridge to nowhere”–an obvious lie?
You’d think McCain would have caught that. She even took the money for the bridge.
Russell (da1856) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:26 amFrom Mike Allen’s Playbook posted by Mike K.
What the hell is this crap? Really? A-list reporters demanding paternity tests?
This is real? Pinch me.
Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:27 amSo Russell’s basis the fact that “no one talked to me” proves they didn’t vet Gov Palin?
Guess he’ll be shocked when McCain wins, because he won’t know anyone who voted for him…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:35 amPalin hits at the core flaw in the progressivist power model: true leadership is based upon principled living.
With Bork, Clarance Thomas, Reagan and Palin, they’ve been frustrated when they recognized they had an existential threat. Principled conservative leaders are individuals that disprove the foundations of liberalism. The only method they know to defeat them is to lie, smear, attack, and conduct ruthless unethical methods of warfare against the individual. All of the above are permissible as they perceive their very existence to be at threat.
redherkey (9f5961) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:35 amSo let me get this straight, because of Beldar’s blog site, the whole main stream media is incorrect.
Yes, I read it. McCain happened to be in Alaska, so that must mean Pailin was vetted.
Wow, if we use blog sites posts as examples as to why the main stream media always gets it wrong…….
I’m sure if we go to a Disney Site, Mickey Mouse was probably vetted as well.
And Goofy too………
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:40 amMcCain is a soldier after all. Ok, sailor, same difference. The MSM did, in fact, have a love affair with him which he reciprocated. But he knows that unreliable allies are worse than enemies. He saw the MSM go into the tank for Obama. So he cut their nuts off, as far as he was concerned. (Whatever they had, anyway.)
nk (21731d) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:41 amOiram, you use Kos and HuffingtonPost. Quit being the hypocritical Gluteus Maximus.
PCD (5c49b0) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:41 am“…Alaska was still granted an equivalent amount of transportation money to be used at its own discretion….She even took the money for the bridge.”
No Russell, you’re making things up, again.
By your own post, you said that Congress sent the money to AK to be used at its’ own discretion.
The Gov accepted the money, not for the bridge, but for other projects which had a higher priority.
You have heard of priortizing, haven’t you?
As to the vetting process, the WaPo has shot this down, big time. Their headline is crap, but the article truthfully describes the process carried out by Hugh Culverhouse, starting over six months ago, in vetting many candidates, and noting that Sarah Palin was on the list from the beginning.
Please stop dissembling.
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:43 amThe DNC did not contact me about vetting Baracky. Baracky did not contact me about vetting Biden. Ergo, they were not vetted.
JD (5f0e11) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:44 amOiram – That was weak. Your fellow travelers set the bar pretty high yesterday.
JD (5f0e11) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:46 am#64, I don’t use Huffington post (tabloid blog) anymore, Kos occasionally. When I do use them, it’s for Reference purposes only.
I don’t use them as exclusive proof, and I certainly don’t expect the MSM to read it before making a “vetted” claim.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:47 amUgh, JD.
Just why would anyone call you?
Bigot!
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:47 amThe fact that you consider them even remotely accurate tells us so, so much…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:52 amAD – I am bigoted against amoral asshats, yes. That is true. Especially Levi, james, Holly B, etal
JD (5f0e11) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:53 amOn a continuum, Oiram, how does Kos compare to wikipedia, HuffPo, and actual facts?
JD (5f0e11) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:55 amOh Eye Are Eh Em –
I’m sure if we go to a Disney Site, Mickey Mouse was probably vetted as well. And Goofy too………
— Dopey was vetted right here at this site.
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 9:57 amSophistry. She took the money for the bridge. Didn’t use it for the bridge, but she took it anyway. Anyway, the main point is that she lied about being against the bridge.
The article says the first interview with McCain happened the day before the announcement. Still no one bothered to talk to Walt Monegan. Maybe McCain did his honest best in the vetting process, but he didn’t manage to preempt the news that Palin has close ties to a seccessionist Alaskan political party whose founder once said:
Russell (da1856) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:00 amA great post, Patterico, which I just elaborated on at my blog: Just last night my husband had a liberal acquaintance who works in politics sneer that no one had ever heard of Sarah Palin before last week and that surely we weren’t hoping for her to be nominated before last Friday…how little that acquaintance knew!
You also might enjoy checking out my review of Curry Village, which I linked to at the end of the post. We were there at the end of July. Hope you found more to eat there than we did (grin) and that you had a great vacation!
Thanks for an excellent post. You are one of my multiple-times-a-day reads.
Best wishes,
Laura (56a0a8) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:06 amLaura
And yet the Dems nominated him anyways…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:06 amThe paternity test gets worse.
This is why “journalists reading left of center blogs” is a real problem.
Gabriel Sutherland (90b3a1) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:07 amThis just in – the Grateful Dead reunites (with one notable exception) to play an Obama rally at Penn State University.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:08 am#71…
And this is why we love you.
Now, stop being nice, and take the gloves off!
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:10 am#72 JD, if you don’t take all Blog sites with a grain of salt, I don’t know if there is any hope for you. I don’t know if you do, but your hinting that I do.
“Trust But Verify” – George H. Bush (I think)
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:10 amYou think wrong
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:12 amSome of the people the MSM are talking to in Alaska are roadkill she flattened on her way up. Of course, they are upset and disbelieving. Then there are more reliable (albeit lefty) sources. There was also a letter on a TNR blog from an Alaskan who knows her. I can’t find it now. Here is more. Personally, I don’t mind them underestimating her.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:13 am“Trust but Verify” was RR speaking about Gorbachev and the Soviets.
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:14 amRR means Ronald Reagan…
I say that, because I fear Oiram wouldn’t have figured it out…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:15 amWhat this story reminds me of is, it is the height of arrogance of unelected, paid media gurus and international provocateurs like Soros to arrogate to themselves the office of National Vetters.
They think that they will decide, from an infinite pool of worthy candidates, which people, which personal credentials, which experiences, which consumer choices – even which pregnancies, are ‘fit’ candidates for individual Americans personal electations.
Study the demonization of an entire economy of fossil-fuel consumers and you’ll see that the Vetters’ unwanted vetting doesn’t confine its intrusions only to election years. It intrudes promiscuously and uninvited into our daily economic lives. Everyday.
So, it’s pleasing to learn that the Pretenders occasionally vet their pants, too. And, if McCain’s circle of players can seal-out Team O!’s ‘ears’ at the NYT and MSNBC, it ratchets up his ratings in my book big-time!
steveaz (e4f890) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:16 amAs one Alaskan said:
City Hall in Wasilla, and the State House in Juneau are littered with the flattened bodies of those that misunderestimated the “Barracuda”.
And, don’t you just love the BS coming from the mouth of Sally “Round-Heels” Quinn?
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:17 amClass, real class!
The MSM are pissed because they followed the Obama camp’s lead on this one. After Obama picked Biden, the absolute LAST thing in the world they expected was that McCain would pick a woman. Even if they had Palin on their radar she was last on the list. Psychologically, they’re projecting. They’re really mad at themselves and each other — but not at Obama; they can’t afford to become disillusioned now, after all of the effort they’ve expended in promoting him — so they turn it around and blame the guy who (HOW DARE HE!) didn’t drop them any hints.
Can you imagine the arrogance? McCain successfully kept it a secret, therefore it must have been a last-second decision; and by extension he could not possibly have properly vetted her. They were surprised by the pick, therefore they must attack it. The news reporters were scooped by the news maker, and they can’t have that. Attacking McCain for poor vetting also allows them to avoid looking like pricks for attacking her directly, although in the end it works out to basically the same thing.
Similar to what the Obama camp is doing, having Obama attack her so that, going into the first debate, Biden doesn’t look like the guy that has already been picking on her. We’re not slamming her, they will claim; we’re slamming McCain for his sloppy job in the way he picked her.
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:18 amIt was all said clearly when one of the talking heads said out loud on national TV “She hasn’t been on Meet The Press” when discussing her qualifications.
Damiano (4cf33e) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:20 amAs a woman, I am always on the lookout for up and coming women in politics, especially from the right as we seem to be in such short supply of them (of course the MSM hopes after this tearing apart of Palin it will prevent other right women from entering the fray). I began to read about Palin last year and was fascinated with her and relieved that she was smart, articulate and tough and her values lined up with mine. Of course the MSM knew nothing about her – why would they inform themselves about a conservative woman? Trivial at best. Its amazing some people believe they actually would take the time and effort to become fully informed so that they would not be caught off guard. Now that they’ve publicly caught off guard, their only response can be a full frontal attack.
I see London, I see France, I see the MSM’s dirty underpants.
My outrage is not so much at them as it is at the feminists who are either silent while the bloodletting occurs, or are stabbing a good woman in the back. No one eats their own like women.
Dana (b4a26c) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:20 amSecrets…
McCain’s camp kept the Palin decision very close to the vest. Good work, guys & gals.
These are the kind of people I want in the National Security Leadership.
I see that the MSM is on a tear with anon sources within the McCain camp dissing Sarah.
My opinion is that it is total BS.
With the way the vetting was carried out without any leaks, it would appear that anyone caught leaking real info to the media would find his balls tacked to the outside of the door.
Goes back to the saying:
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:24 amThose that are talking don’t know; and,
those that know, aren’t talking.
“My outrage is not so much at them as it is at the feminists who are either silent while the bloodletting occurs, or are stabbing a good woman in the back. No one eats their own like women.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:26 amPaging the following list: Boxer, Pelosi, Steinem, Wolf, Ellen Goodman, et. al. They all showed real class by naturally coming out to make even a carefully crafted, general statement of “congratulations” to Palin didn’t they? I recall the eeeeevil Bush in his State of the Union kicked off with an acknowledgment of Pelosi’s accomplishment despite their political opposition.
AD – I do what I can. Their actions the last few days would have to rise up to be reprehensible.
JD (75f5c3) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:33 amO.k.. I was wrong about who said the quote “Trust but Verify”.
It was Ronald Reagan, thanks for some real facts folks.
Hmmm…….maybe that’s why the mainstream media shouldn’t trust blog sites.
Ya think?
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:34 amNobody vetted Baracky with me either. I could have saved them some time based on his well known reputation. I thought the process was supposed to be a lot more thorough for presidential candidates than vice presidential candidates too. Go figure.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:38 am92. And it’s curious that honest efforts to vet aspects of Obama’s career are met with mob tactics by his rabid followers. Lovely campaign they run.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:41 amYes, another sterling example of competence by the
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:41 amFederal Bungling Investigators.
JD @ #90…
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:44 amYes, if we were to get down in the gutter to battle the Left, we would be by ourselves since they’re down in the sewer, or lower.
If we dumped these people into the ocean, we would be locked up by the EPA for poluting a pristine environement.
That’s funny, #94 and #93. You guys don’t pay attention to the vetting that went on about Obama because he’s a Democrat.
I’m sure you will say the same thing about how the liberals and the media are describing Palin.
One difference, we are now being asked as Americans, not party loyalists, to chose a person for president.
The decisions he makes now is evident to all people, not just party loyalists.
Make no mistake, McCain, Obama, and Biden have all been vetted by Americans and their respective parties.
Could we honestly say the same thing about Palin?
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:48 amWhy don’t you personally vet her by watching her speech tonight, Oiram?
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:51 amIf what is happening right now to her daughter is your idea of vetting, you can go fuck yourself if you think I’ll ever run for office…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:52 amI was reading about Palin months ago on RedState as well, thinking how lucky could we get to land her as a veep pick. I never thought McCain would be so bold in a direction that would please, rather than pi$$ off, the base.
We may never know who first brought Palin to McCain’s attention (it could have been Fred), but there is no doubt she has been known to the righty blogosphere for quite a while. That and the fact that the Drive Bys totally (and deliberately) missed this boat have to be big reasons why they are throwing utter hissy fits now. They hate all conservative women to begin with but they didn’t see this coming, she has been a fave with righty bloggers, and she has electrified the base. The media was totally out of the loop, couldn’t destroy her beforehand, and now are exacting their revenge.
She’ll still get the better of them.
Peg C. (48175e) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:55 amHaw haw haw I am so LOVING this thread. You guys are all sounding more and more like Prison Planet every minute! (Not that Prison Planet is necessarily incorrect in its assertions… who know’s whether or not what they are saying is true?)
I especially love this kind of dual lib/con stuff…..
“The only method they (libs) know to defeat them (the pure and unstained cons) is to lie, smear, attack, and conduct ruthless unethical methods of warfare against the individual.”
Thank GOD we have St Palin who will come and slay the evil dragons of immoral communist liberals who think homosexshals should be allowed to marry but not carry personal firearms to pick up their welfare checks at the methadone and free abortion clinic!
So the big O is not the messiah…. NO!
Sarah Palin is the messiah!
How bout this for all you media conspiracy freaks: just remember that the Clintons did VERY well airing out as much dirty laundry as possible before their opponents could. So this media blitz is actually a CONSERVATIVE media conspiracy to Clintonize Ms Palin AND get people to sympathize with her since the “media is piling on”. It sure is working on all of you.
EdWood (c2268a) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:55 amIf this campaign is the sewer we can expect in the future, a lot of people have to be thanking their lucky stars that dueling was outlawed 200 years ago.
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 10:57 amOf course, if politicians and media mavens were to be held personally responsible for some of the crap that they spew, they might act in a more responsible manner.
And we call ourselves Civilized?
The spoiled little children in the media are throwing a widdle tantrum because they weren’t kept in the loop.
Remember the whiny little shit fit David Gregory waged because Cheney’s peeps notified the local paper instead of the betters/deciders in the presidential press pool that he had accidently shot a friend in a hunting mishap?
Topsecretk9 (686554) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:00 am#97, I will watch her speech tonight ICY, just like I watched prime time speeches at the RNC yesterday.
I don’t ask that of you ICY, because I know you watched the DNC last week.
Right?
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:07 amWhich reminds me…
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:08 amWith McCain cancelling an appearance on “Larry King, Live” due to a dust-up between one of CNN’s minions and one of his staffers,
what are the chances that CNN might find their press credentials at the bottom of the list, if at all, in a McCain WH?
You guys don’t pay attention to the vetting that went on about Obama because he’s a Democrat.
You mean Rezko ? And Wright ? And Ayres (Good work shutting down that library until the files could be weeded) ?
I think the real “vetting” of Obama is coming up.
You mean this kind of vetting ? I can hardly wait.
Mike K (6d4fc3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:09 amEdCan’tGetWood –
So the big O is not the messiah…. NO!
Sarah Palin is the messiah!
— Conservatives think Sarah Palin will heal the party.
Liberals believe that Barack Obama will heal the world.
just remember that the Clintons did VERY well airing out as much dirty laundry as possible before their opponents could.
— I guess Hillary’s big mistake this time was not doing that; huh?
Clintonize Ms Palin
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:10 am— That’s Mrs. Palin or, if you choose to actually show her respect, Governor Palin.
I blush, thank you Patterico.
But there were indeed lots of folks who’d previously speculated about Gov. Palin as a Veep pick, even before McCain clinched the nomination. Most prominent among them was Fred Barnes in his National Review piece from 2007, but I linked several others.
EdWood (#100): Your cluelessness is classic. Conservatives and Republicans are thrilled about the Palin nomination because (a) she’s a genuine conservative, and (b) she’s no messiah, she’s real and as down-to-earth as the Democratic nominee is ethereal. She will connect with millions of voters who recognize just that in her and who identify with her story, which is as all-American as, frankly, Obama’s is weird.
Beldar (7bfbbf) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:10 am#98, Scott, I agree with you, I don’t like how the Media is invading Palin’s daughter’s privacy either.
But this is not much different than how many people (not sure you Scott) here complained about Fuel wasted by Democrats who claim to be “GREEN”.
I think accusing Democrats of not walking the talk is nonsense, but I know where it’s coming from.
You have to know that the Republican party has relied heavily on Family Values.
Palin’s family scrutiny is an unfortunate by-product of this.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:14 am#107 “She will connect with millions of voters who recognize just that in her and who identify with her story, which is as all-American as, frankly, Obama’s is weird.”
Thanks Beldar, that’s all liberals needed to see to verify their ideas of Right Wingers.
I’m glad not all Republicans think that way.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:16 amI just looked at some photos on the New York Post website of the Palin family. One shows the family standing on a porch that overlooks a beautiful scenic view of Alaska–mountains and water in the background. They look so at home and happy.
It’s really sad to see the poison thrown at this family. I am sure Sarah gave her family a heads up on the expected intrusion into their lives. But I doubt she was able to prepare them for the intensity of the ugliness that has surfaced.
It must be frustrating to Governor Palin and her family to be attacked by people who not only don’t know them personally, but have only known their images for a few days.
I was born in New York, went to grade, high school and college in the city. I moved away in 1971. I know the elitist types who are slamming the Palins very well. They are the most parrochical bunch of closed-mined, self-absorbed, it’s-all-about-me, asshats imanginable. Many firmly believe thay are the gold standard by which all other Americans should be compared.
I remember being in Hawaii many years ago at a restaurant in Maui. A guy, his wife and teen aged son were waiting for a table, as were a bunch of other folks. The guy was wearing black socks with sandals (nicely contrasting his Ivory white legs) and along with the beard, he had the total East Coast intelligentsia look down just so. But he hadn’t lost the accent of the suburbs—Brooklyn or Queens—the result being a hybrid accent of harsh New York and affected snobbery. He was noticed by everyone around him and many of us exchanged quiet looks of mockery. He was a first class tool, completely out of his element and just flat out lame ass. But he was oblivious to his vibe, a man never circumspect enough to be aware of the difference between his image of himself VS his identity.
The New York elites live in little apartments, ride in little elevators, crowded buses and subways and work in little offices. And when they get together at their little bullshit cocktail parties, they laugh and mock folks like the Palins, who live and enjoy one of the most beautiful places on earth. The Palins are very different from them and so they are hated.
PC14 (ec0516) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:16 amThe lefties will be watching Governor Palin’s speech very closely, tonight. If it half as powerful as I expect it to be, watch them go into pants-shitting hysterics.
nk (21731d) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:16 amSarah Palin is the messiah!
Sigh. We on the right are not looking for a messiah like you on the left. We’re a realistic people – we just a want a smart, savvy, strong elected official.
Its that very difference is what separates the rational from the irrational and the big boys and girls from the adults.
Dana (b4a26c) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:17 amI will watch her speech tonight ICY, just like I watched prime time speeches at the RNC yesterday. I don’t ask that of you ICY, because I know you watched the DNC last week.
Icy Truth didn’t question Obama’s vetting, Oiram.
Paul (ac3cf3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:17 am#103 – Oiram
I don’t ask that of you ICY, because I know you watched the DNC last week. Right?
— That’s right. Look back in the archives to “Democratic National Convention, Day 1 . . . Day 2, etc”. The posts are all there. Live reactions by me to each speaker, including notations of each mention of race — just like I told you I was going to do. I even talked to you within some of the posts, even though you weren’t there.
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:17 amYou have to know that the Republican party has relied heavily on Family Values.
Palin’s family scrutiny is an unfortunate by-product of this.
Wrong.
The Left sees their defeat in her, because she is the personification of their total refutation. So they use every means within their reach to destroy her and her family.
Paul (ac3cf3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:23 amMike K @ #109…
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:24 amThat link is chilling!
I would not be surprised to see most, if not all, of those names reprised in the files of the CAC (if they were not scrubbed).
Dollar to a do-nut that those names were the recipients of the $150M that CAC distributed.
Walter Annenberg must be spinning.
OMG!, even US Weekly has a tabloid story about the woman! This isn’t a lib reaction it’s a status-quo establishment reaction! She is too revolutionary for too many comfy entrenched groups! So in addition to being the messiah (or at least St George) Palin is ALSO Che Guevarra , Teddy Roosevelt, and Machiavelli all rolled into one!
No..I’ve got it. She is Joan of Arc. Joan of Arc is the person who embodies all of those qualities AND is competent in the weapons technology of the day.
Wow.
EdWood (c2268a) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:24 am#112, Um Dana, we on the left are not calling Obama “messiah” you have done that as a way of mocking Obama.
Quite frankly, it also mocks Jesus Christ.
If you had truly understood Obama’s comment “Above my pay grade” at Saddleback, I wouldn’t have to remind you of all this.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:25 amEdWood…
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:29 amAnd like Joan, she must be burned at the stake.
“The lefties will be watching Governor Palin’s speech very closely, tonight. If it half as powerful as I expect it to be, watch them go into pants-shitting hysterics.”
nk – I thought you said she was too white trash for everyone. Are you revising your opinion?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:30 amWhat media bias ?
Mike K (f89cb3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:31 amIf you had truly understood Obama’s comment “Above my pay grade” at Saddleback, I wouldn’t have to remind you of all this.
So, if he meant, “When God breathes His Spirit into the clay”, why didn’t the little, weasally, two-faced, political hack just come out and say it?
You’re following a false prophet, Oiram.
nk (21731d) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:31 am118, Obama was shown to be a lightweight in his own words at Saddleback. Without a teleprompter loaded with glib words and empty answers, Obama ia a fool on parade.
PCD (5c49b0) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:34 am#107
Beldar,
My messiah comment was mostly a reaction to well… the reaction to Palin’s nomination. It was as if a million voices cried out “We are SAVED!!!” all at once. I have been listening to people all over the city here for days (I live in Birmingham). I was of course teasing the commenters here too coz the thread was getting so frothy and spittle flecked.
“She will connect with millions of voters who recognize just that in her and who identify with her story”
EdWood (c2268a) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:34 amYou are right of course (mostly).
For the media, Sarah Palin = Katrina!~
‘Murders in the Superdome!’ = ‘Fake Pregnancy!’
‘Snipers in the Streets!’ = ‘Member of Alaska Independence party!’
I could offer more of these comparisons, easily. The basic story, though, is ‘No rumor too outrageous to be floated’.
Thomas Hazlewood (a77bf5) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:35 amPartly to mock him, sure, but mostly to mock his disciples. After all, it’s not as though there were all that many issues on which Clinton and Obama differed significantly, nor was either individual remotely qualified for the job. The only rational explanation for such a long, protracted and increasingly ugly Democrat primary is that you guys weren’t arguing over the issues or who would make the better President, only which hero to worship.
Xrlq (b71926) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:35 amUS Weekly has a tabloid story about the woman!
Can you say media bias?
Um Dana, we on the left are not calling Obama “messiah” you have done that as a way of mocking Obama.
How do you explain this Rolling Stone cover from March, Oiram?
Paul (ac3cf3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:36 amThe thought that comes up with this comparison as though there is any kind of equivalence is sooo screwed up it is breath taking. Just Wow.
quasimodo (edc74e) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:42 amI am not a big fan of Arnold S since he became our Governor but I think he should have been used in a big brother role tonight at the convention.
Arnold can be very entertaining and engaging and would be the perfect person to stand in front of that convention and stick up for a fellow Governor. Sarah is different and so is Arnold. To many, they are both “foreigners” and with the right speech writer, Arnold could be The Terminator to all this bull crap.
Sometimes I think Arnold’s social positions are completely foreign, but Arnold is still bigger than life to many and he could pull this off.
PC14 (ec0516) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:46 am#122 nk, your digging McCain’s grave when you tell liberals they are following a false prophet.
The right has done a fair job of portraying us as following a prophet.
Quite Frankly we’re tired of President Bush. McCain seems right in line with Bush.
No Messiah necessary.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:46 am#128, the comparison exists. The reason I made it, is that I find both accusations, “Obama, Gore not being Green because they take a jet instead of walking”, “Palin not being a true family values person because of her daughter’s pregnancy” nonsensical.
Wow you need to see hypocrisy when it’s right in front of you Quasimodo.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:49 amExpecting rational thought from Oiram would be like expecting the media not to be in the tank for the Left.
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:53 amIt just ain’t goin’ to ‘appen!
The collection of non-right-wingers who have noted the cult-like devotion of Obamatons was rather lengthy, as far back as March. But maybe Oiram needs pictures.
Karl (f07e38) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:54 amoiram, I might agree with you except for his speech when he said “We are the change we have been waiting for.” Then he gave the megalomaniacal speech about the seas will stop rising and the genie was out of the bottle. This was no fantasy of the right. He seems to believe this stuff.
Mike K (f89cb3) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:57 am#133 KARL show me where “Obamatrons” as you put it, likened Obama to the messiah. Please don’t insult my intelligence by showing me where right wingers referred to him as the Messiah.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:00 pm#134, Self interpretations of speeches or Religion, don’t impress me much Mike.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:03 pm#115 Paul
I can see how her daughter’s pregnancy might be seen as a line of attack (along the whole, “if parents are paying enough attention to their children and raising them in a Godly fashion then the kids won’t have pre-marital sex” line) but I think that confuses some plank in the party platform with the candidate Palin who “lives” her values. She isn’t the “values” candidate she is a “reform” and “anti-corruption” candidate. I bet the latter 2 versions of her candidacy trump the first version.
#119 Apparently so…
#118 Oiram. Yes. Nobody thinks O is the messiah. That’s the Con take on it coz the guy was getting Dems all fired up… sort of like Palin does with the Cons (thus my comment at #100).
EdWood (c2268a) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:03 pmThanks Mike K, I was about to unload on Oiram before you stepped in with the cluebat. Oiram – can you speculate on why Obama got away with calling Bill Ayers “a guy in my neighborhood” for so long when they both had an intimate relationship with a $100M+ bank account? Why the mention of the “Woods Fund” while the CAC sat unexplored and unmentioned by the MSM? You call THAT vetting? Hmmm?
rhodeymark (4f2403) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:04 pmOiram – If you had been paying attention, you would know that Icy, and I, both watched most, if not all of the televised Dem convention, on MSNBC no less.
JD (75f5c3) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:06 pmI think a person running for Pres/VP should be able to pass a background investigation that police officers have to pass. Gov. Palin would have no trouble because she appears to be of good moral character and is a law abiding citizen. Sen Obama may have difficulty because of the whole extensive use of cocaine and marijuana thing. And the part where he has friends who are terrorist. And his sketchy real estate deals. But I guess none of that matters to liberals.
PDizzle (cb6b9b) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:08 pmOiram, I see all the hypocrisy of politicians of all strips.
quasimodo (edc74e) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:09 pmTo find the invasion of privacy of a teenage girl – any teenage girl – morally equivalent to pointing out the fact that Gore lives like a king while lecturing us on the evils of such a life demonstrates that you have lost your moral compass.
#141, “Gore lives like a king while lecturing us on the evils of such a life”
Interesting
I don’t condone accusing Palin of “Not living true family values while lecturing us on it”.
I would rather talk about issues.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:20 pmHow about “a light will shine down on you and you will say ‘I have to vote for Obama'”?? Sounds more like Ahmadinejad than Palin, right?
rhodeymark (1aaf2a) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:20 pmWhen has Palin lectured on anything besides corruption and energy?
rhodeymark (6797b5) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:21 pm#139 JD, I have been paying attention. And I expect that and know that of you and ICY. But with coment #97 by ICY, it appears he doesn’t think I would watch Palin’s speech.
Sorry if I misunderstood ICY.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:23 pmLiberals see Palin living her beliefs and they hear a lecture in their head… it is their soul struggling to survive.
rhodeymark (1aaf2a) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:24 pm#134, Self interpretations of speeches or Religion, don’t impress me much Mike.
Oiram – Your ability to be objective about Obama or the way his disciples act does not impress me.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:25 pmMike #121 What did Rupert Murdoch say? “It’s all subjective.” Keep watchin keep buyin.
US today is gonna make a bundle off that cover. If they are smart they will run some sort of shmoozy nice piece on Palin next week (“The Real Sarah Palin”) then slam her the next.
EdWood (c2268a) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:25 pmOiram,
Let’s start with Messianic rhetoric infuses Obama rallies, just one of the many links at my first link, which you clearly ignored.
Karl (f07e38) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:26 pm#147 Daley, when you call Obama supporters “disciples”, it only reinforces the nonsense some on the right spew.
Keep spewing if you want to make McCain and his supporters look bad.
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:27 pmWSJ editorial take:
LarryD (feb78b) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:30 pmTo slightly change the subject, maybe Sarah can tell Biden what gunfire sounds like. Just to be helpful.
Mike K (f89cb3) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:31 pm#128, the comparison exists. The reason I made it, is that I find both accusations, “Obama, Gore not being Green because they take a jet instead of walking”, “Palin not being a true family values person because of her daughter’s pregnancy” nonsensical.
Oiram – Controlling one’s own behavior to conform to stated important positions is something that should be doable. Something along the the lines of “show me Al Gore acting like gobal warming is an immediate concern and them I might get worried.” Instead he flies around in private jets, buys huge houseboats, drives suburbans, etc., etc. He is just another do as I say, not do as I do liberal. Criticizing him is a valid exercize.
Sarah Palin cannot live her daughter’s life for her or exercize 24/7 control. There is a difference. It’s too bad that you can’t see it.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:32 pm#147 Daley, when you call Obama supporters “disciples”, it only reinforces the nonsense some on the right spew.
Oiram – Would you prefer the word acolytes. I think the point has been amply made here that supporting Obama is almost like a religious movement among many on the left. You just don’t like it. That’s your problem, not mine.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:35 pmIt gets better and better…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:37 pmquasimodo
Well said. The words and actions of the Left in reaction to Gov. Palin have been breath taking. We should no longer be shocked, but dammit, they keep on ratcheting up teh krazy.
JD (75f5c3) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:38 pm#145 – Oiram
JD, I have been paying attention. And I expect that and know that of you and ICY. But with coment #97 by ICY, it appears he doesn’t think I would watch Palin’s speech.
— Two clarifications: 1) It is not that I didn’t think you would watch Palin’s speech; it is that I wanted to encourage you to discuss it here, especially seeing as how you were nowhere to be found last week. 2) JD watched the DNC Convention on MSNBC; I watched it on PBS. If I had to watch Olbermann and Matthews spooning in their Obama jammies I would have ended up buying a new TV every night (not to mention looking for a new supply of bricks).
Icy Truth (614178) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:44 pmPalin represents a huge threat to the whole liberal establishment. To the Obama backers for obvious reasons. But to the Clinton backers as well. If Palin is successful, it threatens the entire rationale for that part of the ‘womens movement’ which is a product made up almost entirely of the left, by the left, and for the left. Those who have staked millions on electing a liberal woman, those who have taken millions promising to push their liberal agenda, those who have risen to prominence as leaders — all these people will be humiliated and embarassed.
The elite is not going to take such a threat lieing down. Expect the sleaze and misogyny to escalate the more Palin impresses.
Against such odds, Palin cannot win by herself, regardless of her toughness, smarts, and persona. It’s time for conservatives and independents to arise, and bring the power of the pen to the battleground. Start by writing a check, and don’t stop pushing until this election is won.
DaMav (e84050) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:47 pm#149, thanks for the link.
Messianic rhetoric does not label him messiah by his supporters.
Did you read the last sentence from your politico link?
Here it is if you didn’t:
“And the loudest cheers may have come when Obama remarked that President Bush will not be on the ballot next year.”
Tired of Bush is becoming a religion in of itself 🙂
Oiram (983921) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:48 pmPalin is to the NOW crowd what Clarence Thomas was to the Black Caucus. The response is similar. She will be better able to fight back but I fully expect that the Alaska Democrats will try to torpedo her with a biased “report” in October. However, the facts of that trooper case are so outrageous I don’t think it will work. This election is obviously a fight to the death for the left. I would not be surprised to see an assassination attempt before November.
Mike K (6d4fc3) — 9/3/2008 @ 12:52 pmOiram,
Lame response, but thanks for playing, along with the admission that BDS is taking on the qualities of a religious cult. As I referred to the cult-like devotion of Obamatons and did not claim that they call him the Messiah, you can drop the strawman.
Karl (f07e38) — 9/3/2008 @ 1:01 pm“Self interpretations of speeches or Religion, don’t impress me much Mike.”
What part of “the seas will stop rising” don’t you understand, then?
Dmac (874677) — 9/3/2008 @ 1:10 pmWe are The One that we have been waiting for.
JD (75f5c3) — 9/3/2008 @ 1:13 pmActually, I was sort of hoping for a set of those foxy DoubleMint Twins…
Another Drew (e5e29b) — 9/3/2008 @ 1:15 pmfwiw, I was at Housekeeping Camp the same day (and week) and could not get a signal to save my life (even on Half Dome), no roaming, no nothing. What service do you use?
J (0a0e49) — 9/3/2008 @ 1:58 pm“The lefties will be watching Governor Palin’s speech very closely, tonight. If it half as powerful as I expect it to be, watch them go into pants-shitting hysterics.”
nk – I thought you said she was too white trash for everyone. Are you revising your opinion?
And then I said I was not going to be part of the problem. Two times, at least. Ok?
nk (21731d) — 9/3/2008 @ 2:02 pm#158 DaMav, you are so right. I bailed out of the women’s movement in the seventies when “equity feminism” got run over by “gender feminism”. I worked full-time as a computer programmer and college instructor until after the birth of my fifth child, and I utterly reject the leftist bias against marriage and family.
Kate0 (b16338) — 9/3/2008 @ 2:48 pmPatterico is totally correct about the main-stream-media’s mind-set, motives, and methods.
Conservatives should take care to avoid the same mistakes.
#158 & #170, I agree and would add that Palin is a threat to the feminists because she got to this point in life swearing allegiance to them. How dare she! These are women scorned by another woman – far worse than if scorned by a man.
Dana (084de8) — 9/3/2008 @ 6:37 pm“You’d think McCain would have caught that. She even took the money for the bridge.
Comment by Russell”
Wait, you mean the State of Alaska didn’t give back money from the transportation budget just because they chose not to spend it as their Political Betters in D.C. told them too?
Of course, as you don’t know but everyone else does, an earmark doesn’t generally add money to a bill; it just forcibly directs how the money in the bill would be spent.
Now maybe if you were in control of a state you’d send most of your transportation budget back to the people who (from your opinion) mismanaged how to spend it in the first place.
But if you are that stupid, I wouldn’t vote for you…
Gekkobear (60ec56) — 9/3/2008 @ 8:23 pmI recall that about five months Wonkette (who ever was running it at the time) had Mrs Palin listed as being in the running but thought that the new born would prevent her from being able to be VP.
seaPea (1cfc37) — 9/3/2008 @ 11:47 pm