Campaign 2008

[At Home 0]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09...d-to-debate/?hp

 

“I have to admit, though, he’s a great debater, and he looks pretty doggone confident, like he’s sure he’s going to win,’’ Ms. Palin, 44, said of Mr. Biden, 65. “But then again, this is the same Senator Biden who said the other day that University of Delaware would trounce the Ohio State Buckeyes. Wrong!”

 

KILL YOURSELF, SARAH PALIN

[Celtic Guardian 0]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle4837644.ece

 

McCain's campaign is hoping Bristol and Levi get married before the election. Nothing says family values like forcing two teenagers into a loveless marriage for political gain!

 

It's time for the McCain/Palin campaign to be told to leave Bristol Palin alone too. No teen girl deserves to be hit from all sides like this.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

She already got hit from all sides. That's how she got pregnant.

[Nightwing 0]

She already got hit from all sides. That's how she got pregnant.

 

Amazing.

[EricMM 0]

Oh, but that comment was bound to happen.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I get points for speed.

[BruteSquad_BRODY 0]

[SuperJerk 0]

Rumor has it there's more embarrassing Palin footage on the way.

 

 

[CubbyBr 0]

Yeah, about that other "embarassing footage" from the Palin CBS interview...

 

Today, the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz reported on potentially embarrassing clips of Sarah Palin being interviewed by Katie Couric that haven't yet been aired. The Politico has more information on one in particular:

 

Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

 

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

 

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

 

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.

 

-Huffingtonpost.com

 

Hilarious.

[SuperJerk 0]

I'm glad to see this important bill passed today because of John McCain suspending his campaign, personally flying to Washington, and getting this bill passed like he...

 

 

...wait, WHAT?

 

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his top aides took credit for building a winning bailout coalition – hours before the vote failed and stocks tanked.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html

 

 

So, to recap, McCain took credit for the bail-out plan (that he had nothing to do with) and bragged about how he'd put together a winning coalition to get it passed. THEN IT DIDN'T PASS! And the Dow dropped 777 points! Now his campaign is saying its the Democrats fault it didn't pass, even though mostly Republicans voted against it.

 

 

John McCain may be the most full of shit candidate for any American political office, ever.

 

If I were still a Republican, I'd be fucking embarrassed to support this shithead. Seriously. Were I a Republican, I'd vote for Barr, and then hope a real candidate runs in 2012.

 

What a fucking joke John McCain has become.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

My dad called me today to complain about this nonsense. He changed his registration today to unaffiliated. I think he's voted Republican for the past 30 years. Ouch, Johnny.

[SuperJerk 0]

CNN has picked up on the sneak preview of the McCain presidency we got yesterday.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/30/bai...ates/index.html

 

 

 

[milliondollarchamp 0]

[SuperJerk 0]

 

Surreal.

 

 

 

[bob_barron 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqITmC8fPS8...feature=related

 

Billy Madison lives on in all of us

[SuperJerk 0]

Ironically, that made more sense to me than anything else I've ever heard her say.

 

 

[At Home 0]

GOD DAMNIT I FUCKING HATE HER.

[BUTT 0]

That Billy Madison clip might have been funny if it didn't come from Air America. They're still around?

 

Palin's Couric interview tonight was incredible.

 

"Which magazines and newspapers did you read as governor of Alaska?"

"Oh, you know, all of 'em."

"Can you name any specific magazines?"

"I read all of 'em, I have a variety of sources..."

 

COULDN'T EVEN NAME ONE FREAKIN' NEWSPAPER OR MAGAZINE

[Guest Vitamin X]

Yeah, I found this kind of interesting. Palin;s debate style doesn't focus on being particular about anything, just anecdotes and general criticism. Like your typical American, so you see it kinda plays well into everything. Here's where I got that from:

What It's Like to Debate Sarah Palin

On April 17, 2006, Palin and I participated in a debate at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks on agriculture issues. The next day, the Fairbanks Daily News Miner published this excerpt:

 

"Andrew Halcro, a declared independent candidate from Anchorage, came armed with statistics on agricultural productivity. Sarah Palin, a Republican from Wasilla, said the Matanuska Valley provides a positive example for other communities interested in agriculture to study."

 

On April 18, 2006, Palin and I sat together in a hotel coffee shop comparing campaign trail notes. As we talked about the debates, Palin made a comment that highlights the phenomenon that Biden is up against.

 

"Andrew, I watch you at these debates with no notes, no papers, and yet when asked questions, you spout off facts, figures, and policies, and I'm amazed. But then I look out into the audience and I ask myself, 'Does any of this really matter?' " Palin said.

 

While policy wonks such as Biden might cringe, it seemed to me that Palin was simply vocalizing her strength without realizing it. During the campaign, Palin's knowledge on public policy issues never matured – because it didn't have to. Her ability to fill the debate halls with her presence and her gift of the glittering generality made it possible for her to rely on populism instead of policy.

 

Palin is a master of the nonanswer. She can turn a 60-second response to a query about her specific solutions to healthcare challenges into a folksy story about how she's met people on the campaign trail who face healthcare challenges. All without uttering a word about her public-policy solutions to healthcare challenges.

 

In one debate, a moderator asked the candidates to name a bill the legislature had recently passed that we didn't like. I named one. Democratic candidate Tony Knowles named one. But Sarah Palin instead used her allotted time to criticize the incumbent governor, Frank Murkowski. Asked to name a bill we did like, the same pattern emerged: Palin didn't name a bill.

[Art Sandusky 0]

(video of Palin interview with McCain as the bouncer)

 

Surreal.

I have moments of blinding anger that people exist who will watch this and say "they're right about everything! Reporters are so biased!" with complete belief. Then I calm down. Stuff like this isn't bugging me this election year nearly as much as it is most of the people in left-leaning circles. I think my mind has already decided that this ticket being elected is so far out of the realm of possibility that it isn't a concern. If Palin can't produce straight answers in that debate people will notice if Biden doesn't jump on her first about it. The people of this country want answers now, not marketing. It's already fooled us twice and 270 electoral votes worth of Americans simply couldn't be THAT stupid this time. Unlike 9/11, this is a different kind of anger in the electorate because there aren't any shadowy men half a world away to blame for this mess.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

That Billy Madison clip might have been funny if it didn't come from Air America. They're still around?

 

Palin's Couric interview tonight was incredible.

 

"Which magazines and newspapers did you read as governor of Alaska?"

"Oh, you know, all of 'em."

"Can you name any specific magazines?"

"I read all of 'em, I have a variety of sources..."

 

COULDN'T EVEN NAME ONE FREAKIN' NEWSPAPER OR MAGAZINE

 

Oh my god, what an incredibly stupid thing to get all angry about.

 

Hell, I bet if she did name them, you wouldn't probably know them anyway and call her for making up names or something.

[BUTT 0]

Hell, I bet if she did name them, you wouldn't probably know them anyway and call her for making up names or something.

oh jeez

[At Home 0]

I tend to agree, Kotz, but then I can't help but think of the great numbers of voters in swing states who vote on gut reaction; this is the reasoning behind the Palin bump. If people wanted facts and real political debate, then Obama would be leading by double-digits. The fact that McCain had an R next to his name makes it an easy game to tie him to George Bush. But calling Obama an elitist and such has done it's part. I remember quite clearly reading a part of a story in which a voter in a critical swing state blatantly says, "I don't know, Obama just seems like an elitist." She'll probably vote Republican because of that, no matter how many debates that go to show how dumb Palin is, or how much better Obama is, etc.

[panthermatt7 0]

I tend to agree, Kotz, but then I can't help but think of the great numbers of voters in swing states who vote on gut reaction; this is the reasoning behind the Palin bump. If people wanted facts and real political debate, then Obama would be leading by double-digits. The fact that McCain had an R next to his name makes it an easy game to tie him to George Bush. But calling Obama an elitist and such has done it's part. I remember quite clearly reading a part of a story in which a voter in a critical swing state blatantly says, "I don't know, Obama just seems like an elitist." She'll probably vote Republican because of that, no matter how many debates that go to show how dumb Palin is, or how much better Obama is, etc.

 

This highlights a fundamental issue that I have with Democrats: they have the viewpoint that if people were as smart as them, they'd be Democrats, too. But that's just not true -- everyone has a differing opinion on how society should be. If someone doesn't agree with your opinions on how a government should be run, that does not make them an idiot that is beneath your intellectual level.

 

Democrats today cry for everyone to have an equal voice (i.e. womens' rights with abortion, gay marriage with homosexuality), up until it comes to people that differ from their opinion.

 

Of course, Republicans think they're the "holy" party, which is another issue altogether...

[At Home 0]

No, Matt, that's not what I'm saying.

 

I digress: first of all, being an independent, as you claim to be, doesn't mean coming in here and just rolling your eyes and presenting opinions against Obama. That's just being a whistleblower, but with no real purpose in mind other than for you to tell us all how we should step back and reconsider our support for Obama. It's freed your mind thus far, obviously.

 

Don't accuse me of ever not letting people with a different opinion speak. You know what I did today for 2 and a half hours in my international relations class? Justified the war in Iraq. Not as a project, or speech, or structured debate, but I just argued with a class full of students the opinion that the war in Iraq was a just war. I was the only person doing that in a class of around 30. I play the devil's advocate on a number of occasions, that's true, but I will never tell anyone that I don't want to hear their opinion. I've told my father several times that "I wish I went to a good school in a red state, I find debating politics with conservatives much more interesting than with liberals." If I'm telling ANYONE to shut up, it's the liberals, because I hear that shit from 9 to 5, every. day.

 

Getting back to what I said there. What are Bush's ratings now? 28? 72% of the country thinks that George Bush is doing a bad job. Many historians, journalists, and analysts alike have said that he's the worst president ever. Sure, that's their opinion, but that's also the opinion of A FUCKING LOT of other people. It's not even hyperbole! There's a justified cause to think that, and plenty of facts to back it up. It's hard to distance Bush from the guy who voted with him close to 80% of the time. The issues favor the Democrats this time around. Bush and his 6 years of a republican majority in the senate and house put this country on the wrong direction (or so says the majority of people asked). It's a simple fucking equation, and so far, Obama's campaign has failed to do that so far, pragmatically at least.

 

So, thanks for the effort, but you completely misunderstood what I was saying. It's just a bad version of whistleblowing. You could argue your points well, but you choose not to. You could raise red flags on posts that make erroneous statements (like I have several times in the past), but you choose instead to take issue with points that you miss the mark on.

 

 

 

EDIT: Ah, wait, trolling. That's what it is. Trolling.

[Nightwing 0]

No, Matt, that's not what I'm saying.

 

I digress: first of all, being an independent, as you claim to be, doesn't mean coming in here and just rolling your eyes and presenting opinions against Obama. That's just being a whistleblower, but with no real purpose in mind other than for you to tell us all how we should step back and reconsider our support for Obama. It's freed your mind thus far, obviously.

 

Okay, first off that's not what whistleblowing is. It's playing the Devil's Advocate. Whistleblowing is breaking with a group to tell an authority figure they are doing something wrong; playing the Devil's Advocate is presenting an unpopular opinion to keep up debate. While Matt's points haven't blown me out of the water, I can understand why he's doing it: It's simply not fun or interesting to circle-jerk about how much you love/hate someone. I tried it until I just got tired of McCain going against his previous positions to appeal to the Republican base.

 

Don't accuse me of ever not letting people with a different opinion speak. You know what I did today for 2 and a half hours in my international relations class? Justified the war in Iraq. Not as a project, or speech, or structured debate, but I just argued with a class full of students the opinion that the war in Iraq was a just war. I was the only person doing that in a class of around 30. I play the devil's advocate on a number of occasions, that's true, but I will never tell anyone that I don't want to hear their opinion. I've told my father several times that "I wish I went to a good school in a red state, I find debating politics with conservatives much more interesting than with liberals." If I'm telling ANYONE to shut up, it's the liberals, because I hear that shit from 9 to 5, every. day.

 

Wow, in your incredibly self-righteous defense (OMG YOU PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE EVERY NOW AND THEN!!!1! U R IRREPROACHABLE!!!), you completely missed his point and managed to prove it in one fell swoop.

 

He never talked about squelching debate. Re-read his post; he talked about ridiculing the other side's view. I can certainly agree with him to an extent, though you can say that every party condescends to outsiders in some way. If I have any comment against that, it's simply because I don't think Obama comes off that way at all. He's honestly a candidate who I feel welcomes discussion on a topic rather than simply shoots it down (Which, ironically, McCain did all Friday night).

 

He may have misinterpreted your post, but his point isn't that bad, and your defense is absolutely miserable.

 

On-Topic: An interesting article here, with some nice trend graphs.

[At Home 0]

Great. Another fucking long series of quote-and-posts.

[Firestarter 0]

Who cares anymore?

 

I pine for my brave little Hillary.

[At Home 0]

Okay, first off that's not what whistleblowing is. It's playing the Devil's Advocate. Whistleblowing is breaking with a group to tell an authority figure they are doing something wrong; playing the Devil's Advocate is presenting an unpopular opinion to keep up debate.

 

Right, it's trolling. I got the word wrong. My mistake. From what I can understand, it's sincere on his behalf. He talked about rising above all the hub-bub and, gasp, SWINGING BACK TO UNDECIDED. So, that's what I'll go on: his points and how he decides to present them.

 

While Matt's points haven't blown me out of the water, I can understand why he's doing it: It's simply not fun or interesting to circle-jerk about how much you love/hate someone. I tried it until I just got tired of McCain going against his previous positions to appeal to the Republican base.

 

Great. Good for you.

 

 

 

Wow, in your incredibly self-righteous defense (OMG YOU PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE EVERY NOW AND THEN!!!1! U R IRREPROACHABLE!!!), you completely missed his point and managed to prove it in one fell swoop.

 

Good way to paint me in that color. Did you make a piggy face when you typed that "OMG" bit?

 

He never talked about squelching debate. Re-read his post; he talked about ridiculing the other side's view.

Democrats today cry for everyone to have an equal voice (i.e. womens' rights with abortion, gay marriage with homosexuality), up until it comes to people that differ from their opinion.

 

How can I interpret this as other than something along the lines of this?: "Democrats today want everyone to have an equal say in matters, until it comes to people whom they disagree with, which they want to shut out entirely." That's wanting to stifle debate. I don't know how he also can say that only Democrats do this. Both parties are somewhat guilty of doing it.

 

you can say that every party condescends to outsiders in some way.

 

Right.

 

He may have misinterpreted your post, but his point isn't that bad, and your defense is absolutely miserable.

 

No, he absolutely misinterpreted my post, his points are completely one-sided (the "Republicans think they're the 'holy' party" line does not salvage the other paragraphs), and I don't know how to defend myself against allegations that I don't want to hear the other people's side BESIDES using examples from this thread (I've been critical of Jerk and JotW, to name a few), and other real-life instances that prove that I'm MORE interested in hearing everyone else's opinions other than my own? I'm sorry if you feel the fact that me saying that gives me a holier-than-thou mentality (it doesn't), but if you can come up with a more effective way to defend myself, then please, chime in.

[Firestarter 0]

<eyes thread wryly> I find it funny that I am now, probably, the most anti-McCain person on this board.

 

Although I'd still vote for his sorry wrinkled dumb old ass over B.O. Hussein.