They want McCain to be a maverick and then when he acts like one they pounce like hyenas.
They want women to assume more dominant roles and when an ascendant, accomplished and confident one does, they say she’s too young, too cute, too average, too motherly.
They want reform and an end to the entrenched policies and personalities of Washington; along comes an agent of that very change and they attack her for not being chosen by them; for not being of the ilk.
WSJ: Even as the Obama camp ponders how best to handle John McCain’s veep pick of Sarah Palin, the high priests and priestesses of the media have marked her as an apostate. The Beltway class is in full-throated rebellion against a nondomesticated conservative who might pose a threat to their coronation of Barack Obama and the return of Camelot-on-the-Potomac.
If we know anything about John McCain, it is that he is by instinct a reformer, sometimes to a fault. Yet when he acts like McCain and picks a maverick reformer in his own mold, his former media cheering squad turns on him for not conforming to Beltway mores and picking someone they’ve all met 10 times in the CNN green room.
They want a break from politics as usual and then won’t recognize Sarah Palin for how much she has accomplished in a short time as Governor, not to mention fighting her very own party in the interest of her citizenry.
The Beltway class whines constantly about how it wants fresh voices in politics, but we guess this means a first-term Democratic Senator rather than a first-term Republican Governor from some godforsaken U.S. state few of them have ever been to.
A sample of some of the spray from the media of late on the Palin candidacy:
– Eleanor Clift, the McLaughlin Group: “If the media reaction is anything, it’s been literally laughter in many places across newsrooms.”
– Sally Quinn, Newsweek: “It is a political gimmick . . . I find it insulting to women, to the Republican party, and to the country.”
– E.J. Dionne, Washington Post: “Palin is, if anything, less qualified for the vice presidency (and the presidency) than [Harriet] Miers was for the court. But there is one big difference: Palin passes all the right-wing litmus tests.”
– Maureen Dowd, New York Times: “They have a tradition of nominating fun, bantamweight cheerleaders from the West.”
– Ruth Marcus, Washington Post: “But as a parent in the media, I also know that the Palins assumed this risk. Anyone who watched coverage of the Bush twins’ barroom exploits knew that the avert-your-eyes stance toward candidates’ children has its limits.”
– Charlie Cook, Beltway pundit, on PBS’s “Charlie Rose”: “I had a friend that had a young person tell them that they had three interviews to get a job as a server at Ruby Tuesday! So this is like putting a whole — for someone that hasn’t played on a national — Geraldine Ferraro had more — Dan Quayle had undergone more scrutiny, had played on a bigger stage than this. This is putting an enormous risk on someone he didn’t know. And he has to just pray that it works!”
Watching the Obama/Biden camp squirm is a lesson in political schizophrenia.
We are instructed that Mrs. Palin isn’t qualified, because she lacks Washington experience. But until recently that was said to be a virtue in Mr. Obama, who is at the top of his ticket. Meanwhile, there’s hardly a peep of media notice that the Obama campaign is preposterously trying to remake Joe Biden into a poor scrapper from Scranton when he’s been in the Senate for 36 years. They all know Joe. But when Mr. McCain picks an authentic middle-class mother who is also a Governor, we are told she’s not up to the job.
Tonight, in what will undoubtedly be one of the most-watched events of the presidential race, the American people will find out if in fact she is up to the job. Ostensibly even more so when she enlists her intellect in a VP debate with Joe Blow’s mouth.
That night we may find ourselves witness to one of the most historic debates of all time as most certainly Joe will underestimate Mrs. Palin or will otherwise be incapacitated by her charms and his inability to control his diction in the presence of a lady.
John McCain is counting on it.
Remember Algore vs W debate. Misunderestimated can be a powerful tool.
It occurs to me that the media — which was in full kneepad-mode for McCain in 2000 — is now rejecting him for much the same reasons that Republicans rejected him in the 2000 primaries.
Anybody who can bring home the $27 million bacon to a town of 6500 people is a woman to be reckoned with.
Palin’s gonna get Wasilla on Biden’s ass!
/jc
Wow. It takes serious effort to have things this backwards.
I don’t mind Palin’s inexperience. It’s the Republicans that seem to have a problem with it… McCain spends months attacking Obama on inexperience, and then chooses an inexperienced running mate? That’s just not clear thinking.
If you think Palin is a break from Politics As Usual, they must be spiking the Kool-Aid with something pretty powerful.
And last but not least, if Obama or Biden had half of the baggage Palin has, you’d be foaming at the mouth right now. The media (John McCain’s base) is just working with what they have, and the liberals are showing considerable restraint, compared to the sort of shots we could be taking at her.
Wow. So the whole “she pretended to have a baby, but it’s actually her daughters child” is defined as restraint? That’s cute, Jeff Rosenberg.
Jeff, with all due respect much of your comment is incomprehensible.
It’s the Republicans that seem to have a problem with it… McCain spends months attacking Obama on inexperience, and then chooses an inexperienced running mate? That’s just not clear thinking.
Lemme clear it up; Palin has more executive experience than Obama, Biden and McCain put together (among the three of them, the only entry is McCain’s stint as a Navy squadron leader).
If you think Palin is a break from Politics As Usual, they must be spiking the Kool-Aid with something pretty powerful.
Jeff, that line says “canned talking point” to me. Palin tackled the AKGOP establishment – she was the real maverick.
And she is definitely a break from politics as usual; she’s a working mother with actual elected and executive experience (unlike Hillary, whose entire “experience” was being “the president’s wife” and a hitch in the Senate).
And last but not least, if Obama or Biden had half of the baggage Palin has, you’d be foaming at the mouth right now.
Huh?
What “baggage?”
Kids? A daughter in trouble? That’s life for most of us. A venal little small-town dispute that’s still under investigation? That’s standard issue in rural politics.
Against Ayers, Wright, “Saving the nation’s soul” and the entire litany of Obama’s callow reversals, and Biden’s long history has a Senatitis sufferer?
No comparison.
The media (John McCain’s base) is just working with what they have, and the liberals are showing considerable restraint, compared to the sort of shots we could be taking at her.
Go for it. It tips your (pl) hand; you’re scared (or your overlords are scared, at any rate).
Kids? A daughter in trouble? That’s life for most of us.
I just posted A Conservative Christian Veiw of Sarah Palin over at Anti-Strib.
What one considers “baggage” others consider in a far different light.
Plus she’s a private pilot, and flies her own SuperCub.
“compared to the sort of shots we could be taking at her. ”
Come on, Jeffey, give us an example. Don’t be shy….
“What “baggage?”
1. Troopergate: The coverup. “In the latest sign that Sarah Palin’s promised cooperation with the Trooper-Gate investigation is failing to materialize, her lawyer is now demanding that the entire case be taken out of the hands of the independent prosecutor hired by Alaska lawmakers, and given over to a state personnel board — whose three members were appointed by the governor herself.”
2. The original Troopergate.
3. Hiring Abramoff (convicted) / Stevens (indicted) tied lobbyist to get earmarks for her town.
4. Ties to Alaska Independence Party which teaches hatred of America.
5. Two weeks ago Palin sat in the pews while a church invited guest pastor said Isreal had brought terrorist attacks on itself for rejecting Christ.
6. Trying to ban books.
7. Raising gas taxes on Americans.
Yeah! I heard she eats kittens and kicks puppies, too!
Tied lobbyists? Is that legal?
“Raising gas taxes on Americans”? Look out for more “happy to pay for a better ???” crossover votes!
Good god, RickDFL. This stuff is pissant. Let’s compare the ‘Alaska Independence Party” with the Weathermen, shall we? Talk about ties to a party that teaches “hatred of America”. Your “list” is bullshit.
Keep flailing, little guy! You gotta land a hit eventually!
“I heard she eats kittens and kicks puppies, too!”
Better, she thought the Bush Administration did too much to protect Polar Bears.
http://www.adn.com/polarbears/story/413710.html
“Look out for more “happy to pay for a better ???”
I don’t necessarily mind paying taxes to support Minnesota, but I really don’t like paying more taxes so that Gov. Palin can cut bigger welfare checks to Alaskans.
“The original Troopergate.”
From the chief of Police of Wasilla (an old friend)
“he’s not the finest example of a police officer”.
enough said.
Either you’re becoming a conservative, or there’s some implied-but-unstated set of checks you DO support.
“Let’s compare the ‘Alaska Independence Party” with the Weathermen, shall we”
OK. Palin’s husband was a member of the AIP until 2002. Gov. Palin attended AIP meetings in 1994, 2000, and sent a tapped message of support in 2008. Barack Obama denounced the Weathermen and never meet anyone from the Weathermen until long after the group disbanded.
“2. The original Troopergate.”
From the chief of Police of Wasilla AK, (an old friend)
“He’s not the finest example of a police officer”.
enough said
RickDFL you are incoherent. Take a rest. Maybe put an icepack on your boiling brain.
Anyone who believes that ‘troopergate’ disqualifies Palin for the vice-presidency but doesn’t think that ‘travelgate’ should disqualify Hillary for the presidency is in serious need of a mental examination.
Terry:
“Anyone who believes that ‘troopergate’ disqualifies Palin for the vice-presidency but doesn’t think that ‘travelgate’ should disqualify Hillary for the presidency is in serious need of a mental examination.”
I guess that is one we will have to let the voters decide. Given the fact that you are not even bothering to defend Palin on the merits, I like my chances.
Gov. Palin attended AIP meetings in 1994, 2000, and sent a tapped message of support in 2008.
Gee, I attended a Liberatarian caucus in 1996. I must not be a Republican.
“on the merits,”
Let’s see.
The trooper
1. Tazed his wife’s 10 year old son.
2. Was caught drinking in his patrol car (twice)
3. Illegally shot and killed a moose. (very bad in AK)
4. Threatened to kill his father-in-law. (very bad anywhere)
5. Received a 5 day suspension without pay.
I’d fire his boss too.
I’m enjoying just sitting back and watching you guys trip over yourselves on this. The irony is, McCain set the agenda that Palin’s now butting up against. He was the one who tried to make this election about experience. Maybe he should have thought for a whole 2 days before selecting Palin.
Palin has more “executive experience?” That’s a fun word game. If that’s the metric we’re using, than McCain never had a leg to stand on when he accused Obama of being inexperienced… because he’s inexperienced too.
Let’s see Palin for what she really is. She’s not about experience, or about being a “reformer.” She’s a desperate, last-minute sellout to the Christian right. And it will work — but McCain will lose the independents and those who care about good governance.
“She’s a desperate, last-minute sellout to the Christian right. ”
Wait, I thought she was a desperate attempt to woo Hillary supporters.
Which is it?
Pingback: The Twin Cities Daily Liberal » “Executive” experience?
Kermit:
“Gee, I attended a Liberatarian caucus in 1996. I must not be a Republican. ”
I wouldn’t know. No one denies that Palin is a member of the GOP. In addition to that she is a supporter and sympathizer of the AIP. They two are compatible.
You’re delusional, Rick. It must be easier that way.
Quotes but no links again, Rick. Seven assertions. Especially point #1: whoever you’re quoting is making an especially tendentious assertion that may not have any basis in fact. But since we don’t know who’s making it, we have no way to evaluate it. But that seems to be new standard on your side — say whatever the heck you want, throw it out there and hope it sticks.
At least there’s some honesty on the port side — so far today I know that Jake Tapper at ABC, Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings and the New York Times have all backed off their stories in re AIP. A lefty commenter on my blog had to admit that and backed down from similar charges he posted yesterday. Perhaps you will, too.
How come people keep screaming about troopergate, but never bother giving any details about it? What was it again the trooper did that made some think he should be fired? I assume Rick feels he should have kept his job, why else bring it up?
The merits of what, commissar RickDFL? There is no ‘there’ there. What is it, exactly, are you accusing her of doing? What was its level of impropriety? Illegal, immoral, unethical? What it shows about her character? Or is it just some straw you can grasp at?
This is just an interesting exercise to measure how far you’ve gone around the bend and gauge just how blind your political self-interest has made you. It’s not about Palin at all.
Jeff Rosenberg-
Since you define ‘good governance’ as enacting a Democrat agenda McCain never had those votes anyhow. Unless you’d like to define exactly what ‘good governance’ is. If it excludes obstructing justice the last D president didn’t govern very well at all.
So Jeff Rosenberg pretends (we hope) he cannot comprehend the difference between a more general experience and a more directly applicable experience.
When running for POTUS, what would be more directly applicable? Community Organizer experience, or experience as a U.S. Senator?
Since POTUS is an executive position, would experience as an executive (say maybe a Business Owner, Mayor, or Governor) be more applicable and so more valuable? I think most reasonable people would say ‘yes’.
Now McCain has someone on the ticket with some executive experience and the opposite ticket still has virtually none. “Well, whoopdy-doo” indeed.
“How come people keep screaming about troopergate, but never bother giving any details about it?”
Palin’s B-in-Law was accused of lots a nasty things during a bitter divorce (cue Mitch on one of his favorite topics). The charges were investigated by the well respected Public Safety Commissioner. Some charges were dismissed, other substantiated leading to a punishment. Then Palin became Governor and there was pressure to ‘revisit’ the case. The PSC refused, because that would be illegal and improper. Palin fired him with no explanation. When asked about she denied any involvement. Then a tapped conversation surfaced and several aides were forced to admit they had pressured the PSC. Palin and aides are now stonewalling bi-partisan legislative investigation and want the whole thing investigated by a Board of her appointees.
So 1. Palin improperly tried to get someone fired. 2. Fired the person who tried to stop her 3. Lied about it and is now 4. stonewalling the investigation.
Let me reduce RickDFL’s accusations to those that are based on facts, not fevered imagination:
“Some charges were dismissed, other substantiated leading to a punishment. ”
He admiited to tazing a 10 year old boy. His punishment was 5 days without pay.
1. Palin improperly tried to get someone fired.
Bullshit. No evidence Palin did anything to get Whooten fired.
2. Fired the person who tried to stop her
Fired her at-will appointee which the governor has the right to do for any reason.
3. Lied about it
Lied about what? No evidence. None.
4. stonewalling the investigation.
When does hiring a lawyer constitute stonewalling. Again, bullshit.
Terry:
You want to dispute any factual assertion in the above post feel free.
Re: polar bears…
How is that better than eating kittens and kicking puppies? The kicking and eating is malicious and villainous.
Not gunning for polar bears is simply a stance you disagree with. Surely, it is.
Uh, RickDFL, there’s something called ‘presumption of innocence’. Believe it or not this applies to conservatives as well as liberals. You are the one making accusations, it’s up to you to prove your case — please do so without links to opinion pieces by sorosbots.
Palin’s B-in-Law was accused of lots a nasty things during a bitter divorce
Yeah, so a State Trooper threatened some one with “eating a f$#@ing bullet”. That’s no reason to fire them! Take away their gun? Maybe.
Regardless of what the b-in-law did, the accusation is that Palin abused her office to try to get him fired. Their has been no ‘finding of fact’ on the matter by any impartial source. Palin has recently — today, I think — taken action to move the investigation from the political to the administrative level. Makes sense to me.
Bada:
“How is that better than eating kittens and kicking puppies?”
I was just thinking of the cuteness factor.
Terry:
If you want to dispute one of the facts, feel free.
Kermit:
Lots of people get accused of lots of things. That is why it is best to let a neutral party investigate instead of letting family members insert themselves in the process.
How would you feel if your ex-wife’s sister fired your boss for not re-opening a finished investigation of you?
If this is the worst stuff anyone can dig up on this gal, that she may have fired someone without due cause and that she has a daughter who is pregnant, a minor, and unmarried, Obama is in serious trouble.
This is clearly a diversionary tactic to take the focus off of Obama’s sordid associations, lack of relevant experience and extreme liberal voting record.
Sarah Palin scares the crap out of the Obama campaign and you liberals are doing their bidding by wasting time talking about the firing of a state trooper.
CNN is calling it “Troopergate”
Come…on!!!
JRoosh:
“she has a daughter who is pregnant, a minor, and unmarried”
You mentioned it, not me.
“fired someone without due cause”
Good to know, when Obama cleans house.
“Col. Julia Grimes, then head of the Alaska State Troopers, suspended Wooten for 10 days and wrote, “The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession.””
A little house cleaning was in order. Please keep bringing this issue up.
Rick:
“I was just thinking of the cuteness factor.”
Maybe the baby polar bears, but otherwise they are not cute… they is fierce, baby.
Bada
“Maybe the baby polar bears, but otherwise they are not cute… they is fierce, baby. ”
Not when cut into beautiful 30 second campaign commercials. But you are right. Just lots of shots of baby polar bears trying to swim, maybe with Mom trying to coax them along.
“Nature, red in tooth and claw.”
MON:
“Col. Julia Grimes, then head of the Alaska State Troopers, suspended Wooten for 10 days and wrote”
Ergo, he had been investigated and punished according to proper procedure. Gov.s don’t get to come in after the fact and decide to retry cases in which they have a personal interest.
RickDFL said:
“How would you feel if your ex-wife’s sister fired your boss for not re-opening a finished investigation of you?”
Feelings? Nothing more than feelings? Please. If you tasered your a kid and drank on the job, I don’t know how much consideration I would give your “feelings”, RickDFL.
Fighting for corruption in the interest of the workers? Oh, must be a union guy. 😉