Self-Loathing Commenters?

43 Comments »

1. Bruce, no surprise here as the gayLeft becomes increasingly adept at using underhanded, deceptive, fraudulent mechanisms to advance their political and policy interests. You guys at GP have had more than a fair share of these blog-perverts… and I use blog pervert as a way to characterize their deceptive activity in subverting intelligent, open, passionate discussion and debate… they pervert the main reason most people blog –to share, to discuss, to expound, to learn.

   Their goal: gay hegemony on policy. They simply loathe gays who aren’t ho’ing da row for da Masta on the Democrat Plantation.

   I gotta tell you though, GP is nothing like the wild-west conditions over at Independent Gay Forum. Over there they have IGF writers who stoop to pose as “readers-commenters”, there are readers/commenters with 3-4-5 aliases, there are the garden variety farLeft gay trolls who stalk people from blog to blog, and then there’s the unusual tactic of gayLeft trolls taking other peoples’ names and using them to fake postings from other commenters. Many of those deceptive trolls are people you’ve dealt with in the past and other blogmasters have banned, blocked or blacklisted from their own blogs.

   Wild west. Gay hegemony. Deception and underhanded dealings. Should it be any wonder it comes from actors on the gayLeft stage?

   Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 8, 2008 @ 7:33 am - October 8, 2008

2. So, the people managing these subprime investments are trolls who can neither spell, capitalize, punctuate, nor reason logically? No wonder our economy is hosed.

   Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 7:57 am - October 8, 2008

3. now, now, now. the little letter lollipop kids are the smartest drones in all of munchkinland. they worship their wizard, fear flying monkeys and get their news from the moonbats. poor babies, they depend on stretching mirrors to make them look tall. But, small dogs still heist on them.

   Comment by heliotrope — October 8, 2008 @ 8:13 am - October 8, 2008

4. OT: Claire McCaskill, another classy Democrat. A United States senator spits in Mitt Romney’s earpiece. Yet, some Democrats want us to believe it’s only their fringe that’s deranged.

   Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 8:52 am - October 8, 2008

5. I believe there are two kinds of screaming-partisan-Democrat businesspeople:

   1) Those who acquire money by something like crime or political connections or inheritance or dumb luck, more than by hard work and competence, and that feel guilty about their good fortune.

   2) Those who WANT to acquire money by something like crime or political connections or inheritance or dumb luck, more than by hard work and competence.

   Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 9:22 am - October 8, 2008

6. , and that feel guilty for their greed.

   Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 9:23 am - October 8, 2008

7. ILC #6: That would certainly explain the support for Obama. Supporting crooks like Tony Rezko isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.

   I imagine we can anticipate any U.S. attorneys investigating Democrat corruption to get fired on January 21, 2009. Just exactly like Clinton did.

   Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 9:26 am - October 8, 2008

8. Michael Malone (journalist-commentator in Silicon Valley, the heart of venture capital) mostly gets it:

   http://pajamasmedia.com/edgelings/2008/10/03/the-end-of-an-era/

   Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 10:25 am - October 8, 2008

9. My money’s on Cambridge, Massachusetts.

   Comment by Julie the Jarhead — October 8, 2008 @ 10:34 am - October 8, 2008

10. #6: I once read a very astute explanation for why every celebrity in Hollywood is a passionate leftist that was along the same lines. To paraphrase, the rich and famous in Hollywood typically have humble (if not desperately poor) backgrounds, so when they make it big, it usually happens very quickly and is accompanied by huge amounts of cash that they never imagined they would make even in their wildest fantasies. At the same time, the nature of the acting profession is that it is a lot of money for comparatively little “work.” So, when they wake up one day, still in their 30s, with $100 million bucks in the bank and no blisters on their hands, they start to feel a little guilty. Eventually, they grow so accustomed to their seemingly infinite wealth (and that of their equally-blessed Hollywood peers) that it doesn’t seem like the same lotto jackpot it once was and they begin to wonder why, if it came so easy for them, why there are so many that still spend their entire lives just “getting by.” They ultimately develop a mindset that there must be something wrong with the system. In a system that just dropped $100 million in their laps overnight, it shouldn’t be so difficult for just about everyone else to find some degree of financial security (house, two cars, college fund, etc.) without having to toil their entire lives for every penny. Naturally, once they channel this pathology into activism, their perfect targets are those who don’t seem to “care” as much as they do: wealthy Republicans that acquired their wealth through hard work (usually as entrepreneurs).

    Comment by Sean A — October 8, 2008 @ 11:05 am - October 8, 2008

11. Sorry to go off topic, but there is some good news this morning. The libtard son of a libtard lawmaker has been indicted by the feds for breaking into Sarah Palin’s e-mail account:

    http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1008081palin1.html

    Comment by Sean A — October 8, 2008 @ 11:17 am - October 8, 2008

12. Sean, I don’t think the Hollywood Elites want everyone else to have the money they do. They like being richer than everyone else and lording it over the little guy.
    Talk to any of the crew that work on these movies – they are completely invisible to the ‘Stars’.

    There may be some guilt involved, they like pointing their fingers at others. They are entitled to every cent and perk they get. But big industry – the kind that hires millions of people – are evil. btw, somehow Hollywood itself has escaped being labeled exactly what it is – big industry.

    Comment by Leah — October 8, 2008 @ 11:40 am - October 8, 2008

13. Actually, the reason they go into leftism is simple; they see people suffering, but rather than put their own money into it, they find virtue in taxing others.

    Every time a liberal or Democrat, especially one of any means whatsoever, whines that “rich people” should pay more in taxes, ask them how much extra they gave to the IRS last year. Then when they whine that they shouldn’t have to do that, point out how they make so much more than (insert local homeless or poor person here), how can they be so cruel and heartless as to not pay more tax to help that person? When they argue that “they give”, tell them that that’s not good enough, and that they should be funding more government to help that person, since private charities are obviously insufficient.

    Usually you can get them to repudiate the entire Democrat economic structure within about thirty seconds.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 8, 2008 @ 12:09 pm - October 8, 2008

14. I’ll say it again: The lazy rich, who got their money by luck or by other “shortcuts”, feel undeserving and guilty for both their success and their greed. Left-liberalism soothes them (as Sean says). It is a way they can feel morally superior, while continuing to lord it over others (as Leah says). It lets them deny their greed and dress up their lording as “helping”.

    “Greed” is a charged term for a morally neutral phenomenon: Ambition. Aspiration. The desire to improve one’s life. If a society respects life, liberty and property, then people will succeed by turning their greed / ambition / aspiration to productive channels. That’s capitalism. If instead a society disrespects life, liberty and property, people will succeed by gaming the system and basically looting the productive. That’s where we are today.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 12:16 pm - October 8, 2008

15. I’m on the official McCain mailing list (there are several; I’m talking about the one specifically for bloggers). Over the last few days, Obamatrons have been hacking list members’ email accounts and using them to send really despicable messages.

    I suppose when sockpuppetry and astroturfing doesn’t work . . .

    Comment by rightwingprof — October 8, 2008 @ 2:09 pm - October 8, 2008

16. (Hint: Bad grammar, bad spelling. Surprised he is working at a real job and isn’t in 8th grade.)

    OK. I have to call you on this.

    Your criticizing this guy, probably middle management or something, for bad grammar, yet Sarah Palin, who practically talks in gibberish, is just fine as VP candidate?

    QUESTION: Governor, on the William Ayers issue, you’ve been bringing it up a lot. I’m curious, why do you think it’s a pertinent argument to make right now? It was a long time ago, why is it pertinent?

    A: It is pertinent, it’s important because when you consider Barack Obama’s reaction to and explanation to his association there, and without him being clear at all on what he knew and when he knew it, that I think kinda peaks into his ability to tell us the truth on, not only on association but perhaps other things also. So, it’s relevant, I believe, and I brought it up in response to the New York Times article having been printed recently, and I think it just makes us ask the question that, if there’s not forthrightness there, with that association and what was known and when it was known, does that lead us to ask, is there forthrightness with the plans Barack Obama has or say tax cuts, or spending increases, makes us question judgment. And I think it’s fair and relevant.

    QUESTION: (FOX) Are you going to continue to link Obama to Ayers with all of the economic problems going on?

    A: Well, Americans are caring about the problems in the economy of course And wanting to know what those long term solutions are that our ticket can provide and what the other ticket is proposing so when you talk though about what it is that we are proposing and what it is that Barack Obama is proposing again it is relevant to connect that association that he has with Ayers–not so much he as a person Ayers, but the whole situation and the truthfulness and the judgment there that you must question if again he’s not being forthright in all of his answers as to how did you know him, when did you know him, why would you continue to be associated with him!? It makes you wonder about the forthrightedness, the truthfulness of the plans that he is telling America in regards to the economic recovery because that is first and foremost on American’s minds.”

    Plus, you made a typo here:

    well, this person is using an IP address which comes a company that describes itself like this:

    Shouldn’t that be “comes from a company…”

    Oops.

    I too have had egg on my face by making errors while pointing to other people’s goofs, which is why, this post post excluded, I don’t do it anymore.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 2:11 pm - October 8, 2008

17. sonicfrog, Palin doesn’t talk in gibberish any more than Obama, McCain or Biden. People frequently mix up words when speaking off the cuff and under pressure. I know I do. And politicians are always trying to find a transition to the thing they want to talk about.

    Obama said something last night that made me laugh out loud – I forget what it was, but it might have been to the effect that we (America) have absolutely done the right thing in Iraq. I assumed he was mixing up his words because if you read a word for word transcript, well, he gave away the election in the quote I’m thinking of.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 2:17 pm - October 8, 2008

18. All politicians speak gibberish, some just do it slicker than others. They don’t think they can get elected if they tell the truth; which is why none of them are saying “America is going to be in tough times the next few years, mainly because of stupid government policies that encouraged people to buy things they couldn’t afford with money they didn’t have.”

    Here’s how a normal, non-political person would have answered those questions:

    QUESTION: V the K, on the William Ayers issue, you’ve been bringing it up a lot. I’m curious, why do you think it’s a pertinent argument to make right now? It was a long time ago, why is it pertinent?

    HONEST ANSWER: Bringing up Obama’s political mentors not only fires up our base, it gives the independents something to doubt about him. It’s also a simplistic enough controversy that the message gets through the media wall. Ideally, the Ayers connection is something the media should be investigating, but since they won’t, we have to bring it up. Otherwise, it would be completely ignored.

    QUESTION: (FOX) Are you going to continue to link Obama to Ayers with all of the economic problems going on?

    HONEST ANSWER: That depends on whether the polls show it’s a message that works. We’d love to talk about the economy and our solutions to it, but the media just yawns when we do that. And sometimes, like with the LA Times last week, they blatantly lie and say we won’t talk about it.

    Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 5:11 pm - October 8, 2008

19. sonicfrog, Palin doesn’t talk in gibberish any more than Obama, McCain or Biden. People frequently mix up words when speaking off the cuff and under pressure. I know I do.

    I do too, and that’s kind of the point. I want to vote for someone who is better and more knowledgeable than me.

    It makes you wonder about the forthrightedness, the truthfulness of the plans that he is telling America in regards to the economic recovery because that is first and foremost on American’s minds.”

    So instead of demonstrating the superiority of your economic plan, you go on and on about an aspect of Obama, as unseemly as it is, that has nothing to do with economics. Explain why you plan is better than his. There is something called economics, and though she does have executive experience, she gives me no confidence that she has much command of the subject. McCain or Obama don’t give me much confidence either, but if they are setting the rubric in this race, Palin falls far below that standard.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 7:01 pm - October 8, 2008

20. sonicfrog, Palin doesn’t talk in gibberish any more than Obama, McCain or Biden. People frequently mix up words when speaking off the cuff and under pressure. I know I do.

    And isn’t it in the best interest of the country to vote for candidates who, you know, can operate effectively under pressure?

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 7:04 pm - October 8, 2008

21. HONEST ANSWER: Bringing up Obama’s political mentors not only fires up our base, it gives the independents something to doubt about him. It’s also a simplistic enough controversy that the message gets through the media wall. Ideally, the Ayers connection is something the media should be investigating, but since they won’t, we have to bring it up. Otherwise, it would be completely ignored.

    See. That wasn’t so hard. Now V just wrote that off the cuff, and I know writing is different than speaking. Palin IS NOT operating off the cuff. She is the one on the campaign trail bringing Ayers into the discussion. She has had time to hone her message, yet this is the best she can do?

    QUESTION: (WaPo) Are you saying Obama is dishonest?

    A: I’m not saying that he is dishonest, but in terms of judgment and in terms of being able to answer a question forthrightly it has–it has two different parts to it that judgment and that truthfulness and just being able to answer very candidly a simple question about when did you know him, how did you know him. Is there still–has there been an association with him since 02 and 05. We’ve heard a couple of different stories. I think it is relevant.

    Tons of words, but little substance.

    ” just being able to answer very candidly a simple question”

    The translation to this piffle is “Yes, I do question his honesty”.

    QUESTION: (NBC) Why did your husband decide to change his mind and return to Alaska and testify?

    A: He’s always been an open book about this whole Tasergate issue [lie], wanting to speak with investigators, wanting to speak and is with attorneys, everybody involved. The personnel board in the state of Alaska is that board tasked with dealing with any issue involving the governor, the lieutenant governor, or the attorney general.

    What the investigation turned into, led by a Senate Democrat, has been kind of a goat rope, a very partisan and very controversial type of investigation. The personnel board Todd’s corroborating with, as long as all the other employees too have an opportunity to cooperate with.

    It’s an open book. Nobody has anything to hide. Nobody’s done anything wrong. My choice, and my responsibility to replace a cabinet member, an at-will exempt political appointment whom I did replace, because his strengths were in other areas. It wasn’t in running an entire department. There was some, some duties there that he was not able to fulfill.

    So my choice, my responsibility had nothing to do with my husband or any of my staff members asking a guy to step aside and take another job, and he didn’t want to take that other job.

    Here is a subject that she is very familiar with, yet the answer to this question still comes out garbled and and almost nonsensical. She can’t communicate specifics about the pseudo scandal she’s a part of.

    If you accept this from a potential President, then it is no wonder Republicans are losing voters left and right – we’ve lowered our standards for the sake of raw partisanship and vitriol.

    PS. V. I was going to write in Paris Hilton, but with your impressive performance, I may just pen you in instead.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 7:48 pm - October 8, 2008

22. Slick-talking politicians have brought us to the brink of the economic abyss. Sarah Palin is a real American. She may not be smooth, but you look at her history, the things she’s done, the things she stands for, and (unless you’re some kind of Jeremiah Wright/Katie Couric type), you can’t help but admire her. I would drain my own blood to help her get elected president. The question is whether being the second fiddle to the hapless anchor that is McCain is going to sink her political future as well. It would be a shame if he brought her down as well.

    Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 8:16 pm - October 8, 2008

23. #4: VtK, when McCaskill was running for her seat, she accused W of (paraphrasing) “leaving people to die on their roofs in New Orleans simply because they are black”.

    I wrote her a snail-mail letter stating that there exactly two possible reasons for her comment:

    1. she believes what she said – in which case she’s far too stupid to hold any position of responsibility
    2. she doesn’t believe what she said – she is so power hungry that she will say anything, no matter how evil, to get elected.

    I then asked which was correct. As you would expect, no answer.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — October 8, 2008 @ 8:37 pm - October 8, 2008

24. [ILC:] People frequently mix up words when speaking off the cuff and under pressure. I know I do.

    [sf:] I do too, and that’s kind of the point. I want to vote for someone who is better and more knowledgeable than me.

    So you think that if someone doesn’t mix up their words, they must be better and more knowledgeable than you? Wow.

    Guess who usually don’t mix up their words? Bill and Hillary Clinton. Unless you are about to go to prison, which I doubt, I would seriously question whether either of them is “better” than you. (And, if they are more knowledgeable in many political areas, well so what.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 8, 2008 @ 9:01 pm - October 8, 2008

25. So you think that if someone doesn’t mix up their words, they must be better and more knowledgeable than you? Wow.

    It’s a decent start. I wouldn’t vote for me as president.

    When I hear or read Palin’s efforts at answering questions, I am reminded of many of the “C” grade papers I got from my junior students when I was student teaching. I know she is more knowledgeable than those students, and I believe she has a better grasp of energy issues than Obama, but that’s about it.

    I am also reminded of George Bush. He has a MBA, but right now, you would never know it. His speech, begging American people to approve of the $700 billion bailout, did not show he has mastery of economic principles, and that should be his greatest strength. He can’t seem talk a cat into a paper bag. I voted for Bush, and excused his interesting syntaxical errors in the same fashion that Palin supporters do hers. He had a lot more accumulative executive experience than Palin, and that didn’t turn out so well.

    Sarah Palin has only been governor for less than two years, during relatively good economic times, in one of the least populous states of the union. She has not been tested, until now. She may, for all I know, be the next Harry Truman. But Truman, who was also criticized for his plain speaking manner had a lot more national political experience than both Palin and Obama put together. He was plain spoken, but at least he could put a sentence together.

    I have to go do stuff now. I just have one question. How can you bag on Obama for his many verbal obfuscations, yet excuse Palin for the same thing?

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 10:24 pm - October 8, 2008

26. What’s so great about national political experience? Our political class has been screwing the country blue. America was never even supposed to *have* a political class. We would be in better shape with more citizen-governors like Palin, and fewer career politicians like Biden, Obama, and McCain.

    Comment by V the K — October 8, 2008 @ 10:44 pm - October 8, 2008

27. sonic: there’s a difference between “verbal obfuscations” and so-so speaking skills.

    The problem with the candidates is the environment they’re in. Their greatest challenge (esp for McCain & Palin) is to not say anything that the MSM can twist into a scandal. Likewise, Obama & Biden have to talk without saying anything that would give the game away.

    We just don’t want to hear unpleasant truths. It’s much more comforting to think that some mean old banker pushed us into bad loans than to hear that it’s our fault for being greedy and sucking at arithmetic; for freely voting for politicians who promise something for nothing. That’s why politicians babble.

    After 8 years of W’s orations, I would truly love a gifted orator in the Oval Office. Since none of the candidates are particularly gifted (not even Barry), we have to rely on judgement and character and, IMHO, McCain and Palin have the edge.

    Adolph Hitler was a remarkably gifted orator (and, no, I am not drawing any comparisons with any of our candidates – I’m just saying).

    Comment by SoCalRobert — October 8, 2008 @ 11:19 pm - October 8, 2008

28. PS. Palin would probably make a great Sec. of Interior.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 8, 2008 @ 11:41 pm - October 8, 2008

29. which is why, this post post excluded, I don’t do it anymore.

    Well thank God for that.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 9, 2008 @ 12:32 am - October 9, 2008

30. which is why, this post post excluded, I don’t do it anymore.

    Maybe maybe I did that on purpose!

    … or, would you believe, I stutter when I type!!!

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 9, 2008 @ 1:03 am - October 9, 2008

31. I take Palin-hatred kind of personally. When the left hates on Sarah Palin, in a way, they are hating on me. I am one of those people who’s played by the rules; I got an education, I stayed out of trouble, I stayed out of debt, I avoided drama. Like Sarah Palin, I started out in a lower middle class family, and by working hard and playing by the rules, I’ve gotten a foothold on a decent arguably upper-middle class lifestyle. I feel like the thing that sets the left apart from the right is that the left wants people to succeed (to a degree, anyway) without following the rules. Those of us who have delayed gratification, and used self-discipline to get where were are really resent these spoiled lefties spitting on our values and trying to promote people whose lives are centered on instant gratification and self-indulgence.

    Comment by V the K — October 9, 2008 @ 6:59 am - October 9, 2008

32. Sonicfrog,

    A) Alaska may be one of the least populated states (so is Delaware for that matter, and Biden doesnt even run it), but it also confers more power and responsibility upon its Governor than any other state save MA and NY.

    B) Palin has precisely as much elected experience as TR did.

    C) The idea that the Bush presidency has not turned out well because of a sub-prime mortgage meltdown he warned Congress about 17 times caused by socialist Democrat policies that Democrats are circling the wagons around to this day is simply ridiculous and untenable. FDR’s policies greatly prolonged the Great Depression and he is, rightly or wrongly, widely considered one of our greatest presidents. President Bush, on the other hand, brought us very quickly out of the dot.com recession, prevented us from entering into a second recession after the nations financial center was destroyed in the 9/11 attacks, presided over an economic boom longer, stronger and more fundamentally sound than the widely-hailed dot.com bubble, kept us safe for seven years when most people wondered if we’d be safe for a week after the 9/11 attacks, did so (contrary to the wailings of the insane left) without any loss of American liberty (compare that to FDR, Wilson or Lincoln just for starters), removed two dangerous rogue regimes, fought a war that the opposition party initially voted for but then decided to undermine and tried their very hardest to turn into a defeat for political gain and won it anyway (best analogy: Bush won Vietnam), and lastly, whose economic policies have us weathering the financial crisis better than any other nation, and depending on what the next president does, may have us recovering from it in fairly short order.

    Now lets compare that to the extremely well-spoken president who ignored the threat from terrorism, allowed Bin Laden to get away lest he pay a political price, recognized the danger posed by Saddam, declared that as a matter of national security he must be removed, but did nothing about it, put up the barriers between intelligence agencies that prevented us from uncovering the 9/11 plot so that his administration could funnel campaign contributions from overseas without detection, is responsible for the expansion of the policy that is responsible for our current economic meltdown, caused the defeat in Somalia that convinced Bin Laden America was nothing more than a “paper tiger”, used tanks against the American people, and sued the cornerstone of the tech sector at the height of the dot com bubble.

    Shall we compare his policies to the well-spoken and “brilliant” Jimmy Carter? The policies that the current Democratic candidate supports and which his running mate voted for?

    Forgive me, but I’ll take a man (or woman) who trips over his tongue but has sound policies over a Rhode Scholar, or anyone else, pushing failed policies any day.

    The conventional wisdom about President Bush, as conventional wisdom so often is, is flat wrong. Bush joins Lincoln and Truman as one of the most unpopular presidents in history, he will also join them, for strikingly similar reasons, as one of the greatest — thanks in no small part to his equally loathed Vice-President, Dick Cheney.

    Comment by American Elephant — October 9, 2008 @ 8:33 am - October 9, 2008

33. Damn, filtered again… and that was a really good one. Bruce? Dan?

    Comment by American Elephant — October 9, 2008 @ 8:35 am - October 9, 2008

34. V. You know I’m not a lefty. Do you classify my criticisms of Sarah Palin as “hatefull”? And because you identify so close with her (I can identify with her too) do you think you get oversensitive to some of the criticism?

    PS. I’ll be on the road for most of the day (Sonic-Mate’s bro is getting “marr’d” in SacTown, so I probably won’t be able to answer until this evening.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 9, 2008 @ 11:27 am - October 9, 2008

35. How can you bag on Obama for his many verbal obfuscations, yet excuse Palin for the same thing?

    That’s a misrepresentation of my views. (If it’s directed at me.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 9, 2008 @ 11:31 am - October 9, 2008

36. ILC, it’s not directed at you. It’s a general observation.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 9, 2008 @ 12:19 pm - October 9, 2008

37. No, sonic, you haven’t been nearly as hateful as the left has been. I do think you make too much of occasions of her ineloquence, and too little of her record of achievement.

    Comment by V the K — October 9, 2008 @ 12:24 pm - October 9, 2008

38. Here are my issues with Palin:

    1) Demands of being a mayor of a small town vs. demands of being President. Not in any way comparable. I don’t care how well this person did, one in their right mind would elect the mayor of Selma California to the Presidency. Need not say more.

    2) Demands of Governorship of small populous state vs. demands of President. Governing 750,000 vs. 305,000,000 – Still small potato(e)s in comparison. Alaska’s entire population is not even twice as large as Fresno’s at 410,000. One of the reasons Mike Huckabee and, on the other side of the isle, Bill Richards didn’t get the nod was that the states they both govern are small populous states, 3 and 2 mil respectively. Look at the mediocrity we got with Bill Clinton. And they were Gov’s for six years or more. Palin has barely two under her belt.

    3) Here is a fair assessment of her record. Yes, it’s not bad. Some very good. But there has been a lot of exaggeration coming from her camp. Earmarks. Bridge To Nowhere. Pipeline Hype. Note that all my sources, save ABC News, are considered conservative leaning.

    OK. I could give all this a pass if I would hear Palin give well thought out answers to easy and predictable questions she’s been asked. But all we get is stuff like this:

    Well, Americans are caring about the problems in the economy of course And wanting to know what those long term solutions are that our ticket can provide and what the other ticket is proposing so when you talk though about what it is that we are proposing and what it is that Barack Obama is proposing again it is relevant to connect that association that he has with Ayers–not so much he as a person Ayers, but the whole situation and the truthfulness and the judgment there that you must question if again he’s not being forthright in all of his answers as to how did you know him, when did you know him, why would you continue to be associated with him!? It makes you wonder about the forthrightedness,…

    Or this:

    Couric: Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? … Instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

    Palin: Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy – Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions.

    These are non-answers. There is no depth there. When the teleprompter is taken away, she does not show much understanding of issues at hand.

    When she was first nominated, I was supportive and, on the face of it, liked the pick. But as I do with every new candidate, I wanted to see her in action to assess whether she is up to the job. I did not prejudge her one way or the other, but evaluated her based on her prior experience, record and her command of national issues. Her resume is thin, so more weight was given to her grasp of the major issues facing the country. In this regard, she has failed miserably. There is nothing beyond the mangled talking point. Simply put, Sarah Palin is not ready for the job of being President or VP.

    Me am tired. I’m going to sleep.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 10, 2008 @ 3:44 am - October 10, 2008

39. I disagree, but I don’t think you’ll appreciate my perspective. I think US senators live in an ivory tower, isolated and above the concerns of regular Americans. A small town mayor deals with real American concerns every day, and has to answer to her constituents directly. A governor has to deal with both constituent and party politics while exercising executive authority.

    I didn’t want McCain to pick Palin. I wanted to save her for 2012 and give her some more executive experience. It looks like she will get that anyway, and I will support her (or Bobby Jindal) full-bore in 2012.

    Comment by V the K — October 10, 2008 @ 1:21 pm - October 10, 2008

40. Demands of Governorship of small populous state vs. demands of President. Governing 750,000 vs. 305,000,000 – Still small potato(e)s in comparison.

    As opposed to Obama, Biden and McCain who have goverened nothing and no one.

    Comment by American Elephant — October 10, 2008 @ 4:18 pm - October 10, 2008

41. That’s what I love about the whole “Palin is inexperienced” line of argument. It only highlights the fact that Obama is even more dangerously inexperienced… and running to be put into the top job.

    I forget where I read the following line of analysis, but it’s brilliant. By actuarial statistics, McCain has something like an 85% chance of surviving his first term, and Obama something like a 98% chance. McCain would be succeeded by someone with real executive experience – Palin. Meanwhile, Obama has no real executive experience, and Biden the same. So, with McCain-Palin we have a 15% chance of being governed by someone with real executive experience… and with Obama-Biden, a zero percent chance.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 10, 2008 @ 6:30 pm - October 10, 2008

42. Interesting: MSM deliberately misquotes Palin to make her seem inarticulate.

    Comment by V the K — October 10, 2008 @ 8:21 pm - October 10, 2008

43. As opposed to Obama, Biden and McCain who have governed nothing and no one

    I wouldn’t endorse Obama for the same reason. I consider 30ish years in the Senate as plenty of experience.

    Comment by sonicfrog — October 12, 2008 @ 11:51 am - October 12, 2008

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Live preview of comment