2008.08.30
Weekend open thread
It's a holiday weekend, and posting will be light.
We'll probably do a wrap-up of the editorials and columns for the weekend on Monday. Until then, use this thread to discuss whatever's on your mind.
.....Advertisement.....
.....Advertisement.....
CHECK THIS OUT!
BREAKING NEWS
Upcoming Events
RSS feed 
From reading the letters to the editor it seems that Sue Ann Huger of Buena Vista has been paying attention. Maybe more of the country will wake up before November.
Comment by C Ramsey — August 30, 2008 @ 3:22 pm
I don't see this as a "wake up" year. Besides the high gas prices, everything seems to be in good shape. The economy is running at speed, we are coming out of the woods on the mortgage crisis, terrorism is in check, the "war" has become a police job. There really is no crisis to motivate the voters.
The Democrats controlling Congress will actually hurt Obama. Pelosi is a burden on her party. The Dems should replace her with Hillary.
Comment by Henry — August 30, 2008 @ 4:34 pm
So, C Ramsey apparently feels that the Huger letter was right on the money. That writer thinks that we are on the verge of World War III.
Henry doesn't see this as a "wake up year" and says "there is no crisis to motivate the voters".
Usually these two frequent posters are on the same page.
Who do you other RT denizens agree with, if either?
Comment by WW — August 31, 2008 @ 1:47 am
While on the subject of letters to the editor, did anyone catch the one about national health care from the guy in Hardy? This is a perfect microcosm of why this country is creeping down the path toward socialism. First, Mr. Gresham keeps referring to the US as a democracy. News flash, Dave, you live in a representative republic. Read your history book. Then comes the reference to the 50 million uninsured. Close to half of those are illegal aliens. Also seniors on medicare are included in that number. Millions of others are young people who feel bulletproof and choose cars and high end toys in lieu of health insurance.
Then comes the best part. 'Our politicians, elected the parents of our national family have betrayed our trust..". All I can say is God save us from attitudes like this. This is really scary that Mr. Gresham and seemingly millions of others prefer to sit back and let politicians and government run their lives and portect them from everything.
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights was written to protect the people FROM government and create an environment where the people could take charge of their own lives without government interference. With that come the responsibility of accepting the consequenses of wrong decisions and actions. People like Mr. Gresham prefer to let their 'politician parents' do that for them. The individual is under attack and losing ground.
Comment by Nick — August 31, 2008 @ 10:16 am
I'm awfully tired of the Times adulation of Rita Bishop--she appears to be doing the same snow job as on her last job- great PR and screwing with numbers and facts. Trust me, she's not "all that". She's screwed me and plenty of my teaching colleagues this year.
Comment by jerry — August 31, 2008 @ 10:48 am
I am just as pleased as punch at how McCain stuck it to the Democrats by getting Sarah Palin. It takes all the steam from the "historic" crap the MSM is using to promote Obama.
What makes it perfect is Palin is exactly the kind of Republican the Left can't stand; a pro-life budget-cutting churchgoer who is squeaky clean with supermodel good looks.
It's easy to see why the radical leftist feminists hate her. She's everything they aren't.
Comment by Josh — August 31, 2008 @ 11:07 am
Historic? Hardly. Democrats beat Republicans to the punch nominating a woman for vice president by what, 24 years?
Comment by Dan Radmacher — August 31, 2008 @ 11:22 am
Squeaky clean?
Isn't she being investigated for some kind of inpropriety having to do with dismissing someone for his refusal to dismiss a state trooper who was married to her sister?
Let's face it, she's a politician...and there's no such thing as a squeaky clean politician. The depth of the mud on her just isn't as deep because of her relative age of the others.
I'm actually amused and yet terrified at the fact that Republicans view her nomination with such glee. If this is the state of how they view leadership...the GOP won't be grand for long.
Comment by Will — August 31, 2008 @ 12:49 pm
HOwever, McCAIN/PALIN will actually win some states unlike Mondale/Ferraro who won one (Minnesota and DC) in the most lopsided presidential election of all time.
Comment by BUD — August 31, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
Will,
Not all conservatives are reacting with glee:
Here's I fear the worst harm that may be done by this selection. The McCain campaign's slogan is "country first." It's a good slogan, and it aptly describes John McCain, one of the most self-sacrificing, gallant, and honorable men ever to seek the presidency.
But question: If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?
Comment by Dan Radmacher — August 31, 2008 @ 1:10 pm
I read the Horizon today. I usually don't read it. If I want to know what is in it, I just go to the Democrat headquarters and read the campaign literature.
I'm surprised you guys aren't embarassed by the over-the-top cheerleading but I guess you view it as normal.
Comment by Henry — August 31, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Dan,
It's absolutely unbelievable you're saying Palin is "untested" when your PRESIDENTIAL nominee is the most untested, unqualified, and inexperienced in the modern era. I realize that's the official talking point because I've heard Obama spokesmen make the same claim.
As I've said, what makes it hilarious is, since you know your top guy can't compete with our top guy, you've made the race Obama vs. Palin, and she STILL beats him in executive governing experience.
Will,
It sounds like one of her underlings did something she didn't know about. No biggie.
Next.
Comment by Josh — August 31, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
Wow Dan, does the DNC actually augment your pay or are you just a die-hard true believer?
Spinning McCain's VP choice as an "untested small town mayor" is analogous to saying the Democrats want to put an untested Illinois State senator not a heartbeat away from the Presidency, but actually in the oval office. And while it is impressive rhetoric, unfortunately it is just political spin.
WW, I don't think we are on the verge of WWIII. I think it has already started, it's just not what we typically think of when we think of a war. Most people either just don't recognize it or don't want to believe it.
Henry, the wake up I hope for is not the popular media cry for change. I hope people wake up and realize the threats the US actually faces. Just because there hasn't been a successful terrorist attack recently doesn't mean terrorism is in check.
In Spain, terrorists struck just prior to an election and in so doing, changed the course of the election. So far we haven't seen any similar attacks. That doesn't mean the terrorists have forgotten us. They may already be satisfied with direction the election seems to be taking.
The RTEB will tell you that our efforts in the Middle East have been a dismal failure and a waste of resources and we need a change. I believe we need a strong foreign policy leader who is willing to defend our society. I'm a little less concerned about the skills of his speechwriters or how big a rock star he may be.
This election should be about substance. Each person should ask himself what kind of record each candidate brings to the table. Don't listen to the media spin, just examine the records and decide for him or herself.
Comment by C Ramsey — August 31, 2008 @ 2:59 pm
Dan,
My answer is yes. I would prefer a governor from a lightly populated state to a politician with marxist leanings, no substantive resume and longtime associations with some very questionable characters, i.e. Wright, Rezko and Ayers.
Comment by Nick — August 31, 2008 @ 3:58 pm
Josh...
You make an excellent point.
Sounds like one of her underlings did something wrong. Well, if she can't stay on top of what's going on in small scale Alaska, how do you think she's gonna stay on top of things in large scale USA?
The only real upshot of this (no pun intended) is that maybe she will have better aim when hunting than Dickie boy did.
I really think that in no uncertain terms this shows that McCain's brain has really gone round the bend. I'm sorry for him.
Comment by Will — August 31, 2008 @ 6:24 pm
TROOPERGATE!
Comment by Blue John — August 31, 2008 @ 7:17 pm
Sorry, Will. Great leaders don't micromanage. Sometimes government workers mess up. It happens. I realize Democrats always want to smear good people, so I can understand your grasping at straws.
Comment by Josh — August 31, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
Palin is everything Hillary Clinton pretends/wishes to be.
The experience question is irrelevant. Obama's inexperience makes it so. Maybe Palin needs more on her resume, but we only have the two tickets to choose from, right?
I was not thrilled at all with having to vote for McCain. With Palin aboard, I CANNOT WAIT TO VOTE.
As for Biden, he should be hospitalized for being such a total boob.
Comment by james — August 31, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
Hmmmmmmmm..which PREZ TICKET should the nation elect?? The one with a community organizer ON TOP or the one with the Alaskan city mayor on deck??
Comment by BUD — September 1, 2008 @ 5:43 am
Josh...
If you're going to hold the responsibility and accountability...then you better be prepared to manage whether it be macro or micro and you sure as hell better know what's going on. When mud splatters, it goes all over everyone.
If the shoe were on the other foot, the Republicans would be having a grand old time smashing a PTA, soccer mom, small town mayor, small population governor VP candidate...and don't sit there and say they wouldn't.
I know plenty of women who are handy with a gun and who were presidents of local PTA's. My mother was quite a markswoman and helped to organize a private school back in the mid 60's. She could out debate anyone but I wouldn't have wanted her as a Vice Presidential candidate. By the way...she was Pro-Life...and I do mean PRO-LIFE...not the shallow pro-birth group that shouts and makes the most noise and then kicks the baby to the curb after its born.
Comment by Will — September 1, 2008 @ 8:34 am
Will,
Sure, Will. You people only use the "buck stops here" stuff when it suits you. Bill Clinton got away with blaming Janet Reno for Waco. Obama always blames surrogates for his blunders.
Yet Bush is accountable when some enlisted soldier puts a leash on a prisoner, and it's
Bush's fault that a Democrat mayor and governor screwed up Katrina.
Comment by Josh — September 1, 2008 @ 10:06 am
"[Hurricane Gustav bearing down on New Orleans] is proof that God is on our side." - Former DNC chairman Don Fowler
"[Hurricane Gustav] is proof that there is a God in heaven.
Comment by Marked Man — September 1, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
How interesting Josh.
So you're saying that when everything is going hunky dorey...then give all the praise to the powers that be but if the wheels fall of the bus, then it's the person who made the steel that was melted into the lug nuts. Gotta love that double standard.
By the way, speaking of the family double standard...how interesting (and sad) that Mr. and Mrs. Palin's 17 yr old daughter is pregnant and out of wedlock. That's showing true family values and promoting abstenance before marriage if I ever saw it.
Maybe while Mrs. Palin was busy supporting gun rights and the pro-life movement, she should have been more attentive to her family.
Can you imagine the whoop-la that would have been created if Chelsea had become pregnant. My oh my.
Comment by Will — September 1, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
But Obama's wife and kids are off-limits to criticism. You can only attack Republicans.
Kind of ironic since Obama's parents were not married when Obama's mom became pregnant as a teen.
Comment by Henry — September 1, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
Henry...
I don't believe that the Obama children were born out of wedlock and I don't believe either of the children are pregnant.
As for Mrs. Obama, I don't think the senator had any say in the matter.
I'm not attacking, but merely pointing out the hypocracy that seems to exist in the "do as I say, not as I do" crowd.
If Mrs. Palin is the stellar parent, politician, manager, PTA president and all around super woman that we've been led to believe, this kind of thing just wouldn't have happened, now would it?
Comment by Will — September 1, 2008 @ 4:33 pm
"Kind of ironic since Obama's parents were not married when Obama's mom became pregnant as a teen." - Henry
Ouch Will... I dont believe the Dems will press the issue of either of these teens getting pregnant out of wedlock, do you?
Comment by Marked Man — September 1, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
Will,
So Palin's daughter having sex disqualifies Palin, but Clinton doing it is just fine (even though he was an adult, was married, and did it with a subordinate in the workplace).
Nothing like double standards like you say. I guess if the girl had had an abortion, you wouldn't be in line standing judgment.
As for leadership, how many leaders know everything their subordinates are doing all the time?
Comment by Josh — September 1, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
Josh...
I've said repeatedly that I thought Clinton was wrong and should have resigned. What occurred was supposedly between two consenting ADULTS. If there's a difference, I suggest that's it. It doesn't make it right, however.
The problem here as I see it is the matter of the double standard that the Republicans set. They continually beat their Bibles thumping away at the so called hethanistic behavior of the liberals while all the time, those amongst themselves are acting in just as irreverant behavior. When one of their own gets caught though, it's a totally different tune.
Of course...to make it right...any public discussion about the matter is now off limits "because it is a private matter in the family." But until it gets into the family, people will condemn you to hell until the cows come home.
I'm truly sorry for the Palin family...the scrutiny they will undergo is awful but at the same time, people often times set themselves up. I hope the child is born into a loving family that has the means to support it until such time as it becomes an adult. Sad to say many babies that are born to 17 yr olds don't have that same benefit and because of reduced spending for programs to help them, these babies often end up the victims of some horrible circumstances.
I'm not sure of the point of your last sentence; however, if you are meaning to imply that her 17 year old daughter is merely a subordinate, that's totally not cool.
Comment by Will — September 1, 2008 @ 7:06 pm
Kinda like the Democrats promising to clean up corruption in Washington and there sits William Jefferson and Charlie Rangel like a couple of foxes in the hen house.
Family Values means you birth your kids rather than killing them. It's rather like Obama smoking cigarettes while condemning the practice.
Comment by Henry — September 1, 2008 @ 7:58 pm
Yep Henry...
I agree that you should birth the babies...and after you birth them...make sure they are taken care of and out of harms way until they are adults.
Unfortunately, that part of the equasion seems to get lost in Republican circles at times when they insist on cutting funding for such programs.
Comment by Will — September 1, 2008 @ 8:31 pm
I told you it wouldnt be long
before the left was after Palen's baby.
The daily Kos has published that Palen's down syndrome baby is really Bristol's.
What a crock.
Is ThRTEB does not condemn ths stuff, I will consider everyone on the Board no better then Hitler.
This also goes out to the Left Dems on here.
This website needs to be taken down, one way or another.
This isnt free speach this is hate.
Time to take them OUT.
Comment by HERB KREBS — September 1, 2008 @ 8:51 pm
Like Barack Obama, I believe that her daughter's situation says nothing about Gov. Palen's leadership abilities or experience. HIs campaign should not make an issue of it - and he has promised to fire anyone who does.
What all of this - her daughter's pregnancy, the fact that she supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, her membership in a fringe Alaskan secessionist group, etc. - does suggest, however, is that Sen. John McCain made THE most important decision of his presidential campaign with little information about the person he chose to take his place as president of the United States if something happened to him.
Over at Talking Points Memo, they are making a pretty convincing argument that McCain did no substantial vetting of this candidate whatsoever.
This so much, much more about McCain that it does about Palen. He made a politically motivated decision, a wild gamble, with very little information, having met Palen ONCE.
That, my friends, is not judgment we can believe in.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — September 1, 2008 @ 9:49 pm
"My problem with Palin is that she doesn't practice what she preaches everyone else should be in such a blatent manner."
Here we go again. Two parties. Two standards. Republicans strive for a higher standard of conduct while Democrats place no such demands on themselves. When Republicans try and fail, they get creamed by the liberal media for it. When Democrats do the same action it's not a big deal.
In this case, it's not even the candidate's actions; it's the child's. And as was mentioned, the media wasn't bothered that Gore's kid has been repeatedly busted for drugs and convicted of reckless driving, doing 101 mph. This kid could have killed someone. Has Gore been called an unfit parent?
As for Dan's comment, let's face it. No liberal will ever commend the appointment of a strong conservative. The fact that McCain hit a home run with his voting base drives the left crazy. The hypocrisy in the objection is stunning because of Obama's glaring inexperience.
Comment by Josh — September 2, 2008 @ 12:24 am
Dan,
I agree that Barack would fire
anyone who started this stuff.
The point is I dont see this anywhere in the country where the right media has attacked the canidates families so hard as the left wing media.
THe demicrates even went to this Daily Kos convention. What s this telling America?
As I stated before that families should be off limits UNLESS they are out there working for there parent's.
Palen's kids have not so far.
Michele has. I have yet to here or see the RTEB condemn such blogs as the DAILY KOS,THE HUFFNGTON POST and a few others. These are the worst of the worst.Either the RT condemns them or they are no better.
Comment by HERB KREBS — September 2, 2008 @ 6:02 am
Sorry, Herb, but we're responsible for our own behavior, not anyone else's.
Most of the really vile stuff at Kos or Huffington is by commenters. The people who run the site can't be blamed for that, anymore than we here should be responsible for what you post.
So, no, Herb, we are no more obliged to condemn the comments at other sites than you are.
But speaking of being obliged to condemn: Did you condemn Rush Limbaugh when he ridiculed Chelsea Clinton's looks when she was 13 years old? Talk about a class act.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — September 2, 2008 @ 7:43 am
"But speaking of being obliged to condemn: Did you condemn Rush Limbaugh when he ridiculed Chelsea Clinton's looks when she was 13 years old?"
Sorry, Dan, but we're responsible for our own behavior, not anyone else's.
Comment by Henry — September 2, 2008 @ 7:59 am
Dan,
I think Rush was way off base when he made these comments and shouldnt have.
Chelsea had no bearing on Bill's campaign. Now she does have to be held to a differant standard this time around as she was campaigning for her mother.
As far as the site cant be blamed for vile info.
Dan that is crazy.
What If I were to say something really vile racist and mean. You have the right,
which you have allready done to me, not to publish the info, so please dont insult my intellegence that the site bears no responsibility. Maybe somebody that just off the boat might believe that but not me and most of your readers.
Comment by HERB KREBS — September 2, 2008 @ 12:27 pm
Josh...
Maybe the reason the Republicans get "killed" as you say when they fall off the wagon is because they ridicule others for being so weak in the process.
If you set yourself and everyone else up to such a high standard with the "holier than thow" attitude, you're gonna get hammered when you or one of your minions falls off the wagon.
Personally, I'm sorry for the Palins. It's tough when you think you've done the right thing by your kids and something like this happens. It's even worse when you've been out beating the drum for abstenance, and someone in your own family didn't get the message.
But at the same time, don't be condemning everyone else for perceived sordid behavior when it's happening in your own household.
Remember the old addage about people in glass houses?
Comment by Will — September 2, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
All I have to say is that this Down Syndrome CHILD is innocent and already has enough problems. The fact that you, Dan, would not even say that it was a dispicable comment (or anything at all) just shows your true colors. Then, to bring up what Rush said about Chelsea??? While there was no place for that being said, that was your comeback? Don't call the president's child ugly, but the kid with disabilities.......
Give me a break...
Comment by Danny — September 2, 2008 @ 1:16 pm
We know more about Sarah Palin's child than the Democrat nominee for President. He refuses to release his college transcripts. He doesn't remember who he lived with or where he lived in college.
http://www.nysun.com/new-york/obamas-years-at-columbia-are-a-mystery/85015/
But we know the name of Bristol Palin's fiance and we know that Joe Bon Palin got a DUI in 1985. But Obama's prior life is mone of our business. How strange.
Yeah, I remember when the "holier than thou" Democrats demanded that Chelsea and Al Gore Jr be taken off the table for scrutiny. It appears they have been bitten by the hypocrite bug.
Comment by Henry — September 2, 2008 @ 1:59 pm
Danny,
Me and Dan dont see eye to eye to often but he did state
that the comments were vile.
He just ment that the website should not be condemd which I believe they should since they have control what is posted.
Comment by HERB KREBS — September 2, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
Thanks for clearing that up...and my appologies for missing that in my reading.
You are right, Herb, that the site should be condemed as well. They may not have control over what is posted, but they have control over what is allowed to stay posted.
This just struck a chord with me being a dissabled child.
Sorry, Dan!!
Comment by Danny — September 2, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
Henry...
I agree with you that Obama should release his Columbia transcripts. It shouldn't be difficult at all to obtain them through the college.
Full disclosure is full disclosure whether it be on the right or the left.
Comment by Will — September 2, 2008 @ 3:50 pm
That's the whole weird thing. The media isn't talking about Obama's ties to a domestic terrorist. They aren't talking about Biden's plagarism or his health issue. They aren't talking about McCain's bout with Keating.
They are talking about the pregnant teen daughter of a VP candidate. It's like breaking out of Obama's speech at the convention to cover a car chase in LA.
Comment by Henry — September 2, 2008 @ 4:21 pm
Henry...
I think it's probably because Palin has made such a huge deal of abstenance versus contraception in schools. She rang a pretty clear and undisputable message about what she stands for. Many (and I can say with my own opinion) are sometimes a bit resentful of being spoken down to by those who think their way is the only way...and sometimes we even gleefully rejoice at those who fall off the wagon. Thats probably not the right way to look at it, but it is human nature I think if we would admit it.
I'm sorry for the daughter myself. Her life is going to be forever changed as a result of this. I'm glad I didn't have to worry about raising a child at age 17 (that seems like a million years ago to me). Perhaps the message that Mrs. Palin should have been delivering was to her own daughter rather than to constituents in hopes of achieving political office. I would guess that the ultimate responsibility is to her family.
If you bring them into this world, then you do bear the responsibility for them...that's how my folks viewed it.
Comment by Will — September 2, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
It looks like McCain really hit a home run with Sarah Palin. If not, the Dems would not be bending over backwards to trash her. The amount of venom and vile trash that's come out about Palin since Friday has been overwhelming so the friendly leftists must really feel threatened. CNN has sent an operative (Kyra Phillips) to Alaska to dig up as much dirt as she can find. Even Dan has come up for air from the Obama tank four times to comment on this single thread.
Comment by Nick — September 2, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
Will
That's nice but what does that have to do with anything? If Al Gore was against drugs, does that mean we should have dragged his child's drug use through the media? Or his choice of music? Should we have subjected Chelsea to media scrutiny every time her father made a proclamation to to see if we could call him a hypocrite?
The question is whether the children are off-limits, not what they did. If Palin's daughter is fair game, Obama's daughters are fair game.
Comment by Henry — September 2, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
Henry...
I guess I'm unable to make my point as clearly as I thought I could.
I'll try one more time.
The issue isn't about the daughter being pregnant. She's representative of what has happened to teens today.
The point is that apparently Mrs. Palin was busy promoting a message to constituents; however, she did not do as good a job as she perhaps could have done with her own daughter. As a consequence, her message is getting lost in the situation with her daughter.
I don't know if this conversation will ever take place between a parent and their daughter...but I think it could go something like this:
"Mom, Dad...I'm going to have a baby." Parent, "WHAT were you thinking?" Daughter, "Well, the vice president's daughter got pregnant, so what's the big deal?"
Maybe I am holding those in power to live up to what they espouse. Perhaps if they admit they have faults, then it would be a little easier to overlook their stumbles.
Hope this helps you some.
Comment by Will — September 2, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
You're right Will. Other conversations I can imagine have already gone like this.
"So what if I lied under oath, the President did it so it's no big deal right?" or "Mom, Dad, don't be so uptight about the fact that I'm using cocaine, Obama did it so what's the big deal?"
Again, you're right Will, it did help. It helped prove how hypocritical people are when it suits their purpose.
Morally Clinton was a sleazebag and Democrats spent years defending his personal escapades as irrelevant. Now all of the sudden the personal life of not the candidate, but her teenage daughter, is relevant because the candidate happens to be a Republican. To quote the church lady, "How convenient."
And how is it we know that the people in question haven't admitted their failings. Is every public figure supposed to admit every shameful, embarassing moment or failure publicly? Where should they go for this catharsis? how many times do they have to do it? Should they reface every speech with a disclaimer?
I thought in threads past you were an advocate for personal privacy. But that's beside the point. You seem to be arguing that because human beings don't always succeed, they should abandon any aspiration to higher goals and ideals. As sad as that is, it seems to be reflective of a common sentiment in society today, aim low, your less likely to fail, or to quote Homer Simpson, "Never try, trying is the first step toward failure."
Unfortunately I think the whole discussion of principle and higher ideals is a farce anyway. It's just a rationalization of the same old dirty politics. It would seem no one is immune. Even the vaunted NY Times had to retract its most recent Palin attack. Apparently they didn't do a good enough job vetting the facts in their story about how Palin hadn't been properly vetted. Ironic, huh? Dan, are you still sitting head in hands wondering why people distrust the media?
Comment by C Ramsey — September 3, 2008 @ 9:40 am
Instead of looking at what the candidates children have done, let's look at what the candidates themselves have done.
Obama did cocaine and much of earlier life is missing. He was chummy with a terrorist. He was involved in a shaky land deal with a convicted felon. He attended a racist church.
Biden is guilty of plagarism and lying about his education. Compared to Biden, Jim Gilmore is a likeable guy.
McCain was involved in the Keating 5 Scandal.
Why in the world are we talking about Sarah Palin's children?
Comment by Henry — September 3, 2008 @ 10:25 am
Who vetted Biden?
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/aug/04/nation/na-briefs4.1
His daughter was arrested in 2002 for obstructing a police officer.
Biden's spokesperson said it was a "private matter". Yeah. Maybe for a Democrat or a man. If it was a Republican woman, she is a lousy mother.
Comment by Henry — September 3, 2008 @ 11:18 am
Perhaps Obama needs to follow the Bill strategy... (1) Go on MTV (2) Talk about how he used illegal drugs (3) Rock the Vote!!
Comment by Marked Man — September 3, 2008 @ 11:37 am
"her membership in a fringe Alaskan secessionist group"
Not true.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/alaska-party-official-says-palin-was-not-a-member/
Comment by Henry — September 3, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
Sorry, Henry, that should read, "her husband's membership in a fringe Alaaskan secessionist group."
She just attended their conventions and sent them video messages.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — September 3, 2008 @ 1:33 pm
Some quality in-depth journalism going on here. Gotta love the RT's editor's choice of sources on that last link...
The TPM muckraker website is dedicated to bashing conservatives even to the point that one of the links on their homepage is to a readers site that headlines "Bristol Palin underage drinking pics".
Nevermind that after you go into the "journalist's" article, you find that the author confesses the pics are actually not of Sarah Palin's daughter, but of one of the relatives of Sarah Palin's mother's granddaughter's boyfriend's relative (deep breath)?!?!
Oh, also, nevermind that the article's author's name is Turd Ferguson.
Comment by Marked Man — September 3, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
Michelle Obama used to be a member of a racist church. Maybe you should investigate that.
Michelle also got a 160% raise about the time her senator husband got her employer a million dollar earmark.
Comment by Henry — September 3, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
Henry and Mr. Ramsey...
You're right. I'll cede the issue of Palin's family to just that. Family. My only suggestion is to turn down the damnation of others that get caught up in the same foibles that you or your own family has displayed as it will more than likely come back to bite you whether you're a Democrat or Republican.
Now..let's get to her. Mayor of a small town, and governor of a state of some 600,000+ residents. PTA president, NRA Member and a soccer/hockey mom.
Sits in a television interview and says "What exactly does the Vice President of United States do?"
I understand the desire to get someone from outside the DC loop, but I still contend there has to be someone with a little more depth than Palin.
She's more like a third string quarterback...maybe with a little more time, she could do a good job but in these days and times, I'm not comfortable with her undemonstrated ability to make very tough decisions under extreme pressure.
Granted, I'm not sure that anyone, male or female is time tested for the Presidency...but I simply can't get my vision around her as a Vice President.
As I said in another post, she isn't Maggie Thatcher and she isn't Golda Meir.
Comment by Will — September 3, 2008 @ 4:55 pm
But she is Barack Obama. We all better hope that is enough.
Comment by Henry — September 3, 2008 @ 5:08 pm
Is the Alaska Independence Party more radical than Obama's black activist church? Rev. Wright: "...g_ d_ America!"
Obama has only one thing on his resume. If he was not black, Hillary would be the nominee.
Speaking of vetting VP's, Obama passed up Hillary and her 18 million votes for a Washington insider who couldn't get 5% of the primary votes. How smart is that!
Comment by John R — September 3, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
I think it's great that Palin has taken the spotlight away from the real problem with the Republican Party. Am I the only one that has noticed that the sitting TWO TERM PRESIDENT and VICE PRESIDENT were not scheduled to speak at the nominating convention. Say what you will about the candidates, but the real deciding factor in this election is whether or not the American People want to continue with the failed policies of the Republicans.
Comment by Blue John — September 3, 2008 @ 6:40 pm
Blue, they were scheduled to speak the first day. They cancelled due to the hurricane approaching the Gulf Coast.
Will, as far as Palin's actual qualification's go, at least that is a legitimate topic. However, I still say it is hypcritical for Dems to say she doesn't have enough experience to be second in command when she has more executive experience than the Democratic nominee for Commander in Chief.
Comment by C Ramsey — September 3, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
Thanks Mr. Ramsey.
People are touting her depth of experience. I would like to know specifically what types of executive decisions she has made that would be comparable to what one would reasonably expect her to have to make as VP or President.
It really does give me reason to pause when she herself asks a question like "What does a Vice President actually do?"
I'm flattered that someone with my limited qualifications of starting a company, hiring people, doing a business plan, putting together a budget and promoting the operation could qualify me for Vice President...not to mention that I have 52 years of life experience behind me.
However, I don't believe that remotely qualifies me for the job of VP and frankly, I don't think being a mayor or governor in Alaska give her any more credentials than me IMHO.
Even Republican analysts are questioning the decision at some length.
Comment by Will — September 3, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Having just listened to Mrs. Palin...
She can come up with quick quips very easily but I'm reminded of life in Hollywood...
All form but very little substance. I haven't heard details yet as to how she's going to pay for all the new energy sources, how she's going to keep jobs in the country and how she's going to reduce the deficit that eats away at available capital for free enterprise.
After listening to her, I've heard the same promise of the sun, the moon and the stars...all vapor promises but little on the actual hows of accomplishing the promises.
Comment by Will — September 3, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
Probably a good enough speech to keep all of the republican drones awake for a few hours, but they had to know that the lies she told all night would be checked, right??
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check
The republicans didn't do themselves any favors laughing at all of the good community organizers in this country. No wonder it's a party of old rich white people. They don't realize that they just laughed at millions of people who give back to their own communities.
Good luck in Nov.
Comment by ajm — September 4, 2008 @ 4:23 am
C Ramsey: "As far as Palin's actual qualification's go, at least that is a legitimate topic. However, I still say it is hypcritical for Dems to say she doesn't have enough experience to be second in command when she has more executive experience than the Democratic nominee for Commander in Chief."
By that measure, C, she also has more executive experience than the Republican nominee for Commander in Chief.
By that measure, the mayor of Vinton is more qualified than Sen. McCain.
Sorry, but I don't buy that.
McCain demonstrated his lack of judgment and his complete disregard for anything beyond his immediate political needs when he chose such a poorly qualified candidate for vice president.
Yeah, she gives a good speech, if you like snide one-liners. But there's more to be vice president - or president - than being a "pitbull in lipstick."
Comment by Dan Radmacher — September 4, 2008 @ 7:14 am
McCain on Palin: "Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that."
Oh, I feel so much better. John, what have you done?
Comment by Dan Radmacher — September 4, 2008 @ 7:33 am
Is it just me or has the Roanoke Times become the "I hate Sarah Palin Club". It's like 6th grade.
10:45 p.m. A pair of Code Pink activists just got to the very edge of the stage and were a moment away from apparently running on stage, right by the Kentucky slot on the floor next to a host of McCain's most senior staffers.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/03/inside_the_convention_hall.html
One of the people who was seized by the Secret Service was an Obama bundler named Jodie Evans, who brags to everyone about her close relationship with Obama. And we are supposed to take Obama seriously when he allies himself with nutbags like this?
Comment by Henry — September 4, 2008 @ 7:52 am
Oh, other than pretty much nominate someone who has the Dems running scared to the point they dont know what state borders their own, make them praise the Lord for letting a hurricane bear down on Louisiana again, make them feel compelled to attack her family with smear tactics, and chose a running mate that has equal if not more experience than the Dem presidential nomination himself..... well not much other than that.
Comment by Marked Man — September 4, 2008 @ 8:05 am
I'm voting for the mayor of Vinton!
Comment by Blue John — September 4, 2008 @ 8:12 am
Umm, wouldn't Palin have as much foreign policy experience as governors running for president such as Carter or Clinton had?
These accusations mystify me. Palin is a VEEP candidate, not a presidential, yet Democrats are complaining about things in which she equals or surpasses Democrats. Are they intentionally trying to make Obama look bad?
BTW, one pundit yesterday said Biden would eat Palin alive in debate. After last night's speech, I doubt anybody thinks that anymore.
Comment by Josh — September 4, 2008 @ 8:12 am
More reflections from last evening's speech and aftermath.
I think Mrs. Palin just gave the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval to teen pregnancy and pre-marital sex. I tried as hard as I possibly could to understand why you would parade those things that you so passionately talk against out in front of the audience and promote the "family values" of it. There is just too much "wanting it both ways" here for me.
Her speech was littered with cliches' but lacked a lot of substantive ideas. Granted, a VP candidate may not be required to set forth specific plans but given McCain's age and health (and I hope he lives to be 100) there are considerations that have to be taken into account. When he was turning around to find Sara last nite, he looked a bit disoriented.
Sara is a good orator. There's no doubt about that. I would like to hear her own words though without the campaign speech writers.
At the end of the day, she is very much like a pit bull in a dog fight. But after the fight, tell me what substance is left?
Comment by Will — September 4, 2008 @ 9:33 am
"Sara is a good orator. There's no doubt about that. I would like to hear her own words though without the campaign speech writers."
Will, people have been saying the same thing about Obama for months now. Do you really believe the rockstar writes his own material. Just look at how pathetically he has performed when he has to speak extemporaneously. He blunders and the media spin machine spends two weeks explaining what he meant to say.
Dan, do you really want to bring up inexperience as a lack of qualifications? True neither candidate has executive experience, but let's look at McCain's service history compared to Obama's lack of same. What exactly has Obama done in the Senate? What committees has he served on or chaired.
Let's look at how each has responded to questions about their past political dealings. Anything McCain has come under attack for has been thoroughly investigated and resolved, despite the best efforts of the media.
However, Obama stays mum when questioned about his relationship with a terrorist. He refuses to provide even the most basic information and the 'impartial' media covers for him at every turn. This guy even claims to not remember who his college roommate was. And, laughably, the media buys it. If McCain made the same assertion you'd either claim he was hiding something or that he was senile due to age.
Face it, Obama is a neophyte. But your spin is that he has fresh ideas for change. So why isn't the same true for Palin? Instead you just pronounce her unqualified and say the choice proves McCain has poor judgement.
Your obvious bias completely undermines any perceived credibility in your arguments. Yet you wonder why people don't trust the media?
Comment by C Ramsey — September 4, 2008 @ 9:20 pm
Mr. Ramsey....
I didn't say Obama did or didn't clearly articulate himself. I merely pointed out that neither did Mrs. Palin. If you aspire to be something better than your opponent, show me how you're better. Don't give me quips and sarcasm.
If you want me to pay attention to your campaign, demonstrate to me your executive decision making. When I interview someone for a job, I ask them about a specific time when they had to make a decison, what the decision was and the process by which they went about arriving at it.
Unfortunately, I don't get that chance to ask the candidate. I wish I could.
Everyone has been bally whoing the media...well, since we as citizens don't get the chance to ask our own questions, then who is left to ask them? I'd love the chance to grill them both but I just pay taxes and get through.
The citizens get spoon fed whatever the spin masters feel that will garner the most votes. It has nothing to do with reality in most cases. Case in point..W.
Comment by Will — September 4, 2008 @ 10:25 pm