Baby Bush McCain chooses Sarah Palin for Veep


by Leon
29th August, 2008 at 4:48 pm    

McCain is smarter than he looks going by his choice for running mate:

Republican presidential nominee John McCain today selected Alaska governor Sarah Palin, a relative political novice, as his vice-presidential running mate.

The move is a bold play for the potentially millions of disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters who yearn to vote for a woman candidate in the November election and who have remained impervious to Democratic pleas for party unity.

The announcement came the morning after Barack Obama’s well-received address on the final day of the Democratic convention, a transparent effort to keep pundits from discussing Obama.

Texas senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, one of the senior women in the US Senate, praised Palin as “a breath of fresh air.”

Team Obama must be watching this turn of events with interest. Sarah Palin presents a distinct challenge for him (as noted above), she could tempt Hillary’s supporters, she’s photogenic, she’s young and she’s a feminist. The US Presidential election just got a bit more interesting.

Update: BenSix notes the other challenges she presents as being not your average Republican.

Update 2: Team Obama responds with quite a scathing attack:

Barack Obama’s campaign is blasting John McCain for putting “the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.”


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs,Election News,United States






144 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 4:51 pm  

    Just to pimp my own piece:

    Since then, she has campaigned against leading figures from her own party, and has gained a reputation as a peculiarly honourable politician. One Weekly Standard columnist has described her asa politician of eye-popping integrity” (yes, coming from the Weekly Standard, I know).

    With this in mind, it appears that McCain is attempting to break away from the popular vision of the Republican Party, not merely in age and gender but in individual principle.

    It’s a canny decision, I agree.

  2. Leon — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:03 pm  

    Good post, added to the above…

  3. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:08 pm  

    Thank you.

    In addition, this will have reflected attention away from Obama’s speech. The religious right, I think, will love her, while she’ll snare some Clinton fans as well.

    Worrying times.

    Ben

  4. Bobby Ewing — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:24 pm  

    You have to admit that Sarah Palin is pretty hot (remember she was in the Ms. Alaska Pageant) and MUCH BETTER on the eyes than Joe Biden. Oh and wait until you see the bikini pics!!! NOT BAD for a mother of 5.

    http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=5055328

  5. halima — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:34 pm  

    Is he smart?

    I don’t understand why disaffected hilary clinton voters would be swayed…. just coz she’s a woman? But she’s a member of the rifle association? She wants to drill? She’s anti-abortion? Surely disaffected Clinton voters don’t swing in extremes.

    being a woman alone doesn’t make you a feminist. Oh dear. She’s like Bri from Desperate Housewives, who i love as a caricuture, sorry, character, I guess, but that doesn’t make her a feminist.

    McCain isn’t smart – he’s picked a nobody out of Alaska, just she’s young and female, after complaining about Obama lacking experience..

    I am cringing as I am hearing her speak….

    And after Obama’s stadium speech this looks boring..

    I think this choice has nailed the victory for the Democrats – if it wasn’t already secure.

  6. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:36 pm  

    “I don’t understand why disaffected hilary clinton voters would be swayed”

    Well…

  7. Ravi Naik — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:45 pm  

    You must be kidding me Leon, she is a feminist? When women realise that she wants to make abortions illegal… this is where Clinton could rip off McCain’s candidacy.

    McCain isn’t smart – he’s picked a nobody out of Alaska, just she’s young and female, after complaining about Obama lacking experience..

    I am cringing as I am hearing here speak….

    I think this choice has nailed the victory for the Democrats – if it wasn’t already secure.

    My guts tell me you are right. But then again, we are talking about Americans.

    Well…

    Not good enough. You will find Republicans for Obama as well. In a week or so we will know whether there was a considerable move from Obama to McCain… it just seems like a very silly move to me. But then again I am not American nor a politician.

  8. halima — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:51 pm  

    ‘Well…’

    Just so they can show two fingers to Obama and the Democrats not choosing a woman?

    Hmm. Still not convinced.

    And McCain says Palin is a good working class woman, who knows the struggles of paying mortgages..

    My response was .. And you don’t.

  9. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 5:57 pm  

    Not good enough. You will find Republicans for Obama as well.

    That’s not a particular consolation, as we’re somewhat reliant upon defective Republicans that are jaded with the Bush administration. A young, seemingly principled candidate might blind them to the fact that many other of McCain’s advisers shaped the policies of the incumbent: Kagan, Scheunemann and even bloody Kissinger.

  10. Ravi Naik — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:00 pm  

    That’s not a particular consolation, as we’re somewhat reliant upon defective Republicans that are jaded with the Bush administration.

    There are many conservatives that are going to vote for Obama or staying at home because they are not happy with Bush nor McCain.

  11. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:08 pm  

    There are many conservatives that are going to vote for Obama or staying at home because they are not happy with Bush nor McCain.

    That’s exactly what I’m trying to say. We’re reliant upon them, and therefore Democrats defecting would be disasterous. What’s more, I predict that those who are disaffected with Bush will have greater preference for Palin, considering the following factors:

    - She’s younger.
    - She’s taken on senior Republicans that have been accused of unethical decisions.
    - She has many of ‘American’ characteristics – working mother, one disabled child and another about to be deployed to Iraq.

    Democrats will have to concentrate on exposing McCain’s various other advisers, as well as the many anomolies in his supposed ‘maverick’ status. Also, we should hope that – as many are predicting – Biden will best Palin in a veep debate. Although the latter has more executive experience, she has no foreign policy experience (and Alaska is a fairly small state).

    Ben

  12. Leon — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:21 pm  

    You must be kidding me Leon, she is a feminist?

    She’s a member of Feminists for Life (see link in post from wikipedia).

    Now, whether you can be a Feminist and anti-choice when it comes to abortion is a debate in it’s self and a good one to have for those considering how to attack her in the coming campaign.

  13. justforfun — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:28 pm  

    Forget her politics – judge her by the names she has give her children – why do parents give their children names like that. Calling a daughter ‘Bristol’ – thats just cruel. It must be a mistake – but then I see the other names.

    justforfun

  14. Leon — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:28 pm  

    Video of her talking about drilling in Alaska and the Veep position back in June: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ys4HGbiONY

  15. halima — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:34 pm  

    She’s a member of Feminists for Life (see link in post from wikipedia).

    That’s a sad day for feminism….. feminism seems to be reduced to just picking one woman to another… which isn’t what feminism is… and er.. it’s insulting to see Hilary Clinton compared to Palin just coz they’re both women… We don’t compare men because they are both men. It’s very dismissive of what Hilary stood for – a woman qualified to serve the role…

  16. shariq — on 29th August, 2008 at 6:39 pm  

    I was initially really worried by this. However, watching her and listening to her speak has reassured me…a lot. Also, supposedly pro-Hillary women hate pro-life women.

  17. Hermes123 — on 29th August, 2008 at 7:10 pm  

    Obama is history!!

  18. Ravi Naik — on 29th August, 2008 at 7:17 pm  

    I was initially really worried by this. However, watching her and listening to her speak has reassured me…a lot. Also, supposedly pro-Hillary women hate pro-life women.

    I have a strong feeling this will backfire, because it makes McCain look like a hypocrite, as he has been banging Obama about not being experienced. And now he brings as a VP someone with less credentials than him. It also has two bonuses for Obama: the media will now focus on McCain’s age and cancer and bring up the question of whether Sarah Palin is ready to become President. And second thing it will bring up the abortion question. A remarkable number of undecided Democrats believe McCain is pro-choice.

    Of course, McCain must have wanted to tap Sarah Palin’s talents in the Miss America contest. She was after all Miss Alaska’s first runner up in 1984.

    McCain must have thought this is so crazy it must work!

  19. justforfun — on 29th August, 2008 at 7:32 pm  

    halima – we live in stange times – words have no meaning now.

    I still stand by my comment though. Choosing a child’s name is a great responsibility – and I just cannot not take anyone seriously when then give their children names like Track and Bristol. If she can do that to her children – she can do anything.

    I’m definately making my bunker deeper.

    justforfun

  20. Ravi Naik — on 29th August, 2008 at 8:21 pm  

    Here is Sarah Palin saying that Creation “science” should be taught in school.

    The reason Palin’s choice is bad – is that Obama can make the election about Palin, which is legitimate considering McCain’s age and disease, and have them on the defense until election time. And I thought Mitt Romney or Joe Lieberman would be bad…

  21. Shamit — on 29th August, 2008 at 8:38 pm  

    she has more executive experience than obama biden combined. And she is a reformer — and this will energise the Conservative base.

    She has gone after her own party and told Congress that Alaska does not need a pork barrel project — kind of a first for any Governor. That makes her un Washington.

    Like Ben has already mentioned, she also has a son serving in the armed forces. She is married to her high school sweetheart. That would be a home run in the heartland. She is an American Dream personfied just like Obama.

    Btw, she also has around 80% approval rating and bipartisan support in Alaska. She also vetoed legislation that would have stopped gay-lesbian couples in Alaska getting benefits. So she is not a rabel rouser evangelical that you could term a nutter.

    And it is funny to find people saying because she is pro-life she is not a bonafide feminist. An Indian feminist once told me she has been trying all her life to stop abortion on the basis of gender.

    Would you support abortion of a child with a limb defect — that has happened as well.

    It is the mother’s choice and niether law makers nor the courts have anything to do with it. And, thats why the US Senate needs to confirm justices — and this would be a key question for the Senate — and by the way the DEMS have MAJORITY.

    Suddenly those people who claimed Hillary’s experience was no experience find her qualified to have been President – - and Sarah Palin no..

    She is a Governor of a State who is responsible for an economy and law and order — which she runs very well and a reformer and she did not get into politics with the dodgy chicago political machine.. So come on folks be fair.

    But, if I were an American I would have supported the Democratic ticket because of the policies which I agree with.

    The choice of Sarah Palin was a good choice by McCain and would make the election much harder than you think — the Conservative base would be behind this woman as she has got impeccable credentials and this makes her the heir presumptive of the Republican nomination in 2012 if McCain loses now.

    This election was not in the bag ever for Obama now it got harder. DEMS can still win but if they attack Palin or her record — I think it would backfire.

  22. Shamit — on 29th August, 2008 at 8:43 pm  

    Ravi

    Palin also said “I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,”

    And so far she has appointed Republicans, Democrats and independents in the School Board. So again this would make good political ad..

    Why make the election about her — or McCain make it about the policy differences and make it about the hope vs the fear — that should work. Attacking Palin would just solidify the base and also the common folks in the heartland wont go for it..focus it on the economy and the economic choices, energy policies and The American Dream..

  23. Ravi Naik — on 29th August, 2008 at 10:24 pm  

    Why make the election about her

    Here is the rub: McCain only met Sarah Palin ONCE, and all of America will have 60 days and one debate to know whether she has what it takes to be President. Contrast that with Joe Biden and over 20 debates.

    This election was not in the bag ever for Obama now it got harder. DEMS can still win but if they attack Palin or her record — I think it would backfire.

    You must be kidding me. That is why Democrats have been losing races, because they let Republicans do the attacking. It is a legitimate issue to attack Palin and her record, because ultimately it reflects on McCain and his judgement.

  24. Rayyan — on 29th August, 2008 at 10:35 pm  

    A feminist who opposes choice and loves hunting and big oil?

    Hmmm.

    She’s also under investigation for corruption: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-grandia/video-palin-doesnt-even-k_b_122482.html

    If supposedly pro-Clinton women are fooled by this, they care only about themselves and not the millions of American women who will suffer from a McCain presidency, not to mention the billions of women in the world who will have to put up with more poverty, more war, and no action on climate change.

  25. Don — on 29th August, 2008 at 10:52 pm  

    She’s a woman, she eats moose, she’s busted knuckles doing honest work. Vote McCain.

    Ravi,

    Yeah, she was rather too eager to accomodate creationists, but backed off when pushed. Presidential material? Are they kidding?

  26. BenSix — on 29th August, 2008 at 11:54 pm  

    Interestingly, The Nation has revealed that Sarah Palin supported Pat Buchanan in 1999.

  27. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 12:04 am  

    Yeah, she was rather too eager to accomodate creationists, but backed off when pushed. Presidential material? Are they kidding?

    Don, I believe McCain panicked after Obama’s speech last night, and rushed into a decision without properly vetting his choice. McCain is counting on one thing: to play the sexist card whenever someone criticises Sarah Palin. The miscalculation is simple: the media needs something to chew on, and… Sarah Palin has a lot of baggage.

    Here’s more about Sarah Palin on Andrew’s blog.

  28. BenSix — on 30th August, 2008 at 12:28 am  

    Yup, I thought that the sheer symbolism and perception of Palin would be enough but Biden’s going to have a lot of meat.

    Ben

  29. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 12:51 am  

    Yup, I thought that the sheer symbolism and perception of Palin would be enough but Biden’s going to have a lot of meat.

    The more I read about McCain’s choice, the more I believe that the media will be over her for the next two months, putting McCain on defence. I don’t think Obama or Biden need to get their hands dirty. It seems McCain just put a check mark on two boxes: woman and anti-abortion.

  30. BenSix — on 30th August, 2008 at 1:20 am  

    I should have put an ‘allegedly’ between ‘Palin’ and ‘supported’, and promptly hit myself with a clue-bat.

    Ben

  31. Sunny — on 30th August, 2008 at 1:24 am  

    Dems should definitely attack her. In fact, I want to see the debates between Palin and Biden now. He should walk all over it.

  32. Rayyan — on 30th August, 2008 at 1:41 am  

    They should attack her but not directly. They should re-do what their strategy was this week: let the Grand Ol’ Bastards think they have Obama on the run, then completely, utterly wipe them out.

    Biden just needs to point out repeatedly that Democrats support choice, support equal pay, that he knows what the VP job is actually about, has the right kind of foreign policy experience, wants to fix the economy, and wants to end oil dependency.

    He needs to paint a stark contrast between the two tickets, and set a trap for the hopelessly inept Palin to fall into. He has to attack her positions as irresponsible, and not what America needs, now or ever. That will destroy her, and also avoid any accusations that the “boys” are ganging up on her.

  33. Amrit — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:03 am  

    Maybe I’m just being overly pessimistic, but I’ve never thought that Obama was sure to win, and now I feel that it’s going to be even less likely.

    I really do not see how Democrats attacking her lack of experience on foreign policy is going to make a huge difference, because, to put it bluntly all nations put themselves first, and America is certainly no stranger to this rule.

    If they look at her record on challenging corruption and etc., they may well see her as a ‘new hope for the country’ which could be more impressive than simply being solid on foreign policy (i.e. America’s relationships with countries that aren’t America!). And I’m sure she’s capable of making crowd-pleasing statements like promising to bring the troops back, which could win people over on the ‘foreign policy’ front – she doesn’t sound dumb at all (I don’t know what her position on that is, though).

    Maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about… I have a bad feeling about all this. I can’t help feeling that even if Biden has more competence and experience, she’ll win people over because, as someone said already, she’s a white female American Dream and therefore more than a match for Obama in the ‘image’ stakes – which is often what people judge upon at the last minute.

  34. Rayyan — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:24 am  

    Dems can attack her on her anti-choice stance.
    Or her belief in unequal pay for equal work.
    Or her support for Bushonomics.
    Or her belief that global warming isn’t man made.
    Or her attempting to paint herself as “good” on corruption when she stands accused of corruption.
    Or her total hitherto lack of interest in national issues.
    Or her support for any part of the McCain platform.

    Better yet, they can attack McCain for choosing a VP candidate purely on the basis of gender.

    She won’t be able to promise to bring the troops back because it would run against McCain’s 10,000 year Iraq strategy.

    Palin will be torn apart by her own lack of understanding on the national stage, and Biden can proudly say he is a pro-woman politician (which she cannot) without undermining her right to run for VP. If it becomes a fight between one very superficial image of the American Dream – of a hunting Christian woman with 5 kids – and the real symbol, a multicultural leader who last night proved he had the right ideas and the steel in his spine to make them happen, then the Dems win hand-down.

  35. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:47 am  

    The punditry always sets very high expectations for Democrat candidates, and very low expectations for Republicans. Which means a Republican wins by default… by not screwing up big. Democrats also lose debates because their answers are more complex, nuanced and thoughtful, instead of simplistic fundamentalist sound bites. Add the difficulty for Biden not to look like a bully, and I can’t vouch he will not “lose” the VP debate. Still… you let Biden talk about Iraq, and he will be speaking for hours. It will be an interesting contrast.

    I think Sarah Palin was a gift to Obama, because it neutralised one McCain attack, and open so many attacks against his candidacy. Not only that, because she is unknown, she will attract media scrutiny.

  36. Sunny — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:52 am  

    They have to put out an ad implying – ‘if this guy keels over tomorrow, do you want her to be President?’

    The more I think about this, the more I think the tokenistic effort will annoy a lot of Republicans. Let’s see. Obama’s had a nice post-convention bounce already.

    I wonder what Rumbold has to say about this!

    The feminists at F Word are rejecting tokenism, even if a woman is involved, while the Tories at ConservativeHome are loving the tokenism!

    Just goes to show, the Tories have no morals. Eh Rumbold? ;)

  37. BenSix — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:53 am  

    Although it’s too early to make a conclusive judgement, I’m increasingly sympathetic towards Ravi’s opinion. There seems to be a lot of detail to Sarah Palin, and if the media pursues it, McCain will be forced to defend, rather than merely promote, himself rather. If they fail to, however, the symbolism of the ‘new’ Republicans will be more successful.

    Ben

  38. BenSix — on 30th August, 2008 at 2:59 am  

    * Of course it’s too early to make a conclusive judgement. I hereby replace that with ‘truly informed’.

  39. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 3:06 am  

    Although it’s too early to make a conclusive judgement, I’m beginning to come around to Ravi’s view. There seems to be a lot of detail to Sarah Palin, and if the media pursues it, McCain will be on the negative. If they fail to, however, the symbolism of the ‘new’ Republicanism may be more successful.

    If Americans elected Bush twice, they can surely elect McCain/Palin as well. So McCain might be a genius, and played it well. Americans might also prefer to vote for an all-white cast. So, I may be off the mark.

    I expect we will know in two weeks. Next week we will have the Republican convention, and the following week I guess, it will sink in. I guess the good thing about Palin is that she is a fundamentalist and it will tarnish McCain’s moderate credentials. So, if America does vote for those two, then they won’t have buyers remorse: they will know exactly what they asked for.

  40. Shamit — on 30th August, 2008 at 9:38 am  

    I think Obama got the right tone — he basically said his campaign got it wrong when they sent out that ex mayor of a town of 9000. Rather he congratulated her but he pointed out his disagreements with the direction and policies of McCain.

    With probably a double digit bounce in the polls, why would Obama antagonise the soccer moms — he would continue to say nice things about Palin but hit them where it hurts — its about the economy folks.

    You attack Palin there will be backlash and niether Obama nor his campaign would want to go in the experience thing much. they do not want the election to be about experience or Washington insider vs outsider.

    Focus on the kitchen table issues and the middle class tax cut and McCain is history — why do anything that hurts Obama’s double digit lead.

  41. Desi Italiana — on 30th August, 2008 at 10:53 am  
  42. Desi Italiana — on 30th August, 2008 at 10:54 am  

    “Sarah Palin presents a distinct challenge for him (as noted above), she could tempt Hillary’s supporters, she’s photogenic, she’s young and she’s a feminist. ”

    Leon, yaar, are you joking about her being a feminist?

  43. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 11:30 am  

    I am still in shock. I mean, I thought that no one could be worse than Bush, and then comes McCain which sounds even worse than him. Bomb Bomb Iran? Let’s send cigarettes to Iran to kill them? Rape jokes? On his 72th Birthday, he announces Sarah Palin’s as his VP, a woman he met only ONCE (February 2008), who admitted knowing nothing about Iraq and doesn’t know what McCain’s plan is, who thinks that man-made global warming is a hoax, wants schools to be taught “creation science”… and she could be President of the United States?

    Honestly, this is too depressing.

  44. Muhamad — on 30th August, 2008 at 11:44 am  

    First thing I noted was how pretty she is. :-)

  45. Leon — on 30th August, 2008 at 12:21 pm  

    I want to see the debates between Palin and Biden now.

    Isn’t there only one Veep debate?

    Leon, yaar, are you joking about her being a feminist?

    She’s a member of Feminists for Life and thus must describe herself as such. Doesn’t a woman’s right to choose include the right to choose she’s against abortion?

    LOL at the no show from Rumbold! :D

    I think Obama/Biden have got it bang on with their second statement, clever to say she’s a welcome addition to the campaign etc.

  46. Leon — on 30th August, 2008 at 12:34 pm  

    The more I think about this the more there’s something about it that reminds me of David Davis’ surprise resignation. Big decision, massive drama and shock but little outcome (despite some getting caught up in it)….hmmmm…

  47. soru — on 30th August, 2008 at 1:13 pm  

    Apparently, VPilf is now a word.

    Someone should dig out the flaky black guy the GOP had lined up to be VP if Hilary had won. There must be some small-town mayor with all the stereotypical failings of black politicians (drug-related corruption scandals, accusations of antisemitic remarks, etc.), and a dedication to big business and foreign wars.

    Pretty cool tactic: pick someone obviously unsuitable, even for a mostly-symbolic post. The resulting criticism will inevitably be heard by some proportion of the group they come from as an attack on them.

    If Biden is an attack dog, Palin is a land mine: something you hope the attackers step on.

    ‘Christian moms’ and ‘old white guys’ are probably pretty much a majority of the people who actually vote. If the Repubs consequently pick up the biggest chunk of that kind of identity-based votes, then to win, Obama will need both a big lead in issue-based votes, and a massive effort to turnout those who don’t usually vote.

    The worst mistake he could make is to attribute that kind of identity-based voting to racism: that will just be heard by the white guys as an attack on them, and so a reason to vote McCain.

  48. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 1:19 pm  

    Doesn’t a woman’s right to choose include the right to choose she’s against abortion?

    No, the right to choose means she has the right to choose not to have an abortion, not to impose her choice to others. She goes even further as to oppose abortion on the grounds of incest, rape and where the mother’s life is at risk. Add McCain‘s own mishaps… this has to backfire!

  49. Leon — on 30th August, 2008 at 4:18 pm  

    Hey I’m just being provocative, I don’t for one minute think Palin is a Feminist (that FfL looks like a Conservative front more than anything)….

  50. Don — on 30th August, 2008 at 5:10 pm  

    It seems McCain is backing away from his opposition to oil drilling in the Alaskan preserve, now that he has a new partner who is is zealous for oil.

  51. Leon — on 30th August, 2008 at 5:12 pm  

    Link?

  52. Don — on 30th August, 2008 at 5:48 pm  

    Damn, Leon, you’re so strict.

    Read it this morning, I’ll try to find it again. It involved Palin praising McCain’s ‘evolved’ thinking on the matter.

  53. Leon — on 30th August, 2008 at 6:09 pm  

    LOL! It’s nothing to do with being strict, want to read it myself! :D

  54. Woman With Brain for Obama — on 30th August, 2008 at 9:22 pm  

    Does Palin even know that she isn’t in the Miss USA pagent? She is nothing but a last minute gimick. Calculated. Women? check, Young Mother? check Looks good on TV? check Insulting to Clinton supporters? check Unknown tool ready to be programed? check.

    Her newborn baby is ACTUALLY her teen daughters baby. Look it up. Its going to break HUGE. She is not a VP, she is a new cast member of Desperate Housewives.
    First McCain focused on Bimbos in his attack ads and now he added one to his losing ticket.

  55. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 10:38 pm  

    Her newborn baby is ACTUALLY her teen daughters baby. Look it up.

    Unless you have hard proof of this, it is a smear. Anyway, it seems like two weeks ago, she was excited that Obama got a 4-point lead over McCain in her state of Alaska. I am not making this up.

  56. Katy Newton — on 30th August, 2008 at 10:56 pm  

    @54: woman with a brain, eh? Is that why you’ve immediately gone for an attack on Sarah Palin’s gender rather than her politics?

    I don’t like her as a politician, but the beauty pageant that everyone’s so snide about took place in 1984, i.e. 22 years before she became, er, the youngest and first ever female governor of Alaska. In 2006.

    Whatever else she is, she is clearly not a bimbo, and when you attack her on the basis of her gender you put me in the position of having to defend her even though I despise her politics, because that’s how feminism works.

  57. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 11:37 pm  

    @54: woman with a brain, eh? Is that why you’ve immediately gone for an attack on Sarah Palin’s gender rather than her politics?

    Are attacks against her intelligence and judgement off bounds because it is an attack against all women? Is that how feminism works?

    That VPILF reference is sexist though.

  58. Ravi Naik — on 30th August, 2008 at 11:49 pm  

    Ok, I see your point. I assumed that bimbo was in reference to her current political positions (creationism, anti-science, clueless about Iraq), but you are assuming that “bimbo” was in reference to her participating in Miss Alaska contest 20 years ago.

  59. Katy Newton — on 30th August, 2008 at 11:59 pm  

    I assumed that bimbo was in reference to her current political positions (creationism, anti-science, clueless about Iraq)

    Oh, gosh, you’re RIGHT, because calling a woman a “bimbo” because you disagree with her political stance is totally a rational and sober response and in no way a sexist term specifically directed at women with the aim of putting them down! How oversensitive of me!

  60. BenSix — on 31st August, 2008 at 12:01 am  

    Well, there’s little doubt that it’s a very symbolic choice. In her speech she mentioned her son in Iraq, her ethics, her opposition to “the status quo”, her admiration for Hillary and…this…

    “it was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

    Katy,

    Whatever else she is, she is clearly not a bimbo, and when you attack her on the basis of her gender you put me in the position of having to defend her even though I despise her politics, because that’s how feminism works.”

    Well said.

  61. douglas clark — on 31st August, 2008 at 1:00 am  

    Woman With Brain for Obama @ 56,

    This is hysterical stuff:

    Her newborn baby is ACTUALLY her teen daughters baby. Look it up. Its going to break HUGE.

    Provide the evidence, beyond the somewhat grainy photographs and the loose clothing. Show us a few post doctoral gynaecologists that accept it. Or written evidence. This is a sub Rovian attempt to smear an opponent.

    It is a disgrace. It is also – as it stands – completely counter productive.

  62. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 1:22 am  

    Oh, gosh, you’re RIGHT, because calling a woman a “bimbo” because you disagree with her political stance is totally a rational and sober response and in no way a sexist term specifically directed at women with the aim of putting them down! How oversensitive of me!

    To me, a bimbo is a physically attractive person that is intellectually incurious and superficial, and I have seen that term used in the context of males as well. I would never use that term, because attractiveness is subjective – but based on what I’ve read and her interviews, the “intellectually incurious and superficial” part is not far off, which is a normal symptom when you are a Republican.

    However, if the term “bimbo” is sexist regardless of context, and is demeaning to all women, then it should not be uttered. PERIOD.

  63. Don — on 31st August, 2008 at 1:45 am  

    Why let the idiot @54 derail the thread. Please.

    I’m sure exactly that kind of dissension and misunderstanding was part of the decision when choosing her as a running mate.

  64. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 2:03 am  

    Why let the idiot @54 derail the thread. Please.

    I’m sure exactly that kind of dissension and misunderstanding was part of the decision when choosing her as a running mate.

    If it serves as a demonstration of how feminism works, and also gives us a demonstration of McCain’s tactic at work, I say we are on track.

  65. Leon — on 31st August, 2008 at 3:36 pm  

    The accusation about her kid actually being her daughters was made on Daily Kos: http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/30/121350/137/486/580223

  66. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 3:52 pm  

    Surely someone would have talked by now if it was the daughter’s baby? That wouldn’t be easy to hush up.

  67. Don — on 31st August, 2008 at 4:49 pm  

    Reminiscent of the smear campaign against McCain in 2000.

  68. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 5:05 pm  

    The worst part of that smear is that the author asks us to look at a photo of 16-year old girl as evidence that she is pregnant. The idiotic part, however, is when he talks about Down syndrome as further proof that Sarah is lying. The truth is that a women of 44 has 1 in 30 chance of having a baby with that disease, as opposed to a woman of 25 who has a 1 in 1250 chance. Her daughter is 16. And I agree that too many people would have been involved in covering this up. And conspiracies are no good if you can’t contain them.

  69. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 5:35 pm  

    Let’s just say that you’d need much stronger evidence than “In these photos Mum doesn’t look pregnant and daughter does and some reporters who I’m not linking to or naming were apparently told by some girls who I’m also not linking to or naming that the daughter was out of school for a while”.

    I know at least one woman who didn’t start to look pregnant until she was six or seven months in, and I know lots of pretty, curvy, non-pregnant sixteen year olds with normal, non-concave bellies. I also think it’s highly unlikely that Sarah Palin would have let her daughter pose for a photo with her belly showing if she planned to cover up her pregnancy.

    I’m not saying I couldn’t be wrong, but this is very unpleasant ground for the Daily Kos to be clomping over if it doesn’t have anything better than photos and the fact that most people tend to look pregnant six months in.

  70. Don — on 31st August, 2008 at 5:50 pm  

    Why try to cover up a very minor scandal with a lie which would be a massive one when it inevitably broke?

    How would being supportive of a pregnant teen daughter not be creditable anyway? Or just basic decency, come to that.

    Palin is a horrible prospect as VP for any number of good reasons, this isn’t one of them.

  71. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 7:12 pm  

    Katy Newton – I completely accept that we should challenge Sarah Palin’s stance and avoid calling her names, simply because we disagree with her.

    But I’m a bit perplexed then that you write for Devil’s Kitchen, and associated with a blogger who repeatedly calls women columnists “bitch” when he happens to disagree with them, and also conjures up sexual fantasies involving them, again because he disagrees with the politics.

    http://devilskitchen.me.uk/2006/03/polly-sucks-gordons-cock.html

    Isn’t that bit hypocritical?

  72. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 7:48 pm  

    I don’t write for Devil’s Kitchen anymore, and haven’t for some time, which is why my name has not been on the site for some time. When I did write for his site, I do not think that I used anti-female language, and there have been plenty of occasions where I have taken issue with him in the comments box over there when I felt that he had, as well as in direct conversation/IM with him, which I’m sure he would be the first to confirm – just as I have done here with you and with others.

    I did initially think that the Polly/Gordon posts were quite funny. I will point out that DK is every bit as vitriolic towards Gordon Brown as he is towards Polly Toynbee, as well as a number of other politicians. (I don’t see anyone giving John McCain the same flavour of insult as Sarah Palin’s getting, for example; he’s accused of being a poor politician, yes, but I don’t see him being accused of being too pretty for the job, or not pretty enough, or a bad father because he worked whilst his kids were growing up.) But that said, yes: I find the Polly/Gordon stuff considerably less funny after a year of watching Hilary Clinton and now Sarah Palin field gender-based insult after gender-based insult. I am probably not the first woman who’s realised over the course of the last twelve months that young feminists had become somewhat complacent about just how far feminism had actually taken us.

    I do not think that the fact that my name was on DK’s site, along with a number of other commenters who range from the left to the right, makes me a hypocrite or imputes approval of every post he’s ever written, anymore than me being on the site meant that he agreed with every post that I ever wrote, or than having my name on this site meant that I agreed with the form and content of every post that was written here.

    I suspect that your comment above was partly triggered by your current argument with him over inequality. I am not involved in that and don’t intend to get involved in it, but if you want to take a pop at him you’ll have to do it directly. I never was a representative of his website and I certainly am not now.

  73. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 7:57 pm  

    Gosh, I’m really quite angry now. I can’t believe that you’d say “oooh, you associated with a blogger who does blah blah blah.” I had no idea that “associating” with people meant that you automatically shared their prejudices and foibles. I associate with a lot of people online whose stances on various points I find offensive, and quite a lot of them are commenters on here, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t also friends and it doesn’t mean that their sexism/racism/islamofascism/whateverism is somehow my responsibility. You’ve SEEN me take issue with all of those things, you know I did it on Devil’s Kitchen as well. Calling me a hypocrite is completely out of order.

  74. Leon — on 31st August, 2008 at 8:07 pm  

    Sunny, I have to be honest I don’t think that was fair. Calling someone a hypocrite is quite an accusation especially as your target is a former writer for PP.

  75. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 8:14 pm  

    Thanks, Leon. I’ll put in a good word for you with Madonna.

  76. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 8:32 pm  

    Katy – you don’t think calling someone out over a blog they write for / used to write for merits any attention? I don’t use the word “association” lightly since people people do that in the blogosphere just over even linking to someone or having them in their blogroll.

    Now, I fully agree with your position on Palin above. And yes, its partly to do with our current spat over inequality, but what strikes me isn’t the arguments he makes, because he’s a thick idiot anyway. What strikes me is that he gets a pass over the highly misogynist rubbish he writes

    It doesn’t matter he disses Gordon Brown… the point is that he constantly uses the word “bitch”, “cunt” etc when referring to women, and when related to Polly Toynbee, he comes up with sexual fantasies and other crap – just because she happens to be a woman. Would he come up with sexual fantasies if two male politicians were involved?

    He is a thoroughly hypocritical and unpleasant fuck. No doubt about that in my mind. What is incredible to me, given your well made points above, is that you chose to wrote for his blog.

    Hell, Rumbold and I disagree over most things – he’s a right of centre libertarian, and I’m left of centre. But if he was racist/mysognist, he’d be out like a shot and if I was, I wouldn’t be surprised if he said he wanted to leave. I’m trying very hard to not sound malicious here. But you don’t think I have a point at all?

  77. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 8:35 pm  

    And now the fuckwit has removed my picture and a mention of my “fine Asian features” after I pointed out his hypocrisy.
    You don’t think I have a right to be angry?

  78. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 9:55 pm  

    Do you have a right to be angry with me for taking another commenter to task for unfeminist language – having always been a feminist – because you’re having an argument with someone whose blog I used to write for on a completely unconnected topic?

    Um… no?

  79. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:10 pm  

    Look. This is not the first time you and others here have had a go at me for writing for DK’s website. I did sort of think that now I DON’T ACTUALLY WRITE FOR IT ANYMORE it would no longer be an issue. My values are consistent. The Kitchen is also a group website with writers from all ends of the spectrum, JUST! LIKE! THIS! ONE! and frankly DK was far more relaxed about the fact that I wrote for this website than anyone here was about me writing there.

    It is not on to hijack a thread on your own site to have a go at me for deciding to write for another website. And unless you can specifically point to something antifeminist or racist that I wrote on that website which means that MY values are inconsistent, you owe me an apology for calling me a hypocrite.

  80. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:25 pm  

    I don’t see anyone giving John McCain the same flavour of insult as Sarah Palin’s getting, for example; he’s accused of being a poor politician, yes, but I don’t see him being accused of being too pretty for the job, or not pretty enough, or a bad father because he worked whilst his kids were growing up.

    Going back to the topic at hand. Who is actually accusing Palin of being too pretty or not pretty enough for the job? Yes, she is “accused” of being attractive, but Obama, Edwards, Romney have also been targets of similar “insults”. As for McCain, he has been compared to a lot of unflattering things mocking his age and appearance. I think it is juvenile, but Palin isn’t the only one whose appearance has been talked about both negatively and positively.

    And Palin has a 4-month old boy with Down’s syndrome, and I believe it is a fair point that in this critical period of time (1st year), that a baby needs his mother almost full time. I don’t see how pointing this out can be construed as being anti-woman.

    And in the Sarah Palin sexist watch, has anyone cared to look at Sarah herself as sexist for having embraced a candidate who voted against equal-pay because he didn’t want companies to get the burden of lawsuits? Or someone who promised to take women to court for having abortions? Or for having made herself as a token so that Republicans can get away with all? Isn’t this more sexist than calling someone a bimbo or a cunt, as unpleasant as it sounds?

  81. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:33 pm  

    No, Ravi, it’s all sexist, not “more” or “less”. Much of her stance is antifeminist, at least in my book, and if you remember one of the points that I made is that by demeaning her with words like “bimbo” or “cunt” or “VPILF” people put me in the position of having to stand up for someone who I’d much rather not be standing up for. It wouldn’t happen if everyone let go of her gender and attacked her on her politics, which is where the discourse ought to be.

  82. BenSix — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:39 pm  

    Who is actually accusing Palin of being too pretty or not pretty enough for the job?

    As an example, Andrew Sullivan – who has written some good material on her multiarious detractions as a VP – referred to her only as ‘a former beauty queen’.

    Ben

  83. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:50 pm  

    Katy – will respond to your email in a bit.

    First, I wasn’t aware you’d stopped writing for DK, so sorry for that insinuation. Now being more aware of the bile he has on that site, I would have thought you were more perceptible not to have made that mistake in the first place.
    Apologies for calling you a hypocrite. If you were still writing for it, I think I would have been justified then.

    and frankly DK was far more relaxed about the fact that I wrote for this website than anyone here was about me writing there.

    We have far higher standards, I’d like to think.
    He also doesn’t have a range of writers – only libertarians loons. Politically, this website has more diversity on it.

  84. Katy Newton — on 31st August, 2008 at 10:52 pm  

    libertarians loons

    Er. Thanks?

  85. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:08 pm  

    “Who is actually accusing Palin of being too pretty or not pretty enough for the job?”

    As an example, Andrew Sullivan – who has written some good material on her multiarious detractions as a VP – referred to her only as ‘a former beauty queen’.

    Damn, Sullivan. How dare he say that she is a former beauty queen! :)

  86. douglas clark — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:08 pm  

    Sunny,

    Attempt to to pour oil on troubled waters:

    You have a legitimate grievance about Devils Kitchen. Did I not tell you that DK was a tit a long time ago? I think I did. A snake in the grass that would turn our Rumbold to the dark side? Yes, I did. And you told me I was wrong. Well, I wasn’t, was I?

    But you falling out with Katy reminds me of this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY57jGNCN8Q

    Katy is OK. Katy is 100% right about Palin. She says:

    It wouldn’t happen if everyone let go of her gender and attacked her on her politics, which is where the discourse ought to be.

    Which strikes me as obvious.

    Doh.

  87. BenSix — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:14 pm  

    “Damn, Sullivan. How dare he say that she is a former beauty queen! ”

    Hehe…

    Don’t misunderstand me, I like Andrew Sullivan but he’s onto a loser. It can’t be argued that Palin is just a “bimbo” – you’d have to be awesomely successful before you made that accusation against a former mayor and State Governor.

    It’s better to attack her unworthy credentials as a VP than pretend that she’s little but a blank canvas.

    Ben

  88. douglas clark — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:32 pm  

    Incidentally if you want anyone to take Devils’ Kitchen to pieces, I have a successful record.

    He is a ‘hit and run’ merchant, mainly because that is all Libertarianism is.

    If you care to note, the wee bawbag runs away when challenged.

    Climate science is his 100 metres, he can run away from an arguement quicker than Bolt.

    The last time he addressed climate change, a subject that he wrongly thinks he’s an expert on, he ran away when challenged.

    He is, as you say, a complete utter tit.

  89. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:36 pm  

    Which strikes me as obvious.

    It is obvious, but it misses the larger point in my view. I went to one “Sarah Palin’s sexist watch” site yesterday, and they were collecting quotes from the media and internet (DailyKos, etc) to prove how sexist our society is. Fair enough – you could fill very quickly all the racist quotes from the media and the internet against Obama, including from Clinton herself. What is the point of this? The quotes against Palin were clearly from juvenile and immature people.

    I totally disagree that these quotes have the same sexist reach and power than the ones that Sarah Palin, McCain and the Republican party want to implement in the US, which affect all women… and thus erase half-a-century of achievement. Just as anonymous racist comments left in the DailyMail have less power than what the BNP can do if it reaches power. So who should I focus on? Believe me, one day I did decide to start responding to all these people, but I soon realise it is a lost cause. It is best to look at the big picture and mainstream, not the fringe.

    In the 21st century, is the mainstream still sexist and racist that we need to remind that using words to demean someone just on the basis of gender, race and sexual orientation is wrong? I believe no, and it feels patronising to hear it.

  90. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:44 pm  

    Present company excluded of course – you don’t write for it now :)

    Douglas – I’ve never disagreed with you on that front. I thought for a little while the idiot might actually start debating people and with the left once LC was launched. But, given the vacuous idiot he is, as soon as he loses an argument he turns back to swearing again.

  91. Sunny — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:46 pm  

    Ps – Katy and I haven’t fallen out. She’s planning to come to the meetup next weekend.

    We just like to argue with each other on PP just to scare the hell out of other readers.

  92. Ravi Naik — on 31st August, 2008 at 11:56 pm  

    I like Andrew Sullivan but he’s onto a loser. It can’t be argued that Palin is just a “bimbo” – you’d have to be awesomely successful before you made that accusation against a former mayor and State Governor.

    I don’t think he did that, at all – you need to take into account all his posts yesterday, not just one a single sentence. He is really pissed off at McCain – he is very sympathetic towards her. And he never insinuated that she is too pretty for the job, either.

    It’s better to attack her unworthy credentials as a VP than pretend that she’s little but a blank canvas.

    I don’t think Obama will make that mistake. In fact, I don’t think he will attack her as unworthy VP – because that would be another mistake as well.
    He should attack McCain in selecting an unknown entity that has not be fully vetted (he only met her once), and giving the public 60 days and 1 debate to figure her out – someone who could be President at any point.

  93. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:00 am  

    Ps – Katy and I haven’t fallen out.

    You sounded like a jealous boyfriend. :) I mean, people need to explore and check other blogs before settling down on yours.

  94. BenSix — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:06 am  

    Ravi,

    not just one a single sentence

    I’m making reference to his Times article, not the blog posts that I praised in comment 82.

    He should attack McCain in selecting an unknown entity that has not be fully vetted (he only met her once)

    A fair point – my poor phrasing.

    Ben

  95. douglas clark — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:12 am  

    Sunny @ 90,

    I thought for a little while the idiot might actually start debating people and with the left once LC was launched. But, given the vacuous idiot he is, as soon as he loses an argument he turns back to swearing again.

    Fair enough. It is not that he swears, to be frank. I swear, you swear. I’d like to think that you and I do it for emphasis. Which, I think, is legitimate.

    On the other hand, this:

    David “Batshit” Miliband: a quite spectacular cunt, yesterday.

    Few people in the entire annals of the sordid, stinking, corrupt, cowardly politics of this country can beat David “Batshit” Miliband for sheer hypocrisy and screaming, speccy evil. And, as you may know, your humble Devil is not completely keen on the devious, unpleasant little shit.

    So, it comes as no surprise to find the hideous little shitbag bitching that Russia’s actions in Georgia aren’t completely above board.

    Mr Miliband was speaking in Tbilisi after talks with the Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili.

    “Every day that goes by beyond the deadline of noon yesterday (Monday) is a day that we see Russia not living up to its word,” he said at a news conference.”

    Of course, Mr Miliband, you would never dream of lying like a cunt, would you? You fucking cunt.

    You, my dear Batshit, would never dream of promising a referendum on an international treaty—let’s call it “the Lisbon Treaty”—and then using weasel words in order to wriggle out of said referendum, would you? You fucking little cunt.

    I wouldn’t mind your rampant lies quite so much, if you weren’t such an incompetent turd. Your tenure at DEFRA was marked by the continuing fuck up of the CAP administration which has led to EU fines of some £350 million (minimum); this, in turn, led to the underspend on flood defences which led directly to the disastrous floods of a couple of years ago.

    Despite his enthusiasm for personal carbon points, the tedious little fuckhead was utterly unaware of the advancements made in wave power.

    Now this piece of rubbish—a man who believes that countries no longer indulge in “brinksmanship and powerbroking”—is our Foreign Secretary; supposedly this unpleasant little cuntrag is protecting our interests abroad. Actually, he makes us look useless, toothless and pointless.

    Dear god, Miliband: I hope that you are swiftly removed from government. But I don’t wish death on you; no, not yet—I want to pull the lever myself.

    More or less sums up the daft bastard for what he is. What I find despicable is not the swearing, I couldn’t give a fuck, what I find despicable are phrases like this:

    But I don’t wish death on you; no, not yet—I want to pull the lever myself.

    Which, frankly, is a bridge too far. What a complete utter wanker.

  96. halima — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:21 am  

    “Surely someone would have talked by now if it was the daughter’s baby? That wouldn’t be easy to hush up.”

    I am still sticking to my original suspition that Palin is like Brie out of Desperate Housewives.

    Palin doesn’t look especially smart but she has motivation – and somebody (Carnegie) once said you can have all the talent in the world but without motivation you can’t get anywhere – motivation is 99% of success.

    There’s an old saying in south asia. Out of three children in the family, the cleverest becames a doctor, the second (son) becames a mullah and the third child who wasn’t smart will became a politician.

    That said, I don’t think there’s a sexist bias in the criticisms against Palin – i think much of that is light hearted, more like the jokes against the governor of California. I might add, though, Palin’s own self-branded identity is what invites the sexism so i have no sympathy there. No, the bias on this site appears to be against whether Palin is smart…but then the world did the same with Bush. fair game i’d say in a politician, but we don’t need to be obsessed with being smart – as seems to be the obsession generally in PP.

  97. halima — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:24 am  

    “First thing I noted was how pretty she is. :-)

    I’d say the same thing for Obama.. and his wife. Sadly in the world of television it’s the thing that strikes us first.

    That doesn’t stop us from asking whether either has the goods to qualify beyond being attractive.

    Research, though, generally shows, attractive people are on average , more successful in life. And taller people.

  98. Katy Newton — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:48 am  

    *headdesk*

    Can this please not turn into a DK-bashing thread?

  99. Rayyan — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:06 am  

    I’ve had a look at some of the stuff on Devil’s Kitchen, and while it isn’t always fair to defame someone by association with another person, I cannot in all honesty see how someone could share a platform with a writer like DK and then accuse others of not living up to feminist values. Anyone with an interest in advancing feminism has no business writing on that site, and anyone on writing that site has no business lecturing others for perceived antifeminist rhetoric.

    No one’s criticising Palin because of her gender; to claim otherwise suggests that any objections to Palin’s record or politics are “off the table” because of her gender. It smacks of how, during the primaries, criticism of Hillary Clinton was automatically assumed to be sexist by so-called feminist writers, when it was usually nothing of the sort.

    Palin is a rubbish candidate for Vice President, a Rove-tactic designed to appeal to sections of the American “blue-collar” population who were not going to vote for Obama anyway. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leighton-woodhouse/the-palin-trap_b_122736.html It’s divide and rule. That’s the issue: let’s stick to it.

  100. BenSix — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:10 am  

    Can this please not turn into a DK-bashing thread?

    Seconded.

    I’d rather get on with pretending that I can have an iota of influence in the US elections.

    Ben

  101. Rayyan — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:14 am  

    It’s true, no one who can vote in significant numbers in the US elections really cares what we debate here, but it’s worth following simply to draw out lessons for the progressive movement in the UK. Cameron is more than likely to play John McCain politics, and that’s without Labour having anyone even remotely as inspiring as Obama. In any case, Palin is less about disgruntled Hillary supporters and more about re-energising the Appalachian Republican base in battleground states like Ohio:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/palin-puts-mccain-one-up_b_122842.html

  102. Katy Newton — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:18 am  

    Rayyan, people on this website will tell you that I call racism and sexism where I see it both here and on the Devil’s Kitchen. It’s not for you to decide who is or is not a feminist, especially when you don’t actually know anything about the person you’re judging.

  103. Rayyan — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:28 am  

    You can point it out – and should – except no one is being sexist here in their critique of Palin. If you disagreed so much with what they wrote – and the more I read of DK the less I understand how anyone could even risk any kind of association with that kind of writing – then it seems counter-productive to promote them and add legitimacy by either responding to their views or giving them material to publish. It doesn’t look like DK is going to shift his views, so why spend your energy tackling his poison?

    But you know what? I’ve made my observation, and it doesn’t seem to have contributed to any sort of useful end, so I’ll stop there on that point. Even discussing the substantive part of the debate, about what effect Palin’s selection will have, seems relatively fruitless – unless general political lessons that can be applied on this side of the pond are drawn.

    Perhaps the most important point to consider is why we cannot have such in-depth and interesting discussions about British political events – and the major differences in US and UK political culture.

    I am not disputing that you call sexism when you see it – but I am slightly tired of those pouncing upon Palin’s critics as automatic sexists. Again, its like with Clinton during the primaries.

  104. Katy Newton — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:31 am  

    No one’s criticising Palin because of her gender; to claim otherwise suggests that any objections to Palin’s record or politics are “off the table” because of her gender.

    If I may be permitted to comment on this, what with my shocking right-wing record of oppression and prejudice and everything – I don’t agree with it. Calling someone a bimbo is not an answer to their political stance. If someone says “I’m a creationist”, by all means tell them that they’re insane, or naive, or stupid, or wilfully ignoring established science, because those are all reasonable answers to a ridiculous stance. But “You’re a bimbo” is not a response to anyone’s politics or record. It’s just a sexist smear, and it alienates women who would otherwise agree with you 100%.

  105. douglas clark — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:54 am  

    Katy @ 98,

    Can this please not turn into a DK-bashing thread?

    What is it about you and DK? Is it ’cause he’s mad, bad and juvenile?

    Sunny said:

    And now the fuckwit has removed my picture and a mention of my “fine Asian features” after I pointed out his hypocrisy.
    You don’t think I have a right to be angry?

    Of course he has a right to be angry. And before you say he didn’t, I saw it before it was deleted. The wee fucking creep.

    The man is an idiot. He cannot debate above the level of a childish Tourette infected idiot. I refer you to his intellectual ability as displayed in post 95. Or his ridiculous attempts to be credible on climate change. He makes Monkton look like a fucking genius.

    This is what happens when you let politics exceed sense.

  106. Katy Newton — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:57 am  

    Look, I’m now really fed up. I put a comment on this thread that had nothing to do with DK and I have spent the whole evening being got at because apparently the fact that I wrote for his site makes me some sort of appalling hypocritical monster.

    I am fed up with having people whinge at me about him as if I have any sort of control over what he writes on his own website. Go to HIS website and talk to HIM if you’ve got a problem with him. All right? Go on, Douglas. You’ve got a 100% success record in bettering him in debate? Go and demonstrate it on his website. There’s no point in cutting and pasting his stuff here so you can complain about it. Take the battle to him! Do it!

  107. douglas clark — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:59 am  

    Ben Six @ 100,

    “Can this please not turn into a DK-bashing thread?”

    Seconded.

    So, Devils Kitchen is beyond reasonable criticism because Ben Six says so? I don’t think so, but there you go….

  108. douglas clark — on 1st September, 2008 at 2:00 am  

    Katy @ 106,

    Quite right.

  109. BenSix — on 1st September, 2008 at 2:25 am  

    I don’t think so, but there you go….

    Tough. My word is absolute (and if you don’t believe that then you’re quite clearly deluded, because my word is absolute).

    Respectfully,

    Ben

  110. Sunny — on 1st September, 2008 at 3:02 am  

    As this thread has been completely taken over, I’m going to close it. I’ll start another one on Palin soon enough…

  111. Desi Italiana — on 1st September, 2008 at 9:47 am  

    What the hell is Devil’s Kitchen? Judging from the comments here, it sounds like a nasty site, but w/o PP criticisms, it seems really yummy, like they are baking Devil’s Cake and other sinful indulgences.

    Anyway, back to the topic.

    Ben:

    “I’d rather get on with pretending that I can have an iota of influence in the US elections.”

    A lot of Americans go on pretending they have influence in the US elections. Sadly, it is not always so.

  112. Desi Italiana — on 1st September, 2008 at 9:48 am  

    Anyway, I know who I’m voting for.

  113. Desi Italiana — on 1st September, 2008 at 9:49 am  

    Shamit:

    ‘Why make the election about her”

    Because McCain could possibly pass onto the Other World quite shortly afterward?

  114. Desi Italiana — on 1st September, 2008 at 9:53 am  

    At least Alaska made the national headlines which don’t have to do with oil drilling. We Americans (and foreigners) tend to think that all of the US is concentrated on the contiguous West and East coasts of the US. We rarely hear about say, Wyoming or South Dakota’s existences, until it’s election time. And that’s only the color coded maps, mind you.

    Do not ignore Middle America and the 2 non-contiguous US states, they will come and bite our asses when we least expect it.

  115. Desi Italiana — on 1st September, 2008 at 9:56 am  

    Halima and Muhamad:

    ““First thing I noted was how pretty she is. :-) ”

    I’d say the same thing for Obama.. and his wife. Sadly in the world of television it’s the thing that strikes us first.”

    Obama IS a good-looking guy; and his voice is quite rich and warm (too bad fireside chats aren’t in vogue anymore, but whatever). I was reminded of his deep and soothing voice when I watched SNL last night, and he opened the show.

  116. Leon — on 1st September, 2008 at 10:28 am  

    As this thread has been completely taken over, I’m going to close it.

    Mate, it wouldn’t have happened had you not laid into Katy the way you did.

  117. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 10:55 am  

    How about not closing this thread, and a pledge not to talk about DK? Is he some kind of superstar blogger which warrants all this outrage?

    From what I’ve read yesterday, the guy is vulgar, shallow, doesn’t say anything remotely interesting or new, and his constant use of slang is just a way of covering his shortcomings and get some attention. He seems like a 15-year old boy with teenage issues, the way he construes sexual imagery. Why decent folk like Sunny, Douglas and others here want to engage with this clown is a mystery to me.

    The way to kill these people is to make them irrelevant. This blog too often follows the narrative of these right-wing sites and media. Be a leader, create your own narrative, and let them follow you.

  118. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 11:52 am  

    Desi Italiana

    1. I think my reasons for not wanting the elections about her is the same as Obama not wanting the election to be about her.

    2. She may not have beltway experience but she has got executive experience and has got bipartisan support in her homestate — which is an energy giant by itself and she has got impeccable energy credentials. And joe Biden voted against the trans alska pipeline which is a huge boost for Alaska and the US. and this lady got it done despite pressures to do otherwise.

    And, she has argued about drilling in 2000 acres among 20 million acres in ANWR — and she has got support from Alaska Wild life groups and others which agree that it wont harm the natural balance of the environment — again pressure groups in DC — some of them who have failed to condem eco-terrorism are against it. If you are a democrat strategist you do not want those groups to be given much exposure.

    3. She does believe and run a thrifty state government and she has returned about $1200 per alaskan to their pockets.

    4. You attack her positions on abortion and believe me Obama’s partial birth abortion votes and images would be coming out in droves by 527s in the states which you have mentioned such as Michigan, Ohio, South Dakota and elsewhere.

    5. Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan did not have foreign Policy experience and they were all out of the beltway which worked for them. Also, Obama’s present votes would come in handy at the illinois state legislature — imagine the 527 ads saying is this the experience you want in the White House — that ducks the big questions. Why highlight your candidates weaknesses while trying to attack the no. 2 in the opposing ticket. Who is obama running against?

    6. Obama does not want to harp on her supposed inexperience when his inexperience can be brought into question. The media pundits might disagree but again the states you have mentioned the American heartland disagrees with people like Chris Matthews.

    7. The way Jindal is dealing with Gustav is giving republican Governors a boost everywhere and the Congress run by Democrats have half the approval rating than the President of the US. So, someone who balances a budget, runs a surplus, has a habit of challenging status quo (the change thing) — attacking her might not get you the result you want and could and most probably would backfire.

    8. She is a woman and the Obama campaign has already been branded a bit sexist and the married women vote (or the security/soccer mom vote) is a huge chunk which would go against Obama massively if it is perceived that the campaign is becoming remotely sexist.

    9. For all the above reasons, Obama in the last couple of days campaign stops talked about the historic nature of this election praised Palin and went on the attack on McCain and articulated the change he wants delivered.

    10. On the abortion issue, around 60% of the US agree with Obama’s position — however, if you try to paint Sarah Palin as a nutter and crazy woman — a mother of five, married to her high school sweetheart union member husband wont get you much votes with the working class.

    11. However, the same working class is worried about the economy and the economy is the key issue that worries about petrol, food, jobs — go to West Virginia if you go on social issues they would vote for McCain Palin — go on economic issues they would vote for Obama – Biden.

    12 . As Bill Clinton’s campaign in 1992 said (developed by the best Democratic strategy team Carville and Bagela) — “its about the economy stupid”

    Good enough reasons.

  119. Sid — on 1st September, 2008 at 11:55 am  

    When I first saw this on the news, I thought it was a cunningly good piece of strategy from the McCain camp. The timing couldn’t be better.

    Straight after the Democrat Convention, it pulled the rug from under Obama after all that sickly sweet Obamamessiah stuff. Putting a woman into the VP seat reclaims Obama’s own “Change” ticket. It wins the disgruntled Hilary votes. It the wins middle America “Soccer Mom” votes.

    But looking atit now, it seems to be a risky gamble. The question is, will the McCain camp now be blasted by the “inexperience” charge that so dogged Obama in the early part of the campain, and still does. Will she be mangled by Biden in the face to face debate. All this remains to be seen.

    Gotta say though, this presidential election has been the most compelling one I can remember.

  120. Leon — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:03 pm  

    Yep, I’m inclined to agree with you Sid, I had the same initial response (as noted in this post) but after a few days of scandal stories, watching her on YouTube vids I’m no longer convinced she’s going to be the big boon she appeared to be for Baby Bush McCain.

    Also agree about this election being the most compelling in recent memory too.

  121. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:07 pm  

    She is a woman and the Obama campaign has already been branded a bit sexist and the married women vote

    This narrative – defined by Clinton, the Carvilles and the Bengalas – among the fact that Obama couldn’t get white and hispanic votes is just wrong. Obama is getting a better share of votes among these groups than Kerry and Gore did before. Two days have passed, and preliminary polling show that Obama’s share of female voters has increased because of Palin.

    The fact is Obama and Biden just need to remind voters
    that Palin could be President at any time – can they trust this unknown entity? This is a total legitimate question, as well as remind that both McCain and Palin want to criminalise abortions. The fact they don’t listen to Carville and Bengala – two political shallow hacks – is a good sign.

    So it looks like gamble 1 (woman’s vote) didn’ t work. Let’s see if gamble 2 – shielding behind the gender/sexist card just as McCain is shielding himself on the POW card will work. Obama is pretty cool and disciplined, but Biden… I am not very optimistic that any sentence of his will be misconstrued as sexist.

  122. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:18 pm  

    And I have a feeling that feminists will be all over Biden, despite the fact that this guy – like Obama – have a 100% commitment and record on women’s rights, and despite McCain and Palin having 0% record on that.

    But faux-outrage is what Republican are masters at. Obama and Biden cannot let that happen this year. They should also respect Palin as a competent and worthy opponent. That’s an advice Gore and Kerry would give Obama.

  123. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:22 pm  

    Ravi

    Guess what mate — Obama is not following your advice but following the economy issue — listen to his stum speeches in the last couple of days.

    Second you might call them shallow hacks but they won two presidential elections.

    Three, Obama is not going to play the experience card or the Palin card.. She will be known over the course of next 2 months — she has low expectations and if she gaffes and screws up — Obama wont have to do anything — the media will do it for him

    Ravi, please mate this is getting irksome..You are unnecessarily attacking democrats and successful democrats. And, I am on Obama’s side.

    And more importantly, Obama is not going to attack Palin or make her an issue — because that would be dumb and he knows and if you notice his stump speeches in the last 3 days — you would see what I am saying.

    Obama is following the Carville line — so get over your clinton hatred — god pickled politics is becoming moveon.org.

  124. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:25 pm  

    Funny thing about Palin: Alaska GOP hates her. She has praised Obama’s energy plan, and she was excited that Obama was ahead in the polls against McCain… all of that was 2 weeks ago!

  125. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:31 pm  

    Thank you — thats my point.

    So why attack her and give her more credibility with anti corruption and change issue man.

    We agree Ravi — Obama runs a discplined campaign and thats why he will praise her and say the top of the ticket is a bit lost because he supports Bush on issues where his running mate doesnot.

    The Bridge to Nowhere is a great example.

  126. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:39 pm  

    Guess what mate — Obama is not following your advice but following the economy issue — listen to his stum speeches in the last couple of days.

    I didn’t say he shouldn’t talk about the economy, Shamit. That would be pretty silly, and he doesn’t need anyone to remind him to talk about the issues that matter to most people.

    Second you might call them shallow hacks but they won two presidential elections.

    Jon Stewart did. He went on their show, he said you guys are nothing more than hacks, and CNN cancelled crossfire soon after. Need I say more?

    Three, Obama is not going to play the experience card or the Palin card.. She will be known over the course of next 2 months — she has low expectations and if she gaffes and screws up — Obama wont have to do anything — the media will do it for him

    I agree with you. But an unknown entity is not the same as playing the experience card.

    You are unnecessarily attacking democrats and successful democrats. And, I am on Obama’s side.

    Carville on the 2nd day of the convention was wearing PUMA shoes. Is this the guy who wants to give advice to Obama? Give me a break!

    Obama is following the Carville line — so get over your clinton hatred — god pickled politics is becoming moveon.org.

    There is no hatred against Clinton, just utter disappointment. You have a problem with moveon.org? Please tell me you are joking.

    The Bridge to Nowhere is a great example.

    I don’t follow.

    why he will praise her and say the top of the ticket is a bit lost because he supports Bush on issues where his running mate doesnot.

    That is a losing strategy. And Obama on his first ad since Palin was announced, claimed that it was more of the same.

  127. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:47 pm  

    The bridge to nowhere was pork barrel project approved by the Congress – signed by President Bush — whihc was about a bridge literally to nowhere for I think 2000 people in total — this was a Ted Stevens project — the Alaska Senator (R).

    the Governor told the congress — thanks but no thanks. Which got her amazing support in her state and made her quite famous for saving tax payer dollars and drving out corruption.

  128. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:50 pm  

    YES I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HUFFINGTON POST AND MOVEON.ORG — because they demonise people and they dont check their facts –

    They are as BAD AS FAWX NEWS

    AND I dont apologise for that

  129. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 12:55 pm  

    I ALSO SUPPORTED THE IRAQ WAR AND A FAN OF TONY BLAIR AND I THINK CAMERON WOULD BE A BETTER PM THAN THIS COUP MAKER WHO IS OUR CURRENT PM.

    I DISLIKE ED BALLS AND COOPER — I LIKE MILIBAND AND JOHNSON

    I THINK BILL CLINTON IS PROBABLY THE BEST POLITICIAN I HAVE SEEN IN MY LIFETIME.

    I DONT LIKE OBAMA MUCH (BECAUSE OF HIS LACK OF EXPERIENCE OF RUNNING ANYTHING) BUT IF I WERE AN AMERICAN I WOULD VOTE FOR HIM AS I SUPPORT HIS STANCE ON ISSUES — especially abortion, middle class tax cut.

    I THINK THERE IS A LOONY LEFT REPRESENTED BY HUFFINGTON POST AND MOVE ON — and also there are many in our own country as well.

  130. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:23 pm  

    The bridge to nowhere was pork barrel project approved by the Congress – signed by President Bush… the Governor told the congress — thanks but no thanks

    You need to check your sources.

    YES I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HUFFINGTON POST AND MOVEON.ORG — because they demonise people and they dont check their facts

    Huffingtonpost is an opinion site. But give me one instance where MoveOn.org didn’t check their facts.

    I DONT LIKE OBAMA MUCH (BECAUSE OF HIS LACK OF EXPERIENCE OF RUNNING ANYTHING)

    He is running a very succesful presidential campaign that is moving millions of people and 200 million dollars. He is the best thing that happened to the Democrat party for a long time. He is following the 50-state approach and empowering a netroot movement, which is not only helping his chances to become President, but also improving the chances of Democrats controlling the House and the Senate. This of course started with Howard Dean. So, while people have been mocking Obama on his inexperience, that he is the Obamamessiah, he is setting up the ground work that already has given results in different fronts. And he is getting rid of the Bengalas, Carvilles, and all other hacks, who have been giving too much bad advice to Democrats. Witness what happened to Clinton – the race was actually over in March, and she ended up with a deficit of 20 million dollars. How can anyone say she came close? If that’s what “experience” buys you, then I think Obama is in pretty good hands.

  131. Leon — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:27 pm  

    Shamit please use less caps.

  132. Rayyan — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:38 pm  

    Well said, Ravi. Begala and Carville ARE useless, washed-up hacks. They were successful in ONE presidential election – for 1996 Bill chose Mark Penn to head up his campaign, who turned out to be another loser this year. Ultimately, history will remember the shameful role of Carville in Hillary Clinton’s crash-and-burn 2008 primary campaign, and the increasingly desperate rhetoric used by those men shows that their time has gone. Even as soon as last week, they were laying into the Obama campaign’s handling of the Convention: they’ve shut up now, haven’t they?

    Carville/Begala/DLC tactics have been superceded by the superior Obama campaign – the latter needs a lot of work, especially in effectively neutralising attacks rather than just taking them and striking back a month later. But the Obama way is a lot more inspiring and a lot less divisive. It is a campaign for the 21st century – not the battles of the 1990s – that will win this one.

  133. Rayyan — on 1st September, 2008 at 1:46 pm  

    http://mudflats.wordpress.com/2008/08/30/palin-is-mccains-bridge-to-nowhere-thanks-but-no-thanks/

    From the mouth of an actual Alaskan – Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it, as the saying goes. It’s also in the leading local paper:

    http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html

    So you accuse HuffPo of lies – and then tout Palin’s lie as evidence of her suitability for the job? Get real!

  134. Shamit — on 1st September, 2008 at 2:17 pm  

    Sorry Leon for caps and Sorry Ravi for losing my temper.

    If you notice my previous posts — I am for Obama and Sen. Obama will not attack Palin but attack their positions. Her inexperience is not the issue for this campaign.

    And, I have always maintained Obama is an inspiring figure but he is in a political campaign where his opponents are GOP. Bill Clinton wasnt divisive either but the Republicans made him such especially in 94-96 (contract with america).

    So, being inspiring is not going to get the job done and niether will the 50 state strategy. The Last guy for whom the 50 state strategy worked was Ronald Reagan.

    And I was not cursing anyone like you guys are going on about carville and bagela. DLC is something which helped Democrats to win again so please stop this vitrol.

    Our folks here at eGov monitor research team tells me that CNN tracking poll has come out just now — showing Obama 48 and McCain 47%. So, the race is tight and Obama’s 8 point lead has disappeared.

    And to your point about the primaries being over in march — guess what Hillary won 11 out of the last 15 primaries — Why could not Obama close the deal? Why cant he close the deal yet on McCain —

    And, my earlier posts would show me agreeing with Obama and not you guys on how to handle Palin. And I think he has taken the right approach on that.

    So my point is again no point attacking her as it wont wash and if there is anything on her let the media do the hatchet job — you dont want Obama to do it.

    Anyway, I think enough said and apologies again guys

  135. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 3:11 pm  

    Our folks here at eGov monitor research<team tells me that CNN tracking poll has come out just now — showing Obama 48 and McCain 47%. So, the race is tight and Obama’s 8 point lead has disappeared.

    This is a closed election, and therefore polls do show a lot of noise. If you look at the composite, things look a hell lot better for Obama who is between 50-45, and McCain goes from 40-45. Look at the electoral votes and as of now, it is a landslide for Obama.

    And to your point about the primaries being over in march — guess what Hillary won 11 out of the last 15 primaries — Why could not Obama close the deal? Why cant he close the deal yet on McCain —

    He closed the deal in March as it was mathematically impossible for her to win. She was well-known figure among Democrats unlike Obama, and she was heavily financed by DNC donors.

    Why don’t you ask why can’t Clinton or McCain close the deal? Why is there double-standards in expectations? He will close the deal in November.

    Anyway, I think enough said and apologies again guys

    Don’t need to apologise, Shamit. We agree that is far better for the media to attack the Republican ticket than Obama, and the Democrat ticket must be very careful on their attacks… but we disagree that Obama should go all the way in saying she is against Bush, because essentially she will follow the Republican line.

  136. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 3:21 pm  

    Carville/Begala/DLC tactics have been superceded by the superior Obama campaign – the latter needs a lot of work, especially in effectively neutralising attacks rather than just taking them and striking back a month later. But the Obama way is a lot more inspiring and a lot less divisive. It is a campaign for the 21st century – not the battles of the 1990s – that will win this one.

    Exactly right.

  137. Lee — on 1st September, 2008 at 6:55 pm  

    HOW MANY OF OBAMA’S CONSTITUENTS ARE SINGLE MOMS?
    You know the Obama speeches about how fathers
    need to be responsible and not abandon their
    children’s mothers. What hypocracy for Obama’s
    attack dogs to now smear Palin’s family for their
    daughters pregnancy.DAILY KOS ARE SCUM BAGS !!!
    All you small minded people who are crucifying Governor Palin over the question of her fifth child, are just fueling a vicious smear campaign. Besides, if you want to exhibit your holier-than-thou attitude … why don’t you get even more angry at Obama, Michelle, and their children, for spending 20 years in an anti-American racist church, as well as associations with Farrakhan, Wright, Ayers, Rezko, etc.. These facts are much more relevant to the next administration, than the possibility of a loving mother taking the heat to protect her child and grandchild.

  138. Don — on 1st September, 2008 at 7:18 pm  

    All you small minded people who are crucifying Governor Palin over the question of her fifth child,

    Other than a stray troll, who did that?

    As for Obama’s choice of church, have we had a look at Palin’s church yet? A tad Dominionist, it seems.

  139. Don — on 1st September, 2008 at 7:19 pm  
  140. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 8:31 pm  

    What hypocracy for Obama’s
    attack dogs to now smear Palin’s family for their
    daughters pregnancy

    This should shut you up.

    By the way, there is one angle to this story that is worth mentioning: Palin was against sexual education in schools. Enough said.

  141. Ravi Naik — on 1st September, 2008 at 8:39 pm  

    As for Obama’s choice of church, have we had a look at Palin’s church yet? A tad Dominionist, it seems.

    How about McCain’s pastor? Pastor Hagee? Did you see what he wrote about Hitler, Islam, and so on? I guess not, because that’s not anti-american. Anti-American is to say that America has been a crappy place for Blacks since the start. Mind you, I think Rev. Wright is an idiot, but I find Hagee’s comments more offensive.

  142. bobinALaska — on 2nd September, 2008 at 12:53 am  

    Oh my God……I had gay sex with Track Palin in a public restroom I am also 18 years old and met him while I was trying the pee…..and he was fondling himself and reach over at me he told me if I to,d anyone that he would have me hurt/kill

  143. Ravi Naik — on 2nd September, 2008 at 4:12 pm  

    McCain is smarter than he looks going by his choice for running mate

    I always maintained that McCain is an idiot at a scale lower than Bush, but I underestimated him: he is even worse. In the long list of scandals in the last 3 days, there is this: she belonged and still has links to a party that wants Alaska to be independent from the US.

  144. Mushawaz — on 3rd September, 2008 at 8:33 pm  

    This upcoming Presidential Election will be unpredictable. Palin, for all the embarassing disclosures about her, and seeming lack of appropriate experience for VP, in fact, may be the catalyst that brings out the Evangelical voters in Michigan, Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada which could put McCain over the top or at least make the results on Nov. 2nd darn close, perhaps even cause another election dispute.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.