Among the seeming HOURS of fearmongering and racism I've seen one clip at a time over the past few weeks in footage from McCain/Palin rallies - the Monkey Man takes the cake.
In the first clip, we see him proudly showing off his Curious George doll with an Obama bumper sticker wrapped around its head.
"This is "Little Hussein"... Little Hussein wanted to hear some "truth"." He says.
Monkey Man appears from 1:31 to 1:48 in the following clip.
Seems pretty proud of himself, right? As though he has no consideration that he's doing anything immoral or negative, right?
But then he's caught by another camera inside the rally. Perhaps a camera that he doesn't see as being "friendly" like the first one?
Watch him writhe and wriggle. Watch him try to casually remove the bumper sticker. Watch him finally hand-off the doll (now sans sticker) to a toddler in the row in front of him.
These are the people that McCain/Palin are attracting like moths to a flame. Do you really want to be one of them?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Fellow POW speaks out against McCain
Did you know there is a group called "Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain"?
I'm not really surprised that they exist - every voice has a group these days.
I'm just surprised that in this world of the so-called "Left-wing, liberal media" we don't hear from this particular group more often.
Call me naive, but I'm surprised that I actually stumbled across them while searching for information (trivial info at that) about Sen. McCain's arms. I've heard several different explanations about the limited mobilty he has in his arms and wanted to see if I could learn the real story.
In so doing, I came across a link that brought me to the VVAJM (my achronym, don't know if they use it or not) and the following video - which I believe says a lot that those of us who can't claim the title of War Hero have long wanted to say about John McCain. Only this time it's coming from a classmate of his. One who graduated in the top 25% of their class, rather than near the bottom like McCain. And one who had been a POW for over 2 years by the time McCain was captured.
I don't know about you, but I consider this man's opinion to be very important - not the be-all-end-all necessarily - but surely worth listening to. Watch the following clip and see if you don't agree.
I'm not really surprised that they exist - every voice has a group these days.
I'm just surprised that in this world of the so-called "Left-wing, liberal media" we don't hear from this particular group more often.
Call me naive, but I'm surprised that I actually stumbled across them while searching for information (trivial info at that) about Sen. McCain's arms. I've heard several different explanations about the limited mobilty he has in his arms and wanted to see if I could learn the real story.
In so doing, I came across a link that brought me to the VVAJM (my achronym, don't know if they use it or not) and the following video - which I believe says a lot that those of us who can't claim the title of War Hero have long wanted to say about John McCain. Only this time it's coming from a classmate of his. One who graduated in the top 25% of their class, rather than near the bottom like McCain. And one who had been a POW for over 2 years by the time McCain was captured.
I don't know about you, but I consider this man's opinion to be very important - not the be-all-end-all necessarily - but surely worth listening to. Watch the following clip and see if you don't agree.
Obama & McCain at the '08 Al Smith Dinner in NYC
It took me far too long to post these clips, but I just haven't had much time lately.
As tradition demands, McCain and Obama recently attended the Al Smith Dinner and put partisan politics aside (for the most part) to roast themselves and each other - and to make the obligatory tender-moment comments.
I thought both of them did a great job, and I laughed out loud during both speeches.
I hope that one day, whoever wrote their speeches is given due credit... and a job offer from the Daily Show.
In the spirit of the event, I'll recuse myself from offering an opinion.
If there has ever been a time when I really needed to see the candidates with the gloves off (even for just one night) it is this campaign. And to see them clearly enjoying themselves... letting their hair down, so to speak - was refreshing.
So here they are, in order of appearance:
---> I haven't been able to find the very end of McCain's speech - but this was pretty close, if memory serves.
If I had to pick my favorite line from each candidate, off the top of my head, right now?
McCain: Obama "has a pet name for me, too... George Bush."
Obama: "My greatest weakness... It's possible that I'm a little TOO awesome."
As tradition demands, McCain and Obama recently attended the Al Smith Dinner and put partisan politics aside (for the most part) to roast themselves and each other - and to make the obligatory tender-moment comments.
I thought both of them did a great job, and I laughed out loud during both speeches.
I hope that one day, whoever wrote their speeches is given due credit... and a job offer from the Daily Show.
In the spirit of the event, I'll recuse myself from offering an opinion.
If there has ever been a time when I really needed to see the candidates with the gloves off (even for just one night) it is this campaign. And to see them clearly enjoying themselves... letting their hair down, so to speak - was refreshing.
So here they are, in order of appearance:
---> I haven't been able to find the very end of McCain's speech - but this was pretty close, if memory serves.
If I had to pick my favorite line from each candidate, off the top of my head, right now?
McCain: Obama "has a pet name for me, too... George Bush."
Obama: "My greatest weakness... It's possible that I'm a little TOO awesome."
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Me again on Poliblogger
There's a guy on Poliblogger who calls himself "Western Man". In my opinion he's pretty much a blowhard. He repeatedly reminds everyone that he's a lawyer (which is surprising, since the GOP has taken to calling the Democrats the "Lawyer Party").
And he makes no bones about the fact that he thinks Obama is a HORRIBLE candidate, while McCain/Palin are virtually pure as the driven snow.
It would take entirely too long for me to recount the entire thread which preceded the response I am about to post, so I encourage you to check it out here
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14271
before reading any further. It has been 27 hours since I posted the following, and mine remains the final comment.
"Western Man ~
I suspect we’ll have to start by agreeing to disagree about the candidate’s performances.
You saw a debate in which Palin “swallowed Biden whole”.
I saw a debate it which she failed to specifically answer a single question.
She took her time on that stage to present prepared speeches, rather than respond to the moderator. So of course she did well; she was in her element. And she was also entertaining, in her own way.
I personally don’t tune-in to a political debate to be entertained, or to hear canned one-liners. I tune-in to hear the candidates respond to the questions as the questions relate to their policy. To see how they perform while thinking on their feet.
Being asked one question and speaking to a totally seperate topic shows me neither of these. In fact, it suggests to me that the candidate is unsure. Not of what she thinks about the question, but what the campaign wants her to say. So instead she just stuck with the areas she knew would score points with their base. Which as I’ve pointed out previously was a mistake… they already have their base sewn-up. It’s Independents and Undecideds who she was supposed to appeal to that night - and she failed.
As far as your claims that the media interviews have held “traps”; I would’ve thought you were joking, but you’ve already answered that point. For an adult person - politician or not - to be unable to name a single newspaper or media outlet that they get their news from is assinine.
And please explain to me how expecting someone who might one day be called upon to appoint SCOTUS Justices should have some grasp of the court’s history is akin to expecting that person to preside over the court. There are high school students who could’ve answered that question. And you claim it was a left-wing trap? C’mon, man.
I’m also interested to know whether you’ve heard the invitation to Palin from Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC to do a live, unedited, hour-long interview with either one or both of them. I’m sure you’re not a fan of theirs - but even FoxNews wasn’t willing to extend such an invitation. I think it would be an excellent way to gauge whether your POV on the unfair editing and “trap” questions is accurate. Perhaps the campaign could swing a similar interview from Bill O’Reilly or Brit Hume to even the score from the Right side?
But you know as well as I do, it’ll never happen. As others have already posited on this thread, other than being window dressing and an attack dog in this new round of last-ditch attacks on Obama’s character - Palin is “back in the box” until after the election.
As far as Ms. Ifill’s book goes; you have the title right, but seem to be misguided in the rest of your statements about it. The book is actually touted as “a thought exercise on the “black political structure” of the civil rights movement, and outlines how that struggle led to today, where we’re moving toward racial equality.”
It includes Colin Powell(R), Newark Mayor Corey Booker(D), Alabama Congressman Artur Davis(D), and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick(D) as well as Obama. There is little doubt in my mind that if Powell were the one running for President - the subtitle would include his name instead of Obama’s.
Prior to the debate, Journalists from both sides spoke out on Ifill’s professionalism and credibility. In addition, both campaigns approved her as moderator. And as you yourself have said, she proved them right by her performance.
And I can think of no reason why her book would sell better if Obama is elected than if he isn’t. In fact, I suspect it might sell better if McCain wins. In either case, the same people would be buying it. The only way I would expect it to sell better with an Obama victory would be if people like yourself bought a copy in the hopes of figuring out why you lost. Otherwise, people who want to read it will buy it regardless of who wins the election. And as someone (I believe it was Dr. Taylor) pointed out - the release date was most likely chosen by the publisher, not the author.
Anyway… glad to have found your voice WM. We’ll probably have a tough time finding common ground, and you’re awfully angry for someone who’s been on the winning side for most of my lifetime - but you’re concise and articulate with your venom - which is a welcome change these days."
And he makes no bones about the fact that he thinks Obama is a HORRIBLE candidate, while McCain/Palin are virtually pure as the driven snow.
It would take entirely too long for me to recount the entire thread which preceded the response I am about to post, so I encourage you to check it out here
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14271
before reading any further. It has been 27 hours since I posted the following, and mine remains the final comment.
"Western Man ~
I suspect we’ll have to start by agreeing to disagree about the candidate’s performances.
You saw a debate in which Palin “swallowed Biden whole”.
I saw a debate it which she failed to specifically answer a single question.
She took her time on that stage to present prepared speeches, rather than respond to the moderator. So of course she did well; she was in her element. And she was also entertaining, in her own way.
I personally don’t tune-in to a political debate to be entertained, or to hear canned one-liners. I tune-in to hear the candidates respond to the questions as the questions relate to their policy. To see how they perform while thinking on their feet.
Being asked one question and speaking to a totally seperate topic shows me neither of these. In fact, it suggests to me that the candidate is unsure. Not of what she thinks about the question, but what the campaign wants her to say. So instead she just stuck with the areas she knew would score points with their base. Which as I’ve pointed out previously was a mistake… they already have their base sewn-up. It’s Independents and Undecideds who she was supposed to appeal to that night - and she failed.
As far as your claims that the media interviews have held “traps”; I would’ve thought you were joking, but you’ve already answered that point. For an adult person - politician or not - to be unable to name a single newspaper or media outlet that they get their news from is assinine.
And please explain to me how expecting someone who might one day be called upon to appoint SCOTUS Justices should have some grasp of the court’s history is akin to expecting that person to preside over the court. There are high school students who could’ve answered that question. And you claim it was a left-wing trap? C’mon, man.
I’m also interested to know whether you’ve heard the invitation to Palin from Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC to do a live, unedited, hour-long interview with either one or both of them. I’m sure you’re not a fan of theirs - but even FoxNews wasn’t willing to extend such an invitation. I think it would be an excellent way to gauge whether your POV on the unfair editing and “trap” questions is accurate. Perhaps the campaign could swing a similar interview from Bill O’Reilly or Brit Hume to even the score from the Right side?
But you know as well as I do, it’ll never happen. As others have already posited on this thread, other than being window dressing and an attack dog in this new round of last-ditch attacks on Obama’s character - Palin is “back in the box” until after the election.
As far as Ms. Ifill’s book goes; you have the title right, but seem to be misguided in the rest of your statements about it. The book is actually touted as “a thought exercise on the “black political structure” of the civil rights movement, and outlines how that struggle led to today, where we’re moving toward racial equality.”
It includes Colin Powell(R), Newark Mayor Corey Booker(D), Alabama Congressman Artur Davis(D), and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick(D) as well as Obama. There is little doubt in my mind that if Powell were the one running for President - the subtitle would include his name instead of Obama’s.
Prior to the debate, Journalists from both sides spoke out on Ifill’s professionalism and credibility. In addition, both campaigns approved her as moderator. And as you yourself have said, she proved them right by her performance.
And I can think of no reason why her book would sell better if Obama is elected than if he isn’t. In fact, I suspect it might sell better if McCain wins. In either case, the same people would be buying it. The only way I would expect it to sell better with an Obama victory would be if people like yourself bought a copy in the hopes of figuring out why you lost. Otherwise, people who want to read it will buy it regardless of who wins the election. And as someone (I believe it was Dr. Taylor) pointed out - the release date was most likely chosen by the publisher, not the author.
Anyway… glad to have found your voice WM. We’ll probably have a tough time finding common ground, and you’re awfully angry for someone who’s been on the winning side for most of my lifetime - but you’re concise and articulate with your venom - which is a welcome change these days."
Me on Palin 1 at Poliblogger
On October 5, Dr. Taylor discussed Peggy Noonan's column about Sarah Palin after the VP debate. The GOP supporters on the thread immediately tried to redirect the conversation on to perceived mis-steps by Biden. I admit to not knowing enough details about their comments about Joe to either confirm or deny them.
What I do know is that their's was a plan of absolute distraction from the topic at hand. So I tried to bring everyone back to the discussion:
"Hmmm… I hope I don’t throw everyone off by responding to the actual post this thread started with, but here goes:
In my view, Palin’s performance in the VP debate was an utter disaster for the campaign.
How can I say that, when there has been so much praise slathered over it? Simple.
She wasted 90 minutes appealing to the people that were going to vote McCain/Palin anyway.
What is being sold as her solid performance by the GOP spin-doctors and the right-wing pundits was no such thing.
Anyone who has been following the campaigns with any more than a passing interest should be well-aware that John and Sarah have their Core vote wrapped-up.
Where they’re running into trouble is with Independents and Undecideds. Two groups who are notorious for hating BS. Which is all Palin had to offer during the debate.
I challenge anyone to quote me a specific answer to ANY question she was asked. Her supporters will trumpet her bravery (or is it “Maverickism”?) in openly defying the moderator. To me, that was pure bluster and misdirection.
Anyone looking for actual answers is likely to feel the same. So, for those of you who have already chosen the GOP ticket - I understand why you’ve deluded yourselves into thinking she performed well. She made you feel good about your positions - which I’m sure can be tough at times.
But for those of us who (oddly enough) expect to hear an actual answer to a definite question… she blew it.
There are a lot of us who don’t care how “folksy” a candidate is. There are a lot of us who don’t consider $200K in income as “middle class” (as Palin seems to). And there are a lot of us (I hope) who can see through her veneer.
She’s clueless. She’s unqualified. And you should have a problem with that. You should also have a problem with the fact that she didn’t even TRY to win over the votes you need to win.
My impression of the conversation back-stage after the debate:
Palin: Huh! Whatya think? Pretty freakin’ good, huh?”
Spin Doctors: Are you Effing kidding? You just set us back 6 months!
Palin: What’re you talking about? They LOVE me!
Spin Doctors: YEAH… the same people who loved you when you walked onstage still love you. The people who hated you when you walked onstage hate you even more (and now have more ammunition)… but the people who weren’t sure? With them you dug us a hole. They actively don’t like you now. They don’t trust you. You seem like a liar to them.
Palin: But I didn’t lie about anything!
Spin Doctor: No… you just failed to tell the truth on anything. On any… single… thing. She asked you questions that could have been homeruns for you. Weren’t you listening over the last 10 days? Are you aware that you didn’t answer a single question?
Palin: Uh huh…
Spin Doctor: Why the F didn’t you?
Palin: Our supporters don’t like to hear the truth.
Spin Doctor: But we’ve been rehearsing all week how to make the truth sound less horrific. And besides, didn’t you hear me tell you that our Base isn’t the issue? That we need to connect with the Undecideds?
Palin: Uh huh.
Spin Doctor: Then what the F?
Palin: People like it when I’m Folksy.
Spin Doctor: Ahh.. for F’s sake.
Palin: Didn’t you hear me say “… dog-gone-it Joe…” People eat that stuff up.
Spin Doctor: Nevermind…
So… a back-handed thanks to Gov. Palin for being so obvious in her obfuscation. And a whole-hearted “Wake UP” to the folks who missed it.
I make no claim on telling you who you should vote for, but for the sake of America, for the sake of our children, for the sake of your own piece of mind - at least do it with your eyes open.
Go to the campaign websites. Do some research. If after that it still doesn’t bother you that McCain’s policies don’t match his rhetoric - or only for an hour at a time - that’s on you.
But PLEASE stop this mindless parotting of the campaign and the pundits.
This is exactly how Dubya snuck into the White House, and we’ve all lived through the aftermath.
Don’t you want your candidate to be accountable? Go to sites like FactCheck.Org and Snopes.com to learn some facts about both campaigns.
I don’t expect (or want) everyone to agree with my viewpoint.
I just want us all to make informed decisions.
And in my opinion, anyone who says Palin did anything other than dodge, misdirect and sidestep during the debate wasn’t paying attention."
More than a day later (a long time in the blogosphere) no one has made a claim against my main point. The thread can be found at: http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14277
What I do know is that their's was a plan of absolute distraction from the topic at hand. So I tried to bring everyone back to the discussion:
"Hmmm… I hope I don’t throw everyone off by responding to the actual post this thread started with, but here goes:
In my view, Palin’s performance in the VP debate was an utter disaster for the campaign.
How can I say that, when there has been so much praise slathered over it? Simple.
She wasted 90 minutes appealing to the people that were going to vote McCain/Palin anyway.
What is being sold as her solid performance by the GOP spin-doctors and the right-wing pundits was no such thing.
Anyone who has been following the campaigns with any more than a passing interest should be well-aware that John and Sarah have their Core vote wrapped-up.
Where they’re running into trouble is with Independents and Undecideds. Two groups who are notorious for hating BS. Which is all Palin had to offer during the debate.
I challenge anyone to quote me a specific answer to ANY question she was asked. Her supporters will trumpet her bravery (or is it “Maverickism”?) in openly defying the moderator. To me, that was pure bluster and misdirection.
Anyone looking for actual answers is likely to feel the same. So, for those of you who have already chosen the GOP ticket - I understand why you’ve deluded yourselves into thinking she performed well. She made you feel good about your positions - which I’m sure can be tough at times.
But for those of us who (oddly enough) expect to hear an actual answer to a definite question… she blew it.
There are a lot of us who don’t care how “folksy” a candidate is. There are a lot of us who don’t consider $200K in income as “middle class” (as Palin seems to). And there are a lot of us (I hope) who can see through her veneer.
She’s clueless. She’s unqualified. And you should have a problem with that. You should also have a problem with the fact that she didn’t even TRY to win over the votes you need to win.
My impression of the conversation back-stage after the debate:
Palin: Huh! Whatya think? Pretty freakin’ good, huh?”
Spin Doctors: Are you Effing kidding? You just set us back 6 months!
Palin: What’re you talking about? They LOVE me!
Spin Doctors: YEAH… the same people who loved you when you walked onstage still love you. The people who hated you when you walked onstage hate you even more (and now have more ammunition)… but the people who weren’t sure? With them you dug us a hole. They actively don’t like you now. They don’t trust you. You seem like a liar to them.
Palin: But I didn’t lie about anything!
Spin Doctor: No… you just failed to tell the truth on anything. On any… single… thing. She asked you questions that could have been homeruns for you. Weren’t you listening over the last 10 days? Are you aware that you didn’t answer a single question?
Palin: Uh huh…
Spin Doctor: Why the F didn’t you?
Palin: Our supporters don’t like to hear the truth.
Spin Doctor: But we’ve been rehearsing all week how to make the truth sound less horrific. And besides, didn’t you hear me tell you that our Base isn’t the issue? That we need to connect with the Undecideds?
Palin: Uh huh.
Spin Doctor: Then what the F?
Palin: People like it when I’m Folksy.
Spin Doctor: Ahh.. for F’s sake.
Palin: Didn’t you hear me say “… dog-gone-it Joe…” People eat that stuff up.
Spin Doctor: Nevermind…
So… a back-handed thanks to Gov. Palin for being so obvious in her obfuscation. And a whole-hearted “Wake UP” to the folks who missed it.
I make no claim on telling you who you should vote for, but for the sake of America, for the sake of our children, for the sake of your own piece of mind - at least do it with your eyes open.
Go to the campaign websites. Do some research. If after that it still doesn’t bother you that McCain’s policies don’t match his rhetoric - or only for an hour at a time - that’s on you.
But PLEASE stop this mindless parotting of the campaign and the pundits.
This is exactly how Dubya snuck into the White House, and we’ve all lived through the aftermath.
Don’t you want your candidate to be accountable? Go to sites like FactCheck.Org and Snopes.com to learn some facts about both campaigns.
I don’t expect (or want) everyone to agree with my viewpoint.
I just want us all to make informed decisions.
And in my opinion, anyone who says Palin did anything other than dodge, misdirect and sidestep during the debate wasn’t paying attention."
More than a day later (a long time in the blogosphere) no one has made a claim against my main point. The thread can be found at: http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14277
Read or Watch?
I am of the belief that most Americans today would prefer to watch a video than read words on a page/screen. Which is why I rely so heavily on my man Keith Olberman.
Anyone who's ever received an email from me, and anyone who has visited this blog prior to today is well aware that I have no problem writing at length about my positions, perspectives and opinions.
However, I have found that the majority of people I come across in my daily life simply can not be bothered to sit still long enough to read past the headlines.
So sometimes, when there is an important point to be made, and I'm deluded enough to believe that anyone will ever actually view my blog -- I make the decision to let Keith speak for me.
This is one of those times.
Anyone who's ever received an email from me, and anyone who has visited this blog prior to today is well aware that I have no problem writing at length about my positions, perspectives and opinions.
However, I have found that the majority of people I come across in my daily life simply can not be bothered to sit still long enough to read past the headlines.
So sometimes, when there is an important point to be made, and I'm deluded enough to believe that anyone will ever actually view my blog -- I make the decision to let Keith speak for me.
This is one of those times.
Thanks to TPMTV
John McCain started out talking a good game about running a clean campaign with no negative ads. He even enlisted his wife to speak out about the importance of running a positive campaign.
Apparently even a self-professed "cool headed maverick" will resort to whatever he thinks will work when it's pretty clear that his last shot at the dream is slipping away.
TPMtv posted the following clip chronicling his malfeasance on youtube. Those of us who don't have the time to mine the interviews and pull out the important stuff should be very thankful to those who do. So thanks again, TPMtv.
Apparently even a self-professed "cool headed maverick" will resort to whatever he thinks will work when it's pretty clear that his last shot at the dream is slipping away.
TPMtv posted the following clip chronicling his malfeasance on youtube. Those of us who don't have the time to mine the interviews and pull out the important stuff should be very thankful to those who do. So thanks again, TPMtv.
Credit where it's due
Sometimes the internet moves a little too fast. While I still believe the clip below of McCain passing on a handshake from Obama after tonight's debate is telling of a certain level of contempt - he likely wasn't aware of which camera was "live" at the moment - it is also worth mentioning that there was a shared handshake/embrace at the conclusion of the debate - when it was very clear to all which camera was "live".
Nailed to the wall by his own words
After going on about his cool headedness and ability to be the one to talk softly and carry a big stick - McCain sent a slow-motion lob the size of a grapefruit over the net into Obama's side of the court.
And Obama crushed it.
Listen to Obama during this clip, but watch McCain. He starts off all light-hearted and smiles, but when Obama lowers the boom on him you can see his demeanor visibly change. Not only does he realize that his own words are coming back to haunt him (and there's nothing he can do to stop it) he's also realizing that some of those words were spoken only seconds before when he couldn't resist a snarky, sarcastic comment and a chuckle as Obama lined himself up for the shot.
I don't care who you are, you've got to agree that Obama played this point beautifully. He must have been doing a little dance inside when McCain tried to interupt him at the beginning. It only made his point stronger.
And Obama crushed it.
Listen to Obama during this clip, but watch McCain. He starts off all light-hearted and smiles, but when Obama lowers the boom on him you can see his demeanor visibly change. Not only does he realize that his own words are coming back to haunt him (and there's nothing he can do to stop it) he's also realizing that some of those words were spoken only seconds before when he couldn't resist a snarky, sarcastic comment and a chuckle as Obama lined himself up for the shot.
I don't care who you are, you've got to agree that Obama played this point beautifully. He must have been doing a little dance inside when McCain tried to interupt him at the beginning. It only made his point stronger.
That One? Are you serious?
Once again, the self-described "cool headed" one lets his frustration get the better of him. In the same debate in which he labeled himself as such - he loses any sense of composure, professionalism, etiquette or common courtesy and refers to Obama; not as "My Colleague", "my opponent", "Senator" or any number of other equally respectful terms.
Instead he called Obama "That one." - with a derisive jab of his finger.
What a sad, desperate, defensive attitude.
Instead he called Obama "That one." - with a derisive jab of his finger.
What a sad, desperate, defensive attitude.
I'm gonna take my ball and go home!!
After claiming to be the "cool headed" one who will "talk softly and carry a big stick" (real original, John) - McCain showed his clear contempt for Obama and his inability to take a spanking like a man by refusing to shake his opponents hand after the debate.
If he wasn't so freaking old I'd call him a punk.
If he wasn't so freaking old I'd call him a punk.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Discovery
During my nightly tour of the blogosphere tonight, I came across Dr. Steven Taylor's PoliBlog.
Since I've only just encountered Dr. Taylor, I have no idea how closely our politics actually are.
I can only speak to his post that I read and some of the responses to it. There were 2 or 3 that I felt a need to respond to.
I finally settled on 2, purely out of consieration for time - although I alluded to the 3rd.
In an effort to save space, I can't post the entire Poliblog post here. But as always, I have a link:
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14229
Reading through most of that link will give you the information required to digest the rest of this post.
There were 2 women who responded to Dr. Taylor's post who seemed to think that their advanced age gave them particular insight into the current political climate.
I for one tend to believe that exactly the opposite is true, as indicated by their comments and comparisons.
I really don't want to take the time or the space to include their thoughts here.
I also don't want anyone to read my reply without first hearing the comments that brought it about. So please take the time to click on and read the above link. Doing so will make what follows a lot easier to understand..... go ahead.... I'll wait.
Okay, now that you've (hopefully) read it all - here is my response to Ann and Granny:
To Ann Townsend and Ohio Granny:
I’m sure that my saying that time on this planet does not necessarily make one wise does not come as news to you.
I am also fairly confident that you understand that the political and diplomatic environment has changed significantly since WW II.
So while I’m pretty sure you’ll be put-off by what I am about to say, I hope that you will appreciate the spirit in which it is offered.
Ann… comparing McCain to FDR and Palin to Truman? Are you serious?
Of Palin you say: “SOMETHING in her has gotten her to this place in history…” Yeah… it’s called luck. Or convenience. Or desperation.
You can not honestly look at her credentials, when compared to others on McCain’s short list (other women included) and decry Palin the most qualified of the lot.
To do so is pure delusion.
At least Devildog admits his/her support comes from their shared desire to kill animals for sport.
It took Palin what, 5 different colleges before she graduated with the much sought-after degree of Sports Journalist?
Let me be clear about her degree; I couldn’t care less where she went to school or what she majored in.
Here is why her round-about route to a Bachelor’s Degree is important to me when compared with Obama’s earning of a Law Degree: Palin’s path shows little ambition, dedication or willingness to fight through to the end. It exemplifies indecision, an inability to focus and a final decision based on ego and money.
And before you begin a rant on the financial rewards of being a Lawyer, I suggest you research Mr. Obama’s career after Law School.
Ohio Granny~
You deemed Ann’s response “excellent!” And while you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I feel a need to question your reasoning.
You seem to want me to be excited about a candidate who was suddenly “whisked away from home”. Away from her newborn son, pregnant daughter and war-bound older son.
Whisked away? Really?
Is that the woman who I am expected to consider as the next potential POTUS? This is the person, who in your own words is expected to “rescue the GOP”?
To steal a line from your side: If Palin was a man, would she have been “whisked away” from her family? Or would he have “answered the call”?
You, Granny make some of the most sexist comments I’ve seen so far in relation to Palin’s candidacy. You talk about remembering when women were discriminated against for silly reasons like their menstrual cycle and a fear of vanity.
My disdain for Sarah Palin has nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman. It has to do with the fact that she is supremely under-qualified for the job she has been asked to perform.
Your comments about Obama’s so-called touchy-feely-ness and perceived inability to effect real change to me only show that you haven’t spent the time to actually investigate the policies of the candidates.
Where do you get you information from? (edited from the original)
I myself endevour to probe every niche of the news media. I watch the right-wing blowhards as well as those on the left. I read newspapers and blogs from the UK and Europe. I’ve actually spent hours on both Obama’s website and McCain’s.
Doing so gives one an insight into their actual policies.
And what I have found is that while McCain lies with impunity on the campaign trail, the most I’ve seen from Obama is mere exageration. Of the two, I’ll take the latter.
You say the “people” will get Palin’s “message”. What message are you refering to? The one that says she is clueless on foreign affairs (a key component in any Vice Presidency)? Or the one that says she is totally intolerant of those who hold different ideological and religious views? Or is it the message that says: “It doesn’t matter what I say, as long as I look good and pull some undecided voters to our side”?
Which is why she was chosen in the first place.
And back to Ann:
Suddely Truman isn’t a haberdasher who got lucky. Now you admit to his 10 years in the Senate - albeit you want to minimize how he got there.
Which is a pointless arguement, since we’ve already noticed that the Truman/Palin comparison is utter BS.
You and granny both want to buy into the McCain/Palin rhetoric… I don’t blame you. They talk a good game. Unfortunately, the John McCain of 2000 is gone. The one we are saddled with now is different. The new one is a “win at all cost” politician. He will do and say anything in this last-ditch effort to become President.
The Maverick straight-talker is gone. Replaced by a GOP automoton who truly WILL bring us 4 more years of Bush BS if elected.
Check the facts. Read the policies and compare them to the speeches. If you actually do so, Obama is the clear winner. His rhetoric matches his words.
McCain’s doesn’t.
I too am an Independent. Have been for 20 years.
McCain is bald-faced lying to the American people. Many of whom let him get away with it under the context of this new brand of Bushite, BS “patriotism”.
Fear should not be a domestic political tool - yet they have sharpened it to a razor’s edge.
Why do you suppose that is?
Since I've only just encountered Dr. Taylor, I have no idea how closely our politics actually are.
I can only speak to his post that I read and some of the responses to it. There were 2 or 3 that I felt a need to respond to.
I finally settled on 2, purely out of consieration for time - although I alluded to the 3rd.
In an effort to save space, I can't post the entire Poliblog post here. But as always, I have a link:
http://www.poliblogger.com/?p=14229
Reading through most of that link will give you the information required to digest the rest of this post.
There were 2 women who responded to Dr. Taylor's post who seemed to think that their advanced age gave them particular insight into the current political climate.
I for one tend to believe that exactly the opposite is true, as indicated by their comments and comparisons.
I really don't want to take the time or the space to include their thoughts here.
I also don't want anyone to read my reply without first hearing the comments that brought it about. So please take the time to click on and read the above link. Doing so will make what follows a lot easier to understand..... go ahead.... I'll wait.
Okay, now that you've (hopefully) read it all - here is my response to Ann and Granny:
To Ann Townsend and Ohio Granny:
I’m sure that my saying that time on this planet does not necessarily make one wise does not come as news to you.
I am also fairly confident that you understand that the political and diplomatic environment has changed significantly since WW II.
So while I’m pretty sure you’ll be put-off by what I am about to say, I hope that you will appreciate the spirit in which it is offered.
Ann… comparing McCain to FDR and Palin to Truman? Are you serious?
Of Palin you say: “SOMETHING in her has gotten her to this place in history…” Yeah… it’s called luck. Or convenience. Or desperation.
You can not honestly look at her credentials, when compared to others on McCain’s short list (other women included) and decry Palin the most qualified of the lot.
To do so is pure delusion.
At least Devildog admits his/her support comes from their shared desire to kill animals for sport.
It took Palin what, 5 different colleges before she graduated with the much sought-after degree of Sports Journalist?
Let me be clear about her degree; I couldn’t care less where she went to school or what she majored in.
Here is why her round-about route to a Bachelor’s Degree is important to me when compared with Obama’s earning of a Law Degree: Palin’s path shows little ambition, dedication or willingness to fight through to the end. It exemplifies indecision, an inability to focus and a final decision based on ego and money.
And before you begin a rant on the financial rewards of being a Lawyer, I suggest you research Mr. Obama’s career after Law School.
Ohio Granny~
You deemed Ann’s response “excellent!” And while you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I feel a need to question your reasoning.
You seem to want me to be excited about a candidate who was suddenly “whisked away from home”. Away from her newborn son, pregnant daughter and war-bound older son.
Whisked away? Really?
Is that the woman who I am expected to consider as the next potential POTUS? This is the person, who in your own words is expected to “rescue the GOP”?
To steal a line from your side: If Palin was a man, would she have been “whisked away” from her family? Or would he have “answered the call”?
You, Granny make some of the most sexist comments I’ve seen so far in relation to Palin’s candidacy. You talk about remembering when women were discriminated against for silly reasons like their menstrual cycle and a fear of vanity.
My disdain for Sarah Palin has nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman. It has to do with the fact that she is supremely under-qualified for the job she has been asked to perform.
Your comments about Obama’s so-called touchy-feely-ness and perceived inability to effect real change to me only show that you haven’t spent the time to actually investigate the policies of the candidates.
Where do you get you information from? (edited from the original)
I myself endevour to probe every niche of the news media. I watch the right-wing blowhards as well as those on the left. I read newspapers and blogs from the UK and Europe. I’ve actually spent hours on both Obama’s website and McCain’s.
Doing so gives one an insight into their actual policies.
And what I have found is that while McCain lies with impunity on the campaign trail, the most I’ve seen from Obama is mere exageration. Of the two, I’ll take the latter.
You say the “people” will get Palin’s “message”. What message are you refering to? The one that says she is clueless on foreign affairs (a key component in any Vice Presidency)? Or the one that says she is totally intolerant of those who hold different ideological and religious views? Or is it the message that says: “It doesn’t matter what I say, as long as I look good and pull some undecided voters to our side”?
Which is why she was chosen in the first place.
And back to Ann:
Suddely Truman isn’t a haberdasher who got lucky. Now you admit to his 10 years in the Senate - albeit you want to minimize how he got there.
Which is a pointless arguement, since we’ve already noticed that the Truman/Palin comparison is utter BS.
You and granny both want to buy into the McCain/Palin rhetoric… I don’t blame you. They talk a good game. Unfortunately, the John McCain of 2000 is gone. The one we are saddled with now is different. The new one is a “win at all cost” politician. He will do and say anything in this last-ditch effort to become President.
The Maverick straight-talker is gone. Replaced by a GOP automoton who truly WILL bring us 4 more years of Bush BS if elected.
Check the facts. Read the policies and compare them to the speeches. If you actually do so, Obama is the clear winner. His rhetoric matches his words.
McCain’s doesn’t.
I too am an Independent. Have been for 20 years.
McCain is bald-faced lying to the American people. Many of whom let him get away with it under the context of this new brand of Bushite, BS “patriotism”.
Fear should not be a domestic political tool - yet they have sharpened it to a razor’s edge.
Why do you suppose that is?
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Couric and Palin - The "No Answer" Interviews
Holy crap... every time I watch this stuff I am further amazed and dejected that Palin has even a single supporter. Not only is she clearly clueless -- her handlers haven't even prepared her properly for some of the questions everyone knew Couric would be asking. I defy you to find a single clear, concise answer any where in this first interview:
Sheesh... you can almost see her accessing her mnemonics as she stumbles through some of the assinine responses in this segment.
And here's part 2:
What? Democratic values? Tolerance? This woman wouldn't recognize real democracy if she had a picture and a map. And she personally harbors some of the least tolerant beliefs and opinions in society today.
Kind of funny that during her "answer" to the passport question she much more accurately described McCain's upbringing (son and grandson of Admirals) than Obama's (single mother on food stamps).
She makes the claim that one of the ways she has "understood the world" is through education. Somebody needs to explain to her that attending 5 colleges in order to achieve a degree in Sports Journalism isn't the same as traveling the world and learning about other countries and cultures.
Did you miss it? Couric let it slide, but Palin once again refered to Iraq as a "central front" in the War on Terror.
She asserts her contention that Pakistanis want to rid the world of violent Islamic Terrorists just like we do. I'm sure she's right. The part I'm not sure she's right about is her assumption that the Pakistanis believe that adopting an American-style Democracy is the only way to achieve that goal.
Every time Palin is asked to describe something, she merely alludes to it. I'll give you an example; I was a Carpenter for a long time. For much of that time I was a Cabinetmaker. If someone asked me to describe to them how to build a wet-bar, and I were Sarah Palin I would simply say: "You have to buy the materials and build the bar. It has to be built properly, and the countertop and sink need to fit correctly, with no leaks or gaps."
Which doesn't tell the person who wants to learn about building a wet-bar a single goddamned pertinent detail about how to go about it.
I am beginning to think that Gov. Palin truly doesn't understand the definition of the word "specific."
To hear Palin tell it, the Pentagon and the CIA are counting on the Alaskan people to carry out surveillance and defense against any potential threat from Russia. And - oh, yeah - Canada, too.
She also doesn't seem to realize - and this is a bigee - that nobody cares who the "good guys" and "bad guys" in HER world are. In the real world "good" and "bad" are a matter of perspective. And shortly after her glib claim to understanding diplomacy, she almost immediately launches into an invective against Iran as being "bad guys" in "her world".
I found these clips on the internet. The internet is International. Does she not think the Iranian President has access to this shit? If she is ever called upon if -God help us - she actually becomes VP, to meet with the Ahmadinejad; does anyone actually believe he will be receptive to her? Diplomacy is all about empathy (or at least the perception of empathy) and the ability to communicate with those who disagree with you with an even hand. She hasn't even been elected yet, and she's already talking smack about world leaders. Might play well with her base, but the folks she's likely to be "diplomaticizing" with probably aren't too keen on it.
And just so no one tries to misconstrue my opinion here; I am not personally a fan of Ahmadinejad. All I'm saying is that as 2nd in command of the United States of America - one needs to have the ability to consider future possibilities, and to watch ones mouth when talking publicly about the powerful people you may one day need to practice actual Diplomacy with.
Of all the colloquialisms she seems to have learned over the years, it's too bad no one ever taught her one that can be very important in politics: "Never say never."
Now... to end on a note of brevity; please enjoy another installment of Tina Fey's frigging brilliant impersonation of Palin on SNL. This one should be even funnier, coming so close on the heels of the actual interview... you DID watch it, right?
You know what? Having just watched that clip one last time before posting this, it occured to me... other than the obviously comical shit Fey says... she could probably surrogate for Palin at public appearances and her supporters would be none the wiser.
Scary thought.
Sheesh... you can almost see her accessing her mnemonics as she stumbles through some of the assinine responses in this segment.
And here's part 2:
What? Democratic values? Tolerance? This woman wouldn't recognize real democracy if she had a picture and a map. And she personally harbors some of the least tolerant beliefs and opinions in society today.
Kind of funny that during her "answer" to the passport question she much more accurately described McCain's upbringing (son and grandson of Admirals) than Obama's (single mother on food stamps).
She makes the claim that one of the ways she has "understood the world" is through education. Somebody needs to explain to her that attending 5 colleges in order to achieve a degree in Sports Journalism isn't the same as traveling the world and learning about other countries and cultures.
Did you miss it? Couric let it slide, but Palin once again refered to Iraq as a "central front" in the War on Terror.
She asserts her contention that Pakistanis want to rid the world of violent Islamic Terrorists just like we do. I'm sure she's right. The part I'm not sure she's right about is her assumption that the Pakistanis believe that adopting an American-style Democracy is the only way to achieve that goal.
Every time Palin is asked to describe something, she merely alludes to it. I'll give you an example; I was a Carpenter for a long time. For much of that time I was a Cabinetmaker. If someone asked me to describe to them how to build a wet-bar, and I were Sarah Palin I would simply say: "You have to buy the materials and build the bar. It has to be built properly, and the countertop and sink need to fit correctly, with no leaks or gaps."
Which doesn't tell the person who wants to learn about building a wet-bar a single goddamned pertinent detail about how to go about it.
I am beginning to think that Gov. Palin truly doesn't understand the definition of the word "specific."
To hear Palin tell it, the Pentagon and the CIA are counting on the Alaskan people to carry out surveillance and defense against any potential threat from Russia. And - oh, yeah - Canada, too.
She also doesn't seem to realize - and this is a bigee - that nobody cares who the "good guys" and "bad guys" in HER world are. In the real world "good" and "bad" are a matter of perspective. And shortly after her glib claim to understanding diplomacy, she almost immediately launches into an invective against Iran as being "bad guys" in "her world".
I found these clips on the internet. The internet is International. Does she not think the Iranian President has access to this shit? If she is ever called upon if -God help us - she actually becomes VP, to meet with the Ahmadinejad; does anyone actually believe he will be receptive to her? Diplomacy is all about empathy (or at least the perception of empathy) and the ability to communicate with those who disagree with you with an even hand. She hasn't even been elected yet, and she's already talking smack about world leaders. Might play well with her base, but the folks she's likely to be "diplomaticizing" with probably aren't too keen on it.
And just so no one tries to misconstrue my opinion here; I am not personally a fan of Ahmadinejad. All I'm saying is that as 2nd in command of the United States of America - one needs to have the ability to consider future possibilities, and to watch ones mouth when talking publicly about the powerful people you may one day need to practice actual Diplomacy with.
Of all the colloquialisms she seems to have learned over the years, it's too bad no one ever taught her one that can be very important in politics: "Never say never."
Now... to end on a note of brevity; please enjoy another installment of Tina Fey's frigging brilliant impersonation of Palin on SNL. This one should be even funnier, coming so close on the heels of the actual interview... you DID watch it, right?
You know what? Having just watched that clip one last time before posting this, it occured to me... other than the obviously comical shit Fey says... she could probably surrogate for Palin at public appearances and her supporters would be none the wiser.
Scary thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)