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."