4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8133964.stm
Alaska Governor Palin to resign
Sarah Palin: "I'm doing what is best for Alaska"
Former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has announced she will resign as governor of Alaska on 26 July and not run for re-election.
Mrs Palin's term of office was due to end in 2010.
Some have speculated that Mrs Palin, who is popular with the Republican Party base, might be preparing to make a bid for the White House in 2012.
But a report on NBC news suggested that Mrs Palin intends to get "out of politics for good".
Her resignation means Alaska's Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell will take over as state governor.
'New direction'
Polls indicated Mrs Palin was very popular in Alaska during the first few years of her governorship, and although her approval ratings have dipped somewhat since her vice-presidential run, she still enjoys widespread popularity in her home state.
Mrs Palin announced her decision in a statement from her home town of Wasilla, Alaska.
"I'm taking my fight for what's right in a new direction," she said, as her family looked on.
Mrs Palin did not reveal what she intended to do after leaving office, and did not give an explicit reason for her decision not to run for re-election.
But in a written statement, she made it clear that once she had decided not to run again, she did not want to hang on in office until her term expired.
"Once I decided not to run for re-election, I also felt that to embrace the conventional Lame Duck status in this particular climate would just be another dose of politics as usual, something I campaigned against and will always oppose," she said.
The BBC's Kevin Connolly in Washington says Mrs Palin's revelation came out of the blue, as most Americans were turning to the celebration of Independence Day on 4 July.
She offered no single clear reason for stepping down, our correspondent adds, but the strongest clue was her depiction of what it had been like to be the subject of sustained attack by liberals since she appeared on the national stage.
So apparently its a conservative angle to quit your job when you don't want to run for re election. Glad to know that thats how our political system works. I'm sure all those alaskan voters are loving this move as some dude gets in by default. As to the rumors of her running for a 2012 presidential bid, I applaud her attempts here. I can think of no one more likely to give Obama the win in that election. I mean damn, even half of her own party thinks shes a corrupt idiot. If that really was her plan, the idea that she would quit her elected position a year before she is even likely to begin preparation for candidacy and before her term was up, a term that would have ended before any such campaign is laughable. edit: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0709/GOP_sources_Palin_wont_run_for_reelection.html Other articles allude more to the presidential bid idea.
23
Post by: djones520
Or maybe she was just tired of all the frivolous lawsuits people where bringing against her for made up claims, wasting tax payer dollars and distracting her from her job.
The people of Alaska voted her in to be Governer, and vengeful democrats were doing everything in their power to keep her from doing that.
And even if she is doing this to campaign for higher office, at least she has the grace to quit her job first. Unlike out current President who was only present to represent the people he was elected to represent 25% of the time, for the last two years he was a Senator. I bet he didn't even think twice about collecting 100% of his tax payer funded pay though.
181
Post by: gorgon
Yeah, Obama is part of this story. Bill Clinton probably threatened to do to her what he did to Vince Foster, right? Are those the right-wing nutjob radio talking points for the day?
Anyway, I dunno that Palin was any more corrupt than anyone else. Certainly there were people out to get her, but then there are always people out to get you once you become a nationally recognized politician.
You ask me, her biggest problem is that she's extremely thin-skinned. Controversies don't seem to roll off her...she somehow finds ways to magnify them. Which is a bad attribute for a politician.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
You ask me, her biggest problem is that she's extremely thin-skinned. Controversies don't seem to roll off her...she somehow finds ways to magnify them. Which is a bad attribute for a politician.
Realistically her family also proved to be a train wreck waiting for her once she got media attention. It's hard to preach values and the washington outsider angle when your daughter is an unwed mother to Levi Mouthbreather Johnston and your husband can't seem to stop buying thousand dollar Armani suits on the taxpayer dollar. She also had the ability to open her mouth and make every stereotype about conservative politics appear true. Having a border kinda close to russia doesn't make her skilled in dealing with foreign powers, no matter how hard she wants people to believe that.
5272
Post by: Fallen668
djones520 wrote:
And even if she is doing this to campaign for higher office, at least she has the grace to quit her job first. Unlike out current President who was only present to represent the people he was elected to represent 25% of the time, for the last two years he was a Senator. I bet he didn't even think twice about collecting 100% of his tax payer funded pay though.
Unlike Bush, who remained Governor of Texas while he campaigned for President? McCain is also still in the Senate. And... oh yeah... what about Palin herself... she was still governor of Alaska untill today even with her vice presidential bid. Bet she collected her pay. So... don't even try that line of thinking.
I personally find it kind of sad that she just up and quits this early. What would happen if Cthulu forbid she did get elected president. First time it gets really tough she decides "feth this, I'm out" six months in?
518
Post by: Kid_Kyoto
“Take the words of General MacArthur,” she said. “He said, ‘We’re not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.’ ”
I'm almost certain that's not from MacArthur but from Chesty Puller, can anyone confirm?
131
Post by: malfred
I don't have a confirmed source, but the one that comes up on google is attributed to USMC Major General Oliver Smith.
"Retreat Hell! We're just attacking in another direction." Automatically Appended Next Post: And the one she read looks attributed to MacArthur. Maybe Smith knew the guy  Automatically Appended Next Post: I like the Smith one better.
518
Post by: Kid_Kyoto
OK, I checked too, Puller is the one who said (paraphrase) "We're surrounded on all sides by the enemy. Good. They can't get away this time."
13756
Post by: Mad Rabbit
djones520 wrote:Or maybe she was just tired of all the frivolous lawsuits people where bringing against her for made up claims, wasting tax payer dollars and distracting her from her job.
The people of Alaska voted her in to be Governer, and vengeful democrats were doing everything in their power to keep her from doing that.
And even if she is doing this to campaign for higher office, at least she has the grace to quit her job first. Unlike out current President who was only present to represent the people he was elected to represent 25% of the time, for the last two years he was a Senator. I bet he didn't even think twice about collecting 100% of his tax payer funded pay though.
She was under multiple investigations for corruption. But yeah, I bet it's just all those vengeful Democrats. Maybe even both of the Alaska Democrats?
By your logic, she deserves all the crap she bought with state money because she wasn't in a campaign for anything. Especially not the same campaign as the man who represented his state "25% of the time." Sorry, as an Illinois voter I'd say Obama did a good job as a freshman Senator. Well worth the tax payer funded pay in my opinion.
5369
Post by: Black Blow Fly
Is the Euro really that depressed? Tell me where I can purchase an Armani suit for $1000 US... I'll buy three 4 sho !
G
ShumaGorath wrote:
You ask me, her biggest problem is that she's extremely thin-skinned. Controversies don't seem to roll off her...she somehow finds ways to magnify them. Which is a bad attribute for a politician.
...your husband can't seem to stop buying thousand dollar Armani suits...
11190
Post by: mcfly
The last bit of time in office does mean that you have no power, so it makes sense.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
mcfly wrote:The last bit of time in office does mean that you have no power, so it makes sense.
No it doesn't, and the last few months you have in office are exactly the same as the rest. You just can't rely on absolute follow through on your own agenda. They don't just stop letting them write their names on paper. The last few "lame duck" months are a myth. If the end of your term is a lame duck its probably because you're doing a crap job and you've lost your party a chance at re election, that doesn't mean you just give up and go home like its a kids soccer league. Thats not how democracy works.
5636
Post by: warpcrafter
This means she has more free time to get on tv and say stupid stuff. David Letterman, Conan O'Brien and John Stuart are probably all doing the happy dance.
518
Post by: Kid_Kyoto
Fox news reports that she is going to lead the teabag rebellion against Obamanomics, lift the markets and save the free world from socialism.
I sometimes wonder if they speak the same language that I do. I mean I hear the words but I don't think they know what they mean.
16666
Post by: Neferteila
Im probably going to kick myself in the ass and get some sort of "well, your a woman so of course you would want to vote for a woman" BS. But, I loved Sarah Palin.
I voted for her in Alaska because of what she did, and what she could do.
She has helped the citizens of Alaska greatly, and though I have not been there in close to 10 years now, I still keep in regular contact with several people there.
No other politician recieved the amount of vile spew Palin did. The media attacked every facet of her life, and did not relent even when McCain lost the race.
They have continued to hound the woman, and her family. If she stepped down, just to try to get the wolves off her back, well. I don't blame her for that.
She was the most down to earth and normal politician I have ever seen; I even met her personally on several occasions shopping in the wasilla Wal-Mart.
There were calls for "respect" for MJ because he died, no matter what he might or might not have done in his life,...
But when a politicians child messes up (because lord knows there arn't any other young unwed mothers out there.) its the thumbs up for every fathead who doesn't have a clue to persectute them.
I saw what she did for Alaska, I have heard of the direct benefits for its residents from dear friends in just the last year of what she personally was responsible for.
If she runs for presidency in 2012, I will vote for her. Even if we are all doomed to die the next month.
241
Post by: Ahtman
Kid_Kyoto wrote:Fox news reports that she is going to lead the teabag rebellion against Obamanomics, lift the markets and save the free world from socialism.
I sometimes wonder if they speak the same language that I do. I mean I hear the words but I don't think they know what they mean.
I've been hearing something along those lines as well. I find it interesting that the same people who mocked Obama supporters for using lofty language and making fun of/attacking them for treating him like their savior but now it is being done for her. This isn't all conservatives by any stretch, but I've seen it enough for it to probably constitute more then 3 people is all I'm saying. It is very strange.
Neferteila wrote:There were calls for "respect" for MJ because he died, no matter what he might or might not have done in his life,...
You do understand that being a politician and being dead are not the same thing right? It is ok to call a politician on hypocrisy becuase they are still alive to do so. Jackson didn't resign from his job, he died.
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Ahtman wrote:Kid_Kyoto wrote:Fox news reports that she is going to lead the teabag rebellion against Obamanomics, lift the markets and save the free world from socialism.
I sometimes wonder if they speak the same language that I do. I mean I hear the words but I don't think they know what they mean.
I've been hearing something along those lines as well. I find it interesting that the same people who mocked Obama supporters for using lofty language and making fun of/attacking them for treating him like their savior but now it is being done for her. This isn't all conservatives by any stretch, but I've seen it enough for it to probably constitute more then 3 people is all I'm saying. It is very strange.
Fox news isn't a news network, it's a club for people that like pretty colors and hatin' on the gays to hang out and drink a few brews before going to their anti socialist clan meetings where they burn minorities in effigy and remember a time when the great Reagan cast down the commies for apple pie and good american values.
15894
Post by: Mistress of minis
Sometimes Im reminded that freedom of speech, doesnt necessitate freedom of thought behind it.
Ironic how the two can seem so far apart at times.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Why do people care about what the president's children are doing? You'd think we were damn monarchy or something.
(Oh wait, Bush. )
5470
Post by: sebster
Neferteila wrote:Im probably going to kick myself in the ass and get some sort of "well, your a woman so of course you would want to vote for a woman" BS.
Doubt it.
But, I loved Sarah Palin.
I voted for her in Alaska because of what she did, and what she could do.
Sarah Palin was a very popular governor, and still is despite the failed presidential campaign and countless media sideshows. She may very well have been an excellent governor, well versed in all matters of Alaskan politics and sufficiently connected to get her legislation passed (she was only governor for around 18 months before taking the VP nomination so I'm not sure how much she could have got done in that time but anyway). But that's local politics, and not the presidential campaign. When she looked to address national issues, such as foreign policy, healthcare reform and fiscal policy over the economic crisis, she showed a less than highschool level of knowledge.
No other politician recieved the amount of vile spew Palin did. The media attacked every facet of her life, and did not relent even when McCain lost the race.
The media likes simple targets. She tried a cutesy-poo demeanour that gave them an easy target. It would have quickly gone away, except Palin is not a skilled politician. She kept feeding media contraversies, delivering one petulant comment after the next. The media loves he said she public debates, and she kept providing them. Of course they were going to keep up the contaversies.
There were calls for "respect" for MJ because he died, no matter what he might or might not have done in his life,...
The public reaction to a dead rock star is going to be different to a politician leaving office because... a rock star dying and a politician leaving office are very different things.
But when a politicians child messes up (because lord knows there arn't any other young unwed mothers out there.)
If Palin had wanted her daughter's life to be private, she wouldn't have campaigned on abstinence only sex education as much as she did. But she did, because she wanted all the advantages of a simplistic political position with none of the accountability. If Bristol had wanted privacy, she wouldn't have become a spokesperson for abstinence only sex education.
Palin was attempting to make all her points and was happy to involve her daughter as long as it benefitted her. But she cried foul whenever the obvious response came. It was a transparent political ploy, and I can't believe anyone could genuinely fall for it.
5369
Post by: Black Blow Fly
There is a hot porn by Hustler that features a Sarah Palin look alike.
G
5394
Post by: reds8n
Kid_Kyoto wrote:Fox news reports that she is going to lead the teabag rebellion against Obamanomics, lift the markets and save the free world from socialism.
I sometimes wonder if they speak the same language that I do.
Well.... you do speak Chinese right ?
sound affect for afterwards
13756
Post by: Mad Rabbit
ShumaGorath wrote:Ahtman wrote:Kid_Kyoto wrote:Fox news reports that she is going to lead the teabag rebellion against Obamanomics, lift the markets and save the free world from socialism.
I sometimes wonder if they speak the same language that I do. I mean I hear the words but I don't think they know what they mean.
I've been hearing something along those lines as well. I find it interesting that the same people who mocked Obama supporters for using lofty language and making fun of/attacking them for treating him like their savior but now it is being done for her. This isn't all conservatives by any stretch, but I've seen it enough for it to probably constitute more then 3 people is all I'm saying. It is very strange.
Fox news isn't a news network, it's a club for people that like pretty colors and hatin' on the gays to hang out and drink a few brews before going to their anti socialist clan meetings where they burn minorities in effigy and remember a time when the great Reagan cast down the commies for apple pie and good american values.
*single tear of joy for a fellow anti-Reagan*
Fox News is a direct propaganda machine that ignores facts, morals, and journalistic integrity. If you believe anything else you have truly been drinking the Kool Aid.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Mad Rabbit wrote:If you believe anything else you have truly been drinking the Kool Aid.
Oh yeah?
12744
Post by: Scrabb
I like flavor aid better.
5742
Post by: generalgrog
Orkeosaurus wrote:Mad Rabbit wrote:If you believe anything else you have truly been drinking the Kool Aid.
Oh yeah?
NICE!!
12265
Post by: Gwar!
Orkeosaurus wrote:Mad Rabbit wrote:If you believe anything else you have truly been drinking the Kool Aid.
Oh yeah?
518
Post by: Kid_Kyoto
Orkeosaurus wrote:Mad Rabbit wrote:If you believe anything else you have truly been drinking the Kool Aid.
Oh yeah?
Orkeosaurus wins another thread. 
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
Yay!
7375
Post by: BrookM
I don't think we've heard the last of her yet..
5030
Post by: Grignard
While I certainly disagree with many of Sarah Palin's professed beliefs, I believe that much of the criticism leveled toward her is based not on reason but on simple elitism.
5534
Post by: dogma
Honestly, as much as I detest the woman, I feel bad for her. I truly think she is a perfect example of what happens when you jump into the national scene before you're ready. She let the McCain campaign tell her what to do because she didn't know any better, and ended up stuck with the consequences.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Her voice occasionally makes my spine hurt, like when 10 year old girls go supersonic.
But there is a market in the tea parties. That is a growing force that is not being covered by the maintstream media. Much as the Repblicans woul.d like to catch a hold of it they haven't. Both Rick Perry and Cornyn (US Senator and a bit of a power) were booed at the recent one they went to. People misperceive big time whats growing with that movement. It may be a nascent 3rd party. Frankly we need new blood, anything to get rid of the Washington Party.
5534
Post by: dogma
I took 2 double shots after the wink.
2700
Post by: dietrich
I think part of the reason that McCain picked her was because she was far off the radar. Which meant that it took the Dems about a month to dig up dirt on her. But, she was off the radar for a reason. She wasn't ready to be put on the national stage and was there to appeal to the religious right wing (imho). I hope she doesn't run for president in 2012, although I think she'd have an uphill battle for the job. She's like the Republican version of Hillary - you either loathe her or love her.
5742
Post by: generalgrog
dogma wrote:Honestly, as much as I detest the woman, I feel bad for her.
How can you detest her, you don't even know her. All you know about it is how the media portays her.
I'm not a Palin bandwagoneer by the way. I think she was a terrible choice for VP, and contributed greatly to Mccains loss.
GG
5534
Post by: dogma
generalgrog wrote:
How can you detest her, you don't even know her. All you know about it is how the media portays her.
I'm not a Palin bandwagoneer by the way. I think she was a terrible choice for VP, and contributed greatly to Mccains loss.
GG
I know she can't interview, and that she fancies herself as a small town type of girl. That's pretty much my antithesis.
Also, she flumoxed an FP question, which is my primary area of knowledge.
I'm sure she is a fine person, but I would never choose to be around her.
221
Post by: Frazzled
How many interviews have you been on Dogma with people playing "stump the Dogma?"
12265
Post by: Gwar!
Frazzled wrote:How many interviews have you been on Dogma with people playing "stump the Dogma?"
I'll guess 7!
5742
Post by: generalgrog
Whats an FP question?
GG
5534
Post by: dogma
Frazzled wrote:How many interviews have you been on Dogma with people playing "stump the Dogma?"
15 college radio (it was very Frasier), 4 local TV, 1 network (WGN).
generalgrog wrote:Whats an FP question?
GG
Foreign Policy
221
Post by: Frazzled
dogma wrote:Frazzled wrote:How many interviews have you been on Dogma with people playing "stump the Dogma?"
15 college radio (it was very Frasier), 4 local TV, 1 network (WGN).
so, er none then.
I am not saying I'm better, but there's three worlds of difference between college radio and an entire TV news network looking to find the bomb that kills you.
5394
Post by: reds8n
In fairness I'd imagine he'd, you know, maybe mug up a bit on the topic if he was asked to do an interview. So he wouldn't come across as a moron.
And I'm sure he knows the difference between a country and a continent.
..his lipstick application skills is something I'm not even going to go near. 
5534
Post by: dogma
Frazzled wrote:
so, er none then.
I am not saying I'm better, but there's three worlds of difference between college radio and an entire TV news network looking to find the bomb that kills you.
Yeah, I was a talking head on network. Local I was a 'person of interest', but nothing Palinesque. But I'm also a grad student, not a Governator. She wasn't hit with anything difficult, and failed hard. Hell, my person of interest questions ("What is the population dispersal of Tutsis in Rwanda?") were harder
221
Post by: Frazzled
Probably helped if I watched her interviews in the first place... 
5534
Post by: dogma
The trick is to avoid anything that can be referenced.
Don't say "in 1842".
Say "in the 1800s"
221
Post by: Frazzled
I guess my standard response of
"what kind of stupid  question is that? Gak what a waste of skin," or "I have no recollection," probably wouldn't be the best answer then?
5534
Post by: dogma
One of my answers on college radio was 'can I have another drink?'
221
Post by: Frazzled
dogma wrote:One of my answers on college radio was 'can I have another drink?'
Sounds like a quality response to me.
5742
Post by: generalgrog
What gets lost in all the modern spit and polish of modern TV politics is that just because you don't interview well, doesn't mean your a moron or a good candidate. I often wonder how well Abraham Lincoln or George Washington would have done in todays political atmosphere. Teddy Roosevelt or John Adams would probably have done fine.
GG
221
Post by: Frazzled
Don't forget Lincoln debated for what hours or days or some nonsense? I'm thinking that boy could TALK.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
generalgrog wrote:What gets lost in all the modern spit and polish of modern TV politics is that just because you don't interview well, doesn't mean your a moron or a good candidate. I often wonder how well Abraham Lincoln or George Washington would have done in todays political atmosphere. Teddy Roosevelt or John Adams would probably have done fine.
GG
Hmm. That's interesting, because I always figured that public speeches and debates were a bigger part of a campaign then than they are now.
5534
Post by: dogma
generalgrog wrote:What gets lost in all the modern spit and polish of modern TV politics is that just because you don't interview well, doesn't mean your a moron or a good candidate. I often wonder how well Abraham Lincoln or George Washington would have done in todays political atmosphere. Teddy Roosevelt or John Adams would probably have done fine.
GG
I wouldn't take the historical angle that you did, but I agree about the relevance of public appearances to political ability.
14828
Post by: Cane
Check out this video on Palin's hypocrisy (yea yea big deal that a politician is hypocritical but its right up this topic's alley):
Sarah Palin: 'Whining' about media coverage 'bothers me'
Palin is known for her hostility towards the media. But she has not been so quick to decry tough scrutiny when it is pointed at other female targets: Hillary Clinton, example.
In August 2008, Palin lamented Clinton's complaints about unfair media coverage as 'whining' that is bad for female candidates everywhere
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_225955.html
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA15XU23kEc&eurl=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/06/sarah-palin-flashback-whi_n_225955.html&feature=player_embedded
----
generalgrog wrote:What gets lost in all the modern spit and polish of modern TV politics is that just because you don't interview well, doesn't mean your a moron or a good candidate. I often wonder how well Abraham Lincoln or George Washington would have done in todays political atmosphere. Teddy Roosevelt or John Adams would probably have done fine.
GG
I think 8 years of Bush Jr. proves your point wrong. I don't think Lincoln is the best example either since he was a master-debater (say that 10 times fast) and coined a type of competitive debate still going on today - Lincoln/Douglas Debates. According to his wiki he was known as the best Republican speaker after those debates.
7783
Post by: BloodofOrks
Both my Republican Grandmothers voted for Obama because of Palin. The last time my maternal Grandmother voted for a Democrat for President was John F. Kennedy.
Just sayin'.
5742
Post by: generalgrog
I don't know if it was because of Palin or what but my mom who has never voted Democrat voted for Obama this year. It blew me away.
GG
4869
Post by: ShumaGorath
Frazzled wrote:Her voice occasionally makes my spine hurt, like when 10 year old girls go supersonic.
But there is a market in the tea parties. That is a growing force that is not being covered by the maintstream media. Much as the Repblicans woul.d like to catch a hold of it they haven't. Both Rick Perry and Cornyn (US Senator and a bit of a power) were booed at the recent one they went to. People misperceive big time whats growing with that movement. It may be a nascent 3rd party. Frankly we need new blood, anything to get rid of the Washington Party.
Yeah, the American version of the BNP doesn't get much media coverage. The left wing prefers to act like they are just country bumpkin extremists (as they usually are) and the right wing prefers to pretend they don't exist because they are country bumpkin extremists. Amazingly enough the tea parties got huge right wing coverage due to foxes financial and media support of them, which is hilarious because they did so much to further hurt the image of the splintering conservative base. The right really needs to find it's center before it's extremists and moderates tear the party in half.
16435
Post by: Steel Rabbit
Yes! God bless America!
5470
Post by: sebster
It is true that politics is based largely around appearances. The ability to provide succinct catchphrases is a lot more important than the ability to fully understand an issue. This is why Bush was able to survive in debate with Gore despite Gore’s greater understanding of issues. To some extent it may even be a good thing, as you don’t necessarily want the guy with the most knowledge running the show, you want an effective communicator and leader.
But that was never the issue with Palin. She wasn’t struggling to properly express a complicated position. She just had no position, because she had no knowledge of national politics. As much as modern politics is all about maintaining message and keeping to key phrases, there is a minimum level of skill needed, below that it will become apparent even with the softball media most politicians stick to. Palin didn’t have the level skill needed to reach that bar, and it became obvious in an interview with Katie Couric.
I mean honestly, if you get hammered by Katie Couric it’s time to try your hand at something else. Automatically Appended Next Post: Grignard wrote: While I certainly disagree with many of Sarah Palin's professed beliefs, I believe that much of the criticism leveled toward her is based not on reason but on simple elitism.
There is a difference between standards and elitism. Perhaps some of the criticism of Palin was simple class snobbery. But the presence of poorly based criticism doesn't dismiss the abundance of legitimate criticism. Palin lacked basic knowledge in national politics. It is not elitism to say so.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Attacking her children had nothing to do with basic knowledge in national politics. The mainstream media crossed the line with her family, something they would never have done with any Democrat. Attacking her clothing purchases was sexist as well.
Thats what gave her support. Had they indeed, attacked her like any other candidate, much of that support would have fallen by the wayside.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Frazzled wrote:Her voice occasionally makes my spine hurt, like when 10 year old girls go supersonic.
But there is a market in the tea parties. That is a growing force that is not being covered by the maintstream media. Much as the Repblicans woul.d like to catch a hold of it they haven't. Both Rick Perry and Cornyn (US Senator and a bit of a power) were booed at the recent one they went to. People misperceive big time whats growing with that movement. It may be a nascent 3rd party. Frankly we need new blood, anything to get rid of the Washington Party.
There is a similar feeling abroad in the UK and EU generally, that big time politics has ceased to truly serve the interest of mere citizens and become a lucrative career option for a particular section of the power elite.
Sarah Palin's impact was due to her apparently being a 'down-home' wide and mother who wasn't part of the political insider system.
221
Post by: Frazzled
yep.
15025
Post by: youngblood
Kilkrazy wrote:
Sarah Palin's impact was due to her apparently being a 'down-home' wide and mother who wasn't part of the political insider system.
you betcha
13756
Post by: Mad Rabbit
Frazzled wrote:Attacking her children had nothing to do with basic knowledge in national politics. The mainstream media crossed the line with her family, something they would never have done with any Democrat. Attacking her clothing purchases was sexist as well.
Thats what gave her support. Had they indeed, attacked her like any other candidate, much of that support would have fallen by the wayside.
Honestly, when she runs as "a family candidate" and never shuts up about what a great mom she is, that MAKES her family something that the media will look into. I'm betting they would have done it if the Democrat used parenthood as a qualification to run a country.
In response to the clothing purchases, they attacked Edwards for how much time/money he spent on his hair. Vanity is an easy thing to attack in either sex.
5534
Post by: dogma
I'm going to agree with Fraz about the clothes. It was an unfair attack. When you jump into the national eye, you need the clothes to match.
221
Post by: Frazzled
dogma wrote:I'm going to agree with Fraz about the clothes. It was an unfair attack. When you jump into the national eye, you need the clothes to match.
Indeed, if they attacked every other Presidential candidate at the time for it, I would have been ok. You didn't think Obama's wardobe was something he threw together from the closet did you? It was sexist and caddy.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Women always take more flak than men on account of their wardrobe, hair, etc. And it is always sexist.
12983
Post by: Gobbla
Michelle Obama buys off the rack. Obama's suits look like they are not new, and maybe they fit him better before the campaign added a few pounds.
The bigger issue than clothes or hair or answering civics questions is Palin bail'n mid-term. A preview of how unstable any administration headed by her would have been or would be.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Gobbla wrote:Michelle Obama buys off the rack. Obama's suits look like they are not new, and maybe they fit him better before the campaign added a few pounds.
The bigger issue than clothes or hair or answering civics questions is Palin bail'n mid-term. A preview of how unstable any administration headed by her would have been or would be.
I call blinding levels of bull . http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090501123025AAQ9bzz http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gQmHcNZdSneEDrnU2F-DaS1yEDng http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/06/30/2009-06-30_michelle_obama_and_daughters_enjoy_paris_privilege_barred_to_millions_in_france_.html
16499
Post by: Tyras
ShumaGorath wrote:Frazzled wrote:Her voice occasionally makes my spine hurt, like when 10 year old girls go supersonic.
But there is a market in the tea parties. That is a growing force that is not being covered by the maintstream media. Much as the Repblicans woul.d like to catch a hold of it they haven't. Both Rick Perry and Cornyn (US Senator and a bit of a power) were booed at the recent one they went to. People misperceive big time whats growing with that movement. It may be a nascent 3rd party. Frankly we need new blood, anything to get rid of the Washington Party.
Yeah, the American version of the BNP doesn't get much media coverage. The left wing prefers to act like they are just country bumpkin extremists (as they usually are) and the right wing prefers to pretend they don't exist because they are country bumpkin extremists. Amazingly enough the tea parties got huge right wing coverage due to foxes financial and media support of them, which is hilarious because they did so much to further hurt the image of the splintering conservative base. The right really needs to find it's center before it's extremists and moderates tear the party in half.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the BNP is a racist / isolationist / nationalist movement right? And you're claiming that those attending tea parties are the same? Garaflo style? The tea parties started because people are angry with the reckless spending of their tax dollars, hence the tea party name "taxation without representation" for the current administration and congress being so out of touch with the American people's desires. It has since evolved to include people who are unhappy with policies outside of taxation and usage of that tax revenue.
If you are suggesting that the tea party movement is racist, isolationist, or nationalist you are wrong. It has been a smokescreen tactic of those who oppose the tea parties because it's easier to claim they are monsters than to address the issues they bring to light.
5534
Post by: dogma
Tyras wrote:
If you are suggesting that the tea party movement is racist, isolationist, or nationalist you are wrong. It has been a smokescreen tactic of those who oppose the tea parties because it's easier to claim they are monsters than to address the issues they bring to light.
I'd say the tea parties represent the very definition of nationalism. As in people expressing loyalty to the nation (a group of people defined by a common cultural heritage), as opposed to the state.
However, they certainly aren't racist. Nor are they necessarily isolationist, though given the current fascination with the 'evils of socialist Europe' I imagine there is a high rate of correlation.
16499
Post by: Tyras
I guess by nationalism I was referring to a less than favorable definition used by some to describe those who seek to "purify" their nation in accordance to what they have of their nation's image to the express exclusion of anybody that does not fit that image like immigrants, persons of a paticular religion etc, often by violent means.
5534
Post by: dogma
Yeah, the Nazi's pretty well scarred that word.
13756
Post by: Mad Rabbit
Tyras wrote:ShumaGorath wrote:Frazzled wrote:Her voice occasionally makes my spine hurt, like when 10 year old girls go supersonic.
But there is a market in the tea parties. That is a growing force that is not being covered by the maintstream media. Much as the Repblicans woul.d like to catch a hold of it they haven't. Both Rick Perry and Cornyn (US Senator and a bit of a power) were booed at the recent one they went to. People misperceive big time whats growing with that movement. It may be a nascent 3rd party. Frankly we need new blood, anything to get rid of the Washington Party.
Yeah, the American version of the BNP doesn't get much media coverage. The left wing prefers to act like they are just country bumpkin extremists (as they usually are) and the right wing prefers to pretend they don't exist because they are country bumpkin extremists. Amazingly enough the tea parties got huge right wing coverage due to foxes financial and media support of them, which is hilarious because they did so much to further hurt the image of the splintering conservative base. The right really needs to find it's center before it's extremists and moderates tear the party in half.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the BNP is a racist / isolationist / nationalist movement right? And you're claiming that those attending tea parties are the same? Garaflo style? The tea parties started because people are angry with the reckless spending of their tax dollars, hence the tea party name "taxation without representation" for the current administration and congress being so out of touch with the American people's desires. It has since evolved to include people who are unhappy with policies outside of taxation and usage of that tax revenue.
If you are suggesting that the tea party movement is racist, isolationist, or nationalist you are wrong. It has been a smokescreen tactic of those who oppose the tea parties because it's easier to claim they are monsters than to address the issues they bring to light.
"Taxation without representation" makes me laugh every time. I have no problem with these tea parties nor do I think that they are organized or attended by fascists or anything similar. But using the imagery of the Revolution is wildly inappropriate. I'm sorry that your side doesn't have a majority, but you are still represented in every branch of government. The other problem is that FOX supports them and distorts the facts surrounding them, especially by representing them as "grassroots" and lying about how many people attended. Other than that stain of FOX support, nothing wrong with them. Certainly nothing racist/isolationist about it.
5470
Post by: sebster
Frazzled wrote:Attacking her children had nothing to do with basic knowledge in national politics. The mainstream media crossed the line with her family, something they would never have done with any Democrat.
You mean people noting that Bristol got pregnant? To the extent that Palin continued to talk about abstinence only sex education, it is was reasonable to point out that her own teen daughter got pregnant, so it didn't work in at least that case.
Or do you mean something more vicious than that? Because I haven't seen anything more vicious coming from the mainstream media, unless you've decided Letterman counts.
Because there are all sorts of nasty attacks levelled by peripheral figures against all the candidates (see the purple heart bandaids and John Kerry, or the secret Muslim not really an American citizen gibberish and Obama). Which is ugly, but quite irrelevant to the campaign and political dialect. Whenever I see people complain about the viciousness of the attacks against Palin, they end up quoting anonymous bloggers on sites with about a dozen hits.
Attacking her clothing purchases was sexist as well.
Except that those attacks came from within the Republican party, when they were trying to allocate blame for the election defeat.
Thats what gave her support. Had they indeed, attacked her like any other candidate, much of that support would have fallen by the wayside.
Perhaps that's why Palin spent so much time making as big a deal of any criticism as she possibly could?
12983
Post by: Gobbla
Really? An expensive pair of shoes, bought OFF THE RACK, and a one dress a piece for Momma and the two girls, bought OFF THE RACK. All presumably paid for by the Obamas. That elevates my post to blinding BS? Really?
5534
Post by: dogma
Gobbla wrote:
Really? An expensive pair of shoes, bought OFF THE RACK, and a one dress a piece for Momma and the two girls, bought OFF THE RACK. All presumably paid for by the Obamas. That elevates my post to blinding BS? Really?
Yeah, a clothing rack stocked by designer merchandise. You tried to use the phrase 'off the rack' to conjure up images of spending on a budget, the simple fact that Michelle bought a $500 pair of shoes completely eliminates any relevance your post might have had.
Also, Palin's clothes were paid for by the campaign. Not tax payers. I find it ridiculous that you would consider it any way damning with respect to her character.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Why shouldn't Michelle Obama buy a $500 pair of shoes?
5534
Post by: dogma
It doesn't matter how much her shoes cost. The point was that Palin's clothing purchases are not anomalous with respect to national politicians.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
I doubt anyone ever got elected by buying their clothes secondhand from the Salvation Army charity shop.
9708
Post by: Orkeosaurus
I hear Obama just wore a robe and sandals.
Ba-dum ksh!
5470
Post by: sebster
You have presidential elections where both sides spend around a billion dollars. Which makes the cost of wardrobing slightly irrelevant.
But it needs to be remembered that story about Palin's shopping came from within the Republican party, by elements of the McCain camp who were not happy with how she conducted her part of the campaign. The relevance of Palin's shopping spree was that it was reportedly done without party approval - it was indicative of a loose attitude to regulation and control. This has been strengthened by the wide number of ethics complaints put forward about Palin during her short stint as Governor.
12983
Post by: Gobbla
dogma wrote:Gobbla wrote:
Really? An expensive pair of shoes, bought OFF THE RACK, and a one dress a piece for Momma and the two girls, bought OFF THE RACK. All presumably paid for by the Obamas. That elevates my post to blinding BS? Really?
Yeah, a clothing rack stocked by designer merchandise. You tried to use the phrase 'off the rack' to conjure up images of spending on a budget, the simple fact that Michelle bought a $500 pair of shoes completely eliminates any relevance your post might have had.
Also, Palin's clothes were paid for by the campaign. Not tax payers. I find it ridiculous that you would consider it any way damning with respect to her character.
Guess I'm glad you don't get to decide the relevance of my posts.
Secondly, "off the rack" means exactly that. Michelle Obama is famous for wearing non-designer, non-custom made clothes that can be purchased off the rack by any woman so inclined. Not a clotheshorse, not a big spender on clothes. Obviously, you nailed her with a pair of sneakers that you consider too expensive.
Finally, I didn't say anything about Palin's clothes; I thought that was all debunked. I was responding to this comment about Obama from you:
Frazzled wrote:dogma wrote:I'm going to agree with Fraz about the clothes. It was an unfair attack. When you jump into the national eye, you need the clothes to match.
Indeed, if they attacked every other Presidential candidate at the time for it, I would have been ok. You didn't think Obama's wardobe was something he threw together from the closet did you? It was sexist and caddy.
Every other Presidential candidate gets attacked, often unfairly. Getting attacked for clothes purchases pales in comparison to getting accused of palling around with terrorists. Palin can dish it out, but she really does not take it well. Her supporters find her behavior refreshing and original. To me, she comes off as petulant and erratic.
5534
Post by: dogma
Gobbla wrote:
Secondly, "off the rack" means exactly that. Michelle Obama is famous for wearing non-designer, non-custom made clothes that can be purchased off the rack by any woman so inclined.
Yes, any woman so inclined and possessed of a enough large sum of money. Even custom made clothing can be purchased by any woman so inclined given a large enough sum of money.
Also, off the rack clothes with designer labels are still designer clothes. No one in the world is going to claim that your Versace suit is not a Versaci suit because Giorgio Versace didn't make it for you himself.
Gobbla wrote:
Not a clotheshorse, not a big spender on clothes. Obviously, you nailed her with a pair of sneakers that you consider too expensive.
I don't care how much money they cost. You claimed that Michelle Obama bought clothes which were demonstrably different from the ones purchased by Sarah Palin. That is a nonsense claim because both of them have been shown shopping in designer stores.
Gobbla wrote:
Every other Presidential candidate gets attacked, often unfairly. Getting attacked for clothes purchases pales in comparison to getting accused of palling around with terrorists. Palin can dish it out, but she really does not take it well. Her supporters find her behavior refreshing and original. To me, she comes off as petulant and erratic.
The difference is that 'palling around with terrorists' would be a pretty big deal if the accusation turned out to have merit. Wearing designer clothing is irrelevant regardless of its truth.
5470
Post by: sebster
dogma wrote:The difference is that 'palling around with terrorists' would be a pretty big deal if the accusation turned out to have merit. Wearing designer clothing is irrelevant regardless of its truth.
The difference is that Palin said 'palling around with terrorists'. It is an accusation she is personally responsible for. To be willing to make accusations like that, but then cry foul about her spending habits? That's pretty silly.
For other people to talk about how she was treated harshly by the MSM when the story came from within her own party, and only came out after the election? That's plain crazy.
221
Post by: Frazzled
The story actually came out within days of her speech Sebster.
Note I am not defending Palin (see the voice/grating spine thing), but I am wholly attacking media attacks on a politician's family, of any political stripe.
I like the story best when a critic attacked Truman's daughter, who was giving a piano performance. According to stories he SHOWED UP at the paper and noted that said critic would get the old punch in the face if he did that again, that attacking him is fine but attacking his daughter would insure the old knuckle sandwich.
All the titans have gone and we are left with dwarves for heroes...
5534
Post by: dogma
sebster wrote:
The difference is that Palin said 'palling around with terrorists'. It is an accusation she is personally responsible for. To be willing to make accusations like that, but then cry foul about her spending habits? That's pretty silly.
True enough. Personally I would have been amused if the counter had been "But McCain pals around with state-fed Russian oligarchs". It wouldn't have been affective, but it would have amused me.
sebster wrote:
For other people to talk about how she was treated harshly by the MSM when the story came from within her own party, and only came out after the election? That's plain crazy.
I agree. I don't think she was treated unfairly during the campaign. I think this specific accusation was unfair, but that doesn't necessarily describe my opinion of her overall reception.
You are right though, it was interesting because it came from within her own party.
12983
Post by: Gobbla
Without all the attention of the MSM, there is no Sarah Palin. They made her a rock star politician.
According to Fox News, the reason Palin is leaving office early is that she can cash in on her celebrity. They calculated she can earn $20M this year with her book, TV appearances, and giving 50 speeches at $100K each. She can't take money for any of that while still in office. So, she will be able to buy her clothes anywhere she pleases. I don’t grasp how a politician who is popular with her supporters because she is down–to-Earth can stay popular with the same supporters after quitting mid-term to make big bucks.
Of course, in Palin’s mind, when the job gets tough and stops being fun, a “quitter” stays on till the end, and a “fighter who loves a challenge” quits.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Maybe she only wants the $20 mil and doesn't care about political popularity.
Let's wait and see what she does over the next few years.
2700
Post by: dietrich
Frazzled wrote:I like the story best when a critic attacked Truman's daughter, who was giving a piano performance. According to stories he SHOWED UP at the paper and noted that said critic would get the old punch in the face if he did that again, that attacking him is fine but attacking his daughter would insure the old knuckle sandwich.
All the titans have gone and we are left with dwarves for heroes...
OT. Truman is a vastly underrated President.
16499
Post by: Tyras
Gobbla, why should we give a flying turd what Michelle Obama wears? As long as she's not abusing her Husbands position to steal or get better deals who cares? Well alot of people I guess which is really sad, but she wasn't elected her husband was. To compare her with Palin, who was running for office, is not fair.
1941
Post by: Wolfstan
Ha, ha, ha. Saw an episode of the Daily Show last night and they played her resignation speech... wtf? Is she actually on this planet?
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
He had the disadvantage of following FD Roosevelt.
|
|
