Palin’s Small Town Values
Who doesn’t support small town values, right? Shucks even TIME magazine had an article about those small town values in the last issue. Mom, apple pie, sock hops and Sunday socials. When Sarah Palin quoted “a writer” about small towns in her acceptance speech, I wondered what writer? The answer came from RFK Jr. and the ever helpful wikipedia. I am sure gwb’s speech writer chooses his words very carefully, right?
Legacy
Interest in Pegler was recently revived when Republican Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin quoted him in her acceptance speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota. “We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty and sincerity and dignity”, she said, a Pegler quote that also appeared in the book “Right From the Beginning” by Pat Buchanan. Rather than acknowledging Pegler by name, Palin merely cites ‘a writer’. The speech was written by Matthew Scully, a senior speech writer for George W. Bush.
Following the Palin acceptance speech New York Times columnist Frank Rich elucidated the political significance of quoting Pegler. Mr. Rich noted that “Pegler was a rabid Joe McCarthyite who loathed F.D.R. and Ike and tirelessly advanced the theory that American Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe (“geese”, he called them) were all likely Communists.” He pointed out that Palin’s use of a quote from “once powerful right-wing Hearst columnist Westbrook Pegler” was intended to send a subtle but unmistakable signal to far right wing supporters.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the son of Senator Robert F. Kennedy, expressed outrage about Palin’s quoting of Pegler in her speech. Referring to Pegler as a “Fascist writer” and an “avowed racist”, he reminded readers of the fact that, when Senator Kennedy considered running for president in 1965, Pegler had expressed hope that ‘some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies.’
Pegler’s campaign as a Fascist (or “pro-Nazi” or “antisemite,” etc.) seems to have begun in the late 40s, when Pegler’s column intensified its swipes at such leftist politicians as Henry Wallace and pro-Wallace journalists such as Ralph Ingersoll of New York’s PM newspaper.
There you have it. Small town values like Pegler’s. Where violent words beget violent deeds. It is a lie to say that you are for decency when you include references from a fascist/anti-semite author in your GOP acceptance speech. It is a lie to say you will represent all the people of these United States when this is your dog whistle shout out to the not-so-far right wing. I am all for “honesty and sincerity and dignity” but I am beginning to suspect that some people may be severely lacking in just these crucial traits. Obama continues to appeal to the angels of our better nature, but some people are driven solely by demons.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Honestly, there is no such thing as small town values at all.
September 19th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Really? have you ever lived in a small town?
September 19th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Oh for crying out loud shcb.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:25 am
what?
September 20th, 2008 at 7:50 am
I lived in a small town in Arizona for a year when I was in Jr. High (some how John Cougar Mellencamp is in my head now. Argh). I’m not sure what the values are suppose to be, as everyone their seemed pretty screwed up. The kids there were so bored they would do things like: get pregnant, burn down buildings (churches, schools, the drive-in theater, etc.), make their own alcohol distillery, put straws into their parents gas tanks to sniff the fumes and get high, or pick on the new kid with statements like: “You better not be smart.” There must have been some inbreeding going on, because 1/2 the kids at school had the last name Fenn. One girl in our class had parents who each had a sex change operation, and were featured on the 1980 show “Real People.” The daughter was very popular. Our teacher would openly flirt with all the girls in our class, and later be prosecuted for child molestation to no ones surprise. Small town values? Fortunately, I only had to live there for about a year. I don’t know much about Alaska, but I hear they are all freaks up there too:
http://www.slate.com/id/2200404/
September 20th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Sven,
Excuse me for laughing a little, I mean no disrespect, but boy know how to find ‘em. That sound like the most screwed up town in America. Part of the problem you had is that you were a newcomer and didn’t stay very long. Small towns do tend to be suspicious of newcomers and the new kid is usually befriended by the kids that are something of outcasts. Small communities, whether it be a club or a town have their own inherent problems, no question. I would submit that what we all consider as small town values are as much out of necessity than that the people are “better”. Tthey tend to be more honest because if they aren’t everyone knows about it. The kids tend to be better behaved because everyone knows everyone else’s kids. The kids know this and know it will get back to the parents. Everyone goes to church, not because they are believers but because “people will talk” if they don’t.
All that said there is difference. My sister lives in a town of 900, I grew up in a town of 4,000, moved to Colorado and lived in suburbs of Denver 2 million or so meto, the suburbs were 80,000 to 200,000. For the last 10 years we have lived in a town of 18,000 or so that is being gobbled up by the metro area. There are definite differences as the villages have grown into towns and cities and back to towns throughout my life. For better or worse there are “small town values”
September 20th, 2008 at 10:22 am
I lived in small town of 10,000 growing up. I’ve spent entire summers with my grandmother in a much smaller town in Wisconsin. I think Sven’s experience is not unique: small towns are utterly boring and closed minded. I bootstrapped myself the heck out of there as soon as I reached the age of majority. I volunteered for service, went traveling, eventually back to school, lived in NYC (great place, the people are incredibly kind), Chicago (weather too cold) and San Francisco (too foggy in the summers, otherwise best place on earth ;-)
The point here is that Sarah Palin and gwb’s speechwriter knew exactly who they were telegraphing these messages to: the right wing. If they had wanted to reach out to the center or (gasp) everyone, there were dozens of good picks, Palin or quote. They could have omitted the shout out to the Pegler-types and dressed it up as “we Americans grow great people, people with honesty and dignity, creativity and perseverance, giving, caring, understanding accepting people”. Read shcb’s comment above: he honestly thinks small town people are more honest, sincere and dignified than anyone else. pfffffft (that’s a Bronx Cheer rendered in ascii)
They made a choice to align themselves with the neonazis, the bigots and the violent. It’s who they are. That is your party now shcb, you must be so proud.
September 20th, 2008 at 11:15 am
shcb: no need to excuse yourself. I’m glad my absurd small town tale was good for a laugh.
By the way, I was googling about my old small town, and found this very entertaining: The current mayor there is Mark Fenn. I believe I had a Mark Fenn or two (or three?) in my class, although they were probably some of his many cousins. Apparently he’s under investigation for some emails he sent, abuse of his power, and wrongful termination of the city manager. Somehow, this all sounds very familiar.
http://www.cavefm.com/Politics2.htm
September 20th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Yeah, I have spent, at this stage, the vast majority of my life in small towns. I grew up in a totally rural area (pop of about 2700 currently), went to high school in the same, went to college in a small town (pop. 23,000) and now after about 7 or so years in Cleveland suburbs I moved to another small town (pop. 38,000) for a job. There is no such thing as small town values at all. I feel like I can say with absolute authority there is no such thing as small town values. There are just people, good and bad, people weren’t any better when I lived in the city.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:22 am
For what it’s worth here is an interesting article about Pegler from W. F. Buckley
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/03/01/040301fa_fact_buckley?currentPage=all
September 21st, 2008 at 4:19 pm
jayson, exactly. Just people, bored out of their minds.
shcb, nice the way Buckley referred to the Kennedy thing without actually saying what it was he said. Nothing in that entire article diminishes what I wrote about Pegler or his small town values and his long history of being an enormous right wing asshat.
September 21st, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Enky,
I think if anything the Buckley article reinforces your points. I’ve never read anything by Pegler, this is the first I’ve heard of him. What I found interesting was how similar his and your styles seem to be, that somehow the mere act of being contrary and belligerent somehow gives you superiority over your unfortunate victims.
It’s funny how you guys are all liberals and have had such bad experiences in small towns. Maybe you have to be conservative to appreciate small town values. I’ve never been bored in a small town, we always found plenty to do, still do.
September 21st, 2008 at 7:48 pm
really? Pegler’s style is similar to mine?
that is comically wrong (as usual)
please show me once, just once where I threatened death to someone I disagreed with… just once. Your rwnj language is full of hate and violence (“executed if not burned at the stake” the whole shootin them bad prairie dogs thing or some of the less wholesome rwnj comments on this site and basically every other open comments site on the internets). Let me save you the time: you will not find it. Ever.
Including Pegler’s phrase in the GOP VP’s acceptance is a shout out to the most radical elements in America today. Forgive me if I read it any other way than as a threat of assassination to my candidate.
btw – what ever happened to those three guys, caught with rifles (including a scoped rifle), bulletproof vests, walkie talkies, disguises, a rented truck not in their name (who’s name was it registered in?) and some meth? In Denver? The ones who admitted to wanting to assassinate Obama? gee, I wonder what happened to them? Oh, that’s right! nothing…
No. I will not allow you to equate my mockery of the corrupt and decaying corpus of right wing nutjobbery with Pegler’s call to assassinate RFK (and anyone who would stand in the way of the right wing dominance of America and the world).
All that is necessary for evil to be triumphant is for good men and women to do nothing.
Count me on the side of good, of light, of non-violence and understanding. On the side of Liberalism. If you find my humor too biting for your taste, please eat elsewhere. Or enjoy the bitter taste.
September 21st, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Jayson / shcb,
I’m with you, all kinds of different people in this world.
shcb, in answer to your “what?” I was anticipating your ignoring the point of Enkidu’s article (Sarah Palin dog whistling the Neo-nazies to her side) and dragging this into an irrelevant discussion about small town values being superior to the values of city folks. But I sat it out, and the discussion went well, but would you just stop being so damn nice lately you are starting to freak me out.
FYI, to digress, I tend to prefer people from small towns, and I’ve lived in all sizes of places from a short stint in a prairie town of about 500, and other small prairie towns to Vancouver with what, 3 million? Yes there can sometimes big difference between city folk and people in small towns, but it’s not really about values. You can’t say something like, people in small towns value friendship more, or care more about the environment, or whatever, because there are too many exceptions. If you found surveys I bet they would show there’s as much difference between small towns as there are between a small town and a big city.
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:05 am
Knarly/Jayson,
No doubt there are good people and bad people both places, as I said in my first post on this subject I think it is as much the situation as that people are “better”. You have to be more honest because everyone knows you, you have a limited number of folks you can screw before you have no more business. After a while it becomes a lifestyle, and those lessons are passed to the next generation. The small town effect for better or worse is getting less and less as transportation and communication gets better, the question is will those values be diluted into the urban areas or will they disappear?
Enky, I said you have similar styles, not the same. Pegler was a conservative, we like to kill things, what can I say, there is permanence about it that we like.
I don’t know what happened to those guys with the rifles and such, I’ll see if I can find out. I can assure you there isn’t some right wing conspiracy, Denver is as left wing Democratically controlled as Boulder. I do need to apologize to the City of Denver here though, I didn’t think they were ready for the rabble rousers, but Mayor Hick and his guys played them like a fiddle. The crowning play was when they erected a fence around civic center park after midnight the night before Glen S had planned his big demonstration. Glen woke the next morning to find his venue inaccessible. He cried to the media that the City had broken the law, the city manager with his best poker face betrayed by just a hint of a smile at the edges said it was just a standard precaution to keep people out of the park while they set up stages and such for the Taste of Colorado. Bully!! To the mayor and his boys.
Could it be that she and the speech writer just liked the quote? I kind of liked Stalin’s quote that the American left were “useful idiots” but I don’t much care for anything else he said or did.
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:11 am
Psst, Knarly,
Just between you and I, I really didn’t mean to take the thread off course that much, I just didn’t see much point in Enky’s thought process. But after it headed in another direction, completely derailing Enky’s thread I did have a little Dick Morris inspired pride. Don’t tell the other guys (and occasional girl).
you have to admit I did bring it back after a while, small town values I guess, alway return what you borrow :-)
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:25 am
whatever you say shcb ;-)
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:43 am
I live in a city of 500,000 or so & the folks in my neighborhood all return what they borrow.
September 24th, 2008 at 9:23 am
So you did get your “Order of Death” DVD back, then? Good!
September 24th, 2008 at 9:47 am
By the way Inky, I forgot to extend congratulations on graduating to bona fide thread-originator at Lies.com. It says volumes about JBC’s dedication to insightful, adult, political discussion that you’re officially “on the team,” as it were.
September 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Oh for crying out loud Leftbutt.
September 24th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Hi I’m John McCain.
The fundamentals of our economy our strong.
(4 days pass…)
We need to suspend the presidential campaign, the economy is in crisis.
This has nothing to do with the whole Palin thing back-firing, or with me slumping in the polls.
We need to suspend the debates scheduled for Friday night.
The last thing the American people need to hear right now is their next
president talk about how to make us strong again.
—
lol seriously, is this shit for real?
September 24th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
besides your mocking of McCain, NL, the next best ridicule I’ve heard is a report of what Letterman said:
David Letterman tells audience that McCain called him today to tell him e had to rush back to DC to deal with the economy, Letterman was as incredulous as NL:
September 25th, 2008 at 5:12 am
All of this also shows a severe lack of priorities on McCain’s part. I mean seriously, how could any national financial crisis be more important than an opportunity to shoot the shit with David Letterman on the “Late Show?” And how dare anyone place the CBS Evening News over the “Late Show” in any context? This is David Letterman we’re talking about here.
September 25th, 2008 at 5:36 am
That’s David Letterman, Son. D-A-V-I-D Fucking Letterman, from Indiana!
September 25th, 2008 at 5:52 am
Gretta started her show last night with the statement that one of these men may have just maade the biggest mistake of their political careers. I think she might be right, the question is who? Newt said if all they are going to do is vote for the Bush plan they should have the debates, he thinks this is the worst idea he has seen in his career. Quite a few Republicans seem to agree. So there is some work that needs to be done here. Jack Welch said this deal has to be done by Monday, tomorrow would be better. There is no real rush for this debate, no deadlines to keep.
This canard that a president can do two things at once is going to backfire. This is about priorities. This plays into McCain’s statements last year that he would rather lose an election than lose a war. He also has something of a stake in this situation since he at least initially co-sponsored SB-109 in the 2005 session. So he can at least add something to the debate from the regulatory side of this bill. I don’t think Obama has authored, sponsored, or cosponsored any bill that would be relevant here but that’s ok, he is a junior Senator and still learning. How they vote, and the statements they make in these debates will be more informative to voters who haven’t made up their minds that the debate anyway… and we can still have the debate next week.
September 25th, 2008 at 6:11 am
NL,
The economy is still strong, we are trying to get ahead of this thing before it gets otherwise. Kind of like the 25% of the Bush Doctrine Charlie Gibson understands, that it is better to invade a country before they have reached their military objectives than after.
September 25th, 2008 at 6:13 am
Oops, SB 190, dyslexia rears its ugly head again.
September 25th, 2008 at 7:19 am
SHCB – Which candidate ultimately made the mistake will depend upon how the public at large views McCain’s (feigned) campaign suspension. If the public sees his move as an embracing of Senatorial responsibility over campaign politics, he gets to appear dutiful and Obama appears lacking. If the Obama campaign can convince people that all this is a stumble out of the harsh spotlight by a staggered McCain campaign, it increases his standing. This is one of the few instances where McCain has managed to make himself the pivot on which the campaign turns and it will be interesting to see how it pans out.
NL – How has the Palin thing “backfired’ exactly? She’s still popular with the people who are inclined to vote for her, and a lot more popular with voters outside that “usual suspects” block of voters than John McCain is. She gets more press than either McCain or Obama, and has virtually stolen the touchy-feely women’s magazine press right out from under Barack Obama and his family, who have courted that market hard.
As far as the criticism against her, who has ever seriously damaged the electability of a Republican candidate by 1) calling attention to the candidate’s Christianity 2) identifying that candidate with small towns or 3) tried to make connections between the candidate and some ancient right wing pundit nobody’s ever heard of? So far, the biggest thing anyone can sort of kind of pin on her is that she tried to have her sister’s ex husband fired – and anybody who thinks that’s actually going to damage her standing with women voters knows very little about women, indeed.
Please note, as none of you actually will, that I’ve stopped way short of actually defending the woman – I just hardly see her as “backfiring” against the McCain campaign. If anything, her selection might have revitalized a campaign that was far past old news when she came around.
September 25th, 2008 at 7:46 am
LB,
You are absolutely right, this move by McCain is a combination of heartfelt responsibility and political maneuvering. Is it 80-20 one way or the other, who knows. The one thing I think it does is send Obama into something of a defensive posture, I can’t help but think Obama said “damn, why didn’t I call for a postponement first”. Obama is doing the right thing strategically now, but he lost the advantage of this situation momentarily at least. Bush of course helped McCain by summoning both men to the White House today, this too is a combination of strategery and actual need. McCain is still behind so he can afford to be a little more gutsy, needs to be actually. McCain, or his advisors are running this campaign like a war, you don’t win or lose with one battle, you win by winning many small battles, holding as much ground you gain as possible and lose a little as possible when you are forced to retreat.
September 25th, 2008 at 8:23 am
SCHB – If Bush has summoned both men to the White House, the whole issue is campaign suspension is pretty much moot, since neither man can say the other didn’t drop the campaign to step up in time of crisis. Neither has an advantage over the other, since both have been required by the President to do only what they are obligated to do as Senator. This debate that a few people are so up in arms about is also in jeopardy as a playing card, since it might not happen anyway if both men are in Washington.
It’s hard to see who comes out of this financial crisis a clear winner, since both candidates have reacted to it so shabbily. McCain was telling us, as recently as last week, that the economy was in good shape so he certainly has some crow to eat. On the other hand, the Obama campaign really hasn’t offered much in the way of specifics, much less solutions (as NPR put it the other day, Obama seemed “unsure what was happening, but whatever it is it’s George Bush’s fault,) and has spent as much time crying about a debate that could certainly be moved without too much hardship for anyone, as they have dealing with what has already been called an impending “economic Pearl Harbor.”
September 25th, 2008 at 9:08 am
That’s a good point, it takes the suspension of the campaign off the table at least from a personal appearance standpoint, McCain’s suspension of campaign ads still stands, of course that is probably more to save money. That is probably getting too arcane for the common voter. McCain can still claim he was first to suspend the campaign and Bush calling them to Washington takes away the advantage Obama would have from fulfilling his whistle stops, which isn’t much in the grand scheme of things I wouldn’t think. But this is a battle of inches. As usual, it isn’t so much the situation but what each man makes out of the situation that determines the winner or loser.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:35 am
If McCain can’t be bothered to show up and vote for most of this year… his economic policies have swung from ‘everything is great for us rich folk!’ to ‘running around in a panic’… to finally trying to seize the newscycle by putting his campaign on hold (tho still running attack ads, of course). If McCain hasn’t bothered to read the latest three page $700 Billion request from Paulson/Bush, then he’d better start paying attention and learn how to walk and chew gum at the same time. If he can’t debate and pay attention to his Senate duties, then that pretty much puts the final judgement on his inability to fulfill the duties of the Presidency. Epic fail.
We were rushed into the whole Iraq thing, now they are pushing the panic button to give away over a Trillion dollars of our money to the richest (actually it is debt, since we are already broke). I’d tell Paulson and Bush to stick it without we the people getting their money’s worth. Why did these folks wait until almost October before doing anything? It’s the typical R ‘October surprise’ (altho the way McCain is cratering, they’ll have to cook up an Iranian military thing in a couple weeks). Bush’s mushroom clouds of financial doom sound just like his pitch for Iraq. We’ll do something to shore up our financial institutions, but the fat cats who screwed up need to pay. Oversight, ownership and responsibility or no deal. Even the decent Rs are pushing for better terms etc.
Say, doesn’t the R party platform include a plank about not using public money to bail out private enterprise? Another pesky liberal fact.
Welcome back from the gimp room lefty!
I notice you don’t refute any of the facts from my post – quoting Pegler is a shout out to the worst in America. Fact. “Honesty and sincerity and dignity” seem to be in very short supply over on the R side.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:44 am
Yes, and the stakes are much higher now than they have ever been, since this is the first time either candidate has been called on to actually deal with a real world crisis. Up until now, this campaign has been based almost exclusively on McCain and Obama’s ability to mold themselves into whichever vaguely defined “Daddy figure” their supporters seem to expect them to be (“hip” dad versus “stern and dutiful veteran” dad.) In any case, this is certainly the first matter to emerge during this election cycle where each candidate’s opinion wasn’t a forgone conclusion, just as each man’s reaction might actually be expected to have immediate real world consequences.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:47 am
That “yes” was for SHCB, by the way, and should be construed as a continuation of our conversation.
Not that I mean to shortsheet Enkidu or his astute commentary by ignoring it, even though that’s exactly what I’m doing.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Besides Inky, what more do you want from me? I said it was very nice that JBC has made you “official,” and even complimented the seamless way in which your, um, elevated tone blends into the overall “Lies.com” vibe as it has developed. What else can I say? Your tie looks nice? You’ve lost weight? What?
I guess this will be taken the wrong way too, but I think it was amazingly astute of you to recognize the Peglar quote after so long. True, I can remember basic details of many of the bedtime stories my parents read me growing up, but to recognize an exact quote from something your “genocidal, racist” father might have read you when you were four or five is amazing. I mean, that must have been at least ten years ago…
September 25th, 2008 at 10:08 am
shcb,
yea, its a battle of tactics right now, but the winner will be the one with the best long term strategy. McCain’s been going from one tactic to another at the expense of a cohesive long term strategy e.g. surprise appointment of Palin a governor intricately connected to the very Washington Pork spending bills that he supposedly is against. Obama has not strayed to far from his strategy of unity, e.g. calling McCain to request cooperation in preparing a joint statement in support of finding a bipartisan package to land the current pilot-less financial debacle (and what did McCain do then? Walked to centre stage in a poor John Wayne immitation to announce he was suspending his campaign to go to Washington because the country needed him, as if that wasn’t simply his biggest campaign stunt yet and yet another surprise tactic.)
What would be smartest is for tomorrow’s debate to go forward as scheduled, but change the topic from “foreign relations” to “fiscal policy, finances and the economy”.
Yea, David Letterman. Sometimes it’s how a candidate treats the little people that really shows their true character. Man was Letterman pissed off. And not so much at the brazen political stunt of McCain pretending that he had more important things to do that debate issues in front of the American people. He was pissed of that during his telephone conversatino McCain stated flat out that he was rushing immediately to the airport to fly back to Washington because the crisis was that urgent, however, that was another brazen lie directly from McCain, as some 5 hours later he was still in the city doing an interview with CBS! Is that a big deal to anyone but Letterman? No, unless you want to support a candidate who can be trusted with his word rather than a candidate like McCain who lies so continuously and casually that it crosses the line into pathology.
Someone made the ridiculous comment that one of the candidates have not done presented anything substantive towards a solution, but they got the name wrong. It is McCain who’s added nothing of value, merely pushing his ignorant and dirty persona (see NY Times article about his campaign manager’s $30,000 per month over 5 years lobbyist fees from Freddie Mac interests, investigation continues into what was being done for the scaled down $15,000 per month for the last year while McCain’s campaign manager was supposedly not doing lobbyist work – i.e then why were they giving him 15 k per month?) Anyway, the joint statement from these two candidates was as lame as anything I’ve ever seen, but Obama had matters of substance to add:
The big deal is that if they miss this debate the logistics and scheduling will almost certainly mean that one of the debates will need to be cancelled. Anyone care to guess whether that will be one of the 3 presidential debates or the VP debate? Any bets that McCain’s next tactic will be to replace the VP debate with one of the Preseidential debates, thus saving Palin from utter humiliation by Bidden?
And, for your enjoyment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjkCrfylq-E
September 25th, 2008 at 10:10 am
LB
… and since they are both senators they can actually do something about it, in real time, as the election cycle is in progress. As opposed to the usual construction of two governors or a congressman and a governor in our elections.
I think that is worth postponing a debate only a handful of undecided voters will watch.
September 25th, 2008 at 10:17 am
The VP debate would be the best for the McCain campaign to avoid, yet the hardest one to back out of, since backing out would admit that Palin is outmatched by Bidden. It might also, however, be the least important of the debates for either side to win. The only Vice-Presidential debate most people remember is Lloyd Bensen’s dissection of Dan Quayle. Bensen’s clear victory, complete with its historically snarky soundbyte, meant nothing in the end.
September 25th, 2008 at 10:25 am
SHCB – agreed on both points
September 25th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Now if only Obama can find a way to prevent McCain from weaseling out of all the remaining debates as more depressing economic news trickles in over the next few weeks.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:05 am
That won’t be an issue. McCain couldn’t dodge all the debates, even if he wanted to…that and Obama is hardly an insurmountable debate opponent. He certainly didn’t run away with all the Democratic debates, any more than McCain embarrassed himself over much in the Republican ones.
These are both men who do their best talking to themselves in a room full of supporters, however, so there’s still a lot of doubt in my mind how decisive any of these debates will be. I mean, of how much genuine drama can there be in a debate between Obama and McCain regarding foreign policy, which pretty much means the War in Iraq? If you don’t know where each of them stand on the war by this time, you really haven’t been paying attention, and how likely is it that either of them are going to say anything they haven’t said in one form or another a million times already. You and I could probably sit down right now and, between the two of us, write out every answer either candidate will give almost word for word right now. The primary debates on both sides provided nothing so much as ample airtime for each candidate to reiterate his carefully prepared talking points – there’s little indication the final debates will be any more compelling.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:13 am
yea, might as well just cancel them all right now.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:26 am
The debates are still important because there is certain percentage of undecided voters that will watch them and make their decision based primarily on the debates. One of our maintenance guys is like that, he feels he is an informed voter because he takes the time to watch all the debates, and in the realm of the uninformed voter he probably is relatively well informed. So what may be a repetitious answer to the nth degree to us may be new to him.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Why?
September 25th, 2008 at 11:34 am
That “why” is to Knarly, not SHCB.
September 25th, 2008 at 11:37 am
As in why should we cancel the debates?
September 25th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
You’re right of course, SHCB, and voters like your friend in maintanence are really the only voters either candidate are even talking to at this point in the race. I’m not downplaying the importance of debates so much as I am questioning the whether or not a decisive winner will emerge from them. A lot of people are expecting something really dramatic to emerge from the debates, and I frankly doubt there will. Still, that’s no reason to cancel them, and I fail to see why Knarly wants to, unless it plays into some fine point of the Canadian politics I’m not aware of.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
funny you should ask because the “reasons,” such as they are, are cited in your own recent (11:05) post; “might as well just cancel them all right now” is sarcasm.
Wow, is Palin ever a powerhouse for the campaign! That’s more sarcasm, and if you wonder why it is sarcasm, just listen to Palin’s inept handling of questions about the mortgage company (Freddie Mac) lobbyist that is McSames freakin’ campaign manager (of all things LOL!!!) or her stunning lack of examples (at the end of this clip) thus utter lack of evidence to support her false claim that her candidate is the maverick in Washington who worked towards implementing bills that provided proper oversight of mortgage lending and financial services when in fact McSame has supported every de-regulation measure that has led to this financial fiasco: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP12aNzocSc
The number and depth of Palin’s inadequacies as a VP candidate are so shocking that she makes Dan Quail look like JFK in comparison!
September 25th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Knarly – Obviously, my 11:05 post was over your head. Hopefully my 12:09 post, which uses less words, clarifies the point I was trying to make. If it doesn’t, ask Mom or Dad to read both posts aloud to you, and feel free to ask as many questions as you need.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I wonder if Sarah Palin can spell Dan Quayle’s name correctly?
September 25th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
No, I understand your blathering just fine: you think the debates provide some value for low info voters but otherwise provide little value in terms of real drama or new information and are mostly just another venue to re-state carefully prepared talking points.
Hence, my sarcasm that the campaigns might as well just cancel the debates (e.g. and instead send out more campaign flyers or something like that.) Do you understand that sarcasm now?
Do you see the irony in the utter hypocricy of McCain making the influence of lobbyists a major campaign plank and then we learn that his freakin Campaign Chairman (no less!) has been collecting $360,000 annually for half a decade at least as payment to lobby for continued de-regulation of the mortgage industry??? It would be more hilarious if it weren’t so insane.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
“No, I understand your blathering just fine: you think the debates provide some value for low info voters but otherwise provide little value in terms of real drama or new information and are mostly just another venue to re-state carefully prepared talking points…”
Well?
September 25th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
I bet she could, I think of quail (timid bird) when I remember Quayle, hence the mistake. It’s not so strange that to you the spelling of a name would be worthy of comment as a VP competency rather than the honesty that Palin so obviously lacks.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
well what?
September 25th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Am I wrong?
September 25th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
usually
September 25th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Which of you is playing Abbott and which Costello?
September 25th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
LB,
What I meant by the whole Palin thing back-firing is that the plan to woo large amounts of women voters – and in particular Clinton supporters – just because they share having a uterus in common, has completely back-fired. You’re right, she did rally the base of the party.
But I think the more people are seeing of her, and the more she gets scrutinized like every other candidate, she becomes less attractive. In all senses of the word.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Tangentially relating back to the original post, what do you guys think of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7vfMIQIpII
September 25th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
SHCB – I don’t think we’re Abbott and Costello, Inky and I. We’re more Laurel and Hardy. he’s the one with the cute little dewdrop.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Jason – Near the end of the video, the pastor uses the phrase “we rebuke all forms of Witchcraft.” I guess that means Palin has cost McCain that all-important Wicca vote. I guess you and Nightshde really are going to have to vote vote for Obama now, Inky…
September 25th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
NL – You and I are in agreement that selecting Palin was an utterly naked attempt to co-opt the Hillary vote on the most superficial level. We just disagree on how successful it might have been. Sarah Palin has captured the imagination of a lot of voters in a way I find incomprehensible, but her appeal is real to many, and there is very little any of her critics are throwing at her that seems to stick. The decision to run Sarah Palin was a bad decision made for all the wrong reasons. It deserves to be a crashing failure, but I don’t see much evidence that it is.
Considering that only half the country votes and nearly half of that half always votes Republican, McCain doesn’t need all that many “undecided” voters, or even ship-jumping Democrats to tip the scales in his favor come November. All I’m saying is that, although you and I aren’t fans, Sarah Palin evidently hits a mark with some of those people that McCain really didn’t before she signed on.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
And Knarly, I asked you a question a little while ago. Have you composed yourself enough to answer it yet, or are your airspeed vs the angle of approach equations still off?
September 25th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
LB,
To the A & C comment, I meant you and Knarly, you were doing the “what?” “who?” routine. He wanted you to answer his question, but when you did in a way he wasn’t expecting he didn’t realize you had answered him. I’ve been on the receiving end of that one so many times it was comical to see it from outside.
Back to Palin, I’m one of those that is excited by her. I don’t much care one way or the other about her personally yet since so little is known. I was just excited that we in the Republican party had someone like her. I haven’t quite forgiven McCain for campaign finance reform and it was refreshing to see a real conservative. She brings a lot more people to our side or at least makes them think about coming to our side than just Hillary leftovers. I don’t know if that was the intent or not, I think McCain thought she would help the ticket in more ways than the woman vote but he has also been as shocked as anyone. Kind of like the coach that calls the screen pass to get the 4 yards for the first down and ends up with a touchdown, he doesn’t call it back and tell the officials to take the points off the board, he looks at his playbook like he had it planned all along.
September 25th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
I thought the whole point of her was to get the evangelical vote, which was an iffy proposition for McCain. In symbolic terms I see her place in the campaign, in practical terms I still don’t see anything to be excited about.
September 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Jason – That’s because, in practical terms, there isn’t anything to get excited about – but a lot people are still excited. If this election has shown us anything, it’s that the ability of practically every sector of the American body politic to get excited over practically nothing is virtually inexhaustable. Remember how women used to cry and gnash their teeth at the podium when Obama spoke? That wasn’t politics – that was nuts, and it’s that same kind of nuts that’s turning Sarah Palin into a folk hero. This is merely competant people passing themselves off as Paul Bunyon-sized American icons because they provide a blank slate for their respective supporters to hang whichever symbolic baggage they need to see displayed.
Knarly – Let me rephrase my earlier question for you: If jet fuel burns at a maximum temperature of 1800 degrees Fahrenheit, but steel will not melt below 2500 degrees Fahrenheit, what, exactly, should inspire me to expect more from the upcoming debates than I obviosly do? If a plane were to crash into a steel-frame building at top speed, would I feel more enthusiastic about either of these men, and would I stop noticing what I feel are obvious deficits in the rhetoric both employ, and look more forward to hearing that rhetoric repeated again for the umteenth time in the formal setting of a debate? At what temperature would I lose the feeling that this week has presented the first real challenge either has been asked to address as a presidential candidate, and that neither of them has offered anything of any service to anyone?
September 25th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Lefty – Yeah, pretty much.
September 25th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Funny what idiots assume when you step away from the computer for a few hours! shcb thinks I was surprised by lefty’s response; Lefty’s ego told him I was so astonished by his posts that I needed time to compose myself. Just goes to prove those too mostly live in their little fantasy worlds.
So to answer Lefty’s original question if he’s wrong about the debates being boring except to the low info voters, I’d say that depends on what a person is looking to find in the debates and that Lefty would probably be best qualified to answer what use the debates are to low info voters.
Yes, I’m more interested in these debates than the last US presidential elections, because I’m interested in whether Obama’s public persona of cool diplomacy and being above the juvenile crap and dirty tricks that has now defined the Republican party since Rove’s rise to power, and whether McCain’s lies will become transparent under the lenses Obama shows the viewers. However, I’ve got better things to do than sit in front of TV watching such a foreign news broadcast of lame schoolyard theatre that is dressed up by your US media as supposed intelligent debate.
That brings me back to the first part of your last post, the part to Jason to which he “pretty much” agrees. Your concept can be summed up as there being too kinds of voters, those who look at issues and try to make intelligent decisions, and those who go with their gut or rely on their emotional response. Unfortunately so many people fall into the latter category, not just in America but in every democracy. As shcb noted, Churchill put it well: Democracy is not the best political system, but it is better than every other alternative.
September 25th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
two
September 26th, 2008 at 4:45 am
Knarly – That was pretty good. You should write political analysis for “Grit.”
September 26th, 2008 at 6:07 am
Knarly,
Your third paragraph, I’m guessing you weren’t paying that close attention to American politics prior to 2000, both men in this election are showing greater restraint than throughout our history. Even Dick Morris was more brutal than Rove, and Morris is a Republican working for a Democrat!
Last paragraph, Of course there are many reasons people vote the way they do, there are people that look at issues and try and make informed decisions but go with their gut anyway. Then there are those like me that vote a straight ticket no matter who is running. The distribution would look more like a star than a line. But for the sake of argument it is easier to combine several of the points of the star into a line. Most of the people that watch the debates have already made up their minds, they are watching to reinforce their decision, so the candidates are preaching to the choir. The undecided voters for the most part just aren’t that interested in politics, their priorities are simply on something else. If 20% of the voters are undecided, maybe 10 or 20 % of those will bother to watch the debates. That’s my gut feel :-)
September 26th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Yeah, why are these debates on a Friday night anyway?! Bet not many viewers from the 18-34 crowd watching!
September 26th, 2008 at 9:07 am
shcb,
yes, not sure what you mean by “star” but agree there are many variations of voters and splitting them into 2 types is overly artificial; impressed you could straighten your star out into those 2 camps for the sake of continuity of this thread.
Lefty, I’m not familiar with Grit, but coming from you I should probably assume that was insulting…
NL – That’s probably part of the reason they are scheduled Fri night. The other part is if the debate turns out to be very very bad news for a candidate, well, apparently late Friday is when conventional wisdom says that the damage from bad news is minimized.
September 26th, 2008 at 9:17 am
The Letterman factor: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080926.wletterman_mccain0926/BNStory/Front
September 26th, 2008 at 9:54 am
this is the only one that is on a Friday, the others are on a tuesday, wednesday and thursday
September 26th, 2008 at 9:55 am
guess they didn’t want to compete with Monday Night Football
September 26th, 2008 at 10:48 am
shcb – btw you are right, my interest in American politics pre-2000 was far more sporadic than now (other than a fascination with watching the Watergate hearings as a kid). So I appreciate your added historical context.
September 26th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Foolish McCain. The jury reaches a verdict: McCain’s tactics undermine his campaign strategy:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/100484/mccain%27s_campaign_is_a_train_wreck%3A_premature_ad_declares_he_won_debate/
and McCain’s campaign keeps piling on the mistakes:
“Adding to the rocky perception was a McCain campaign web ad released this morning declaring “McCain Wins Debate!” — put out even before the candidate had announced he was planning to debate.”
September 26th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
http://flickr.com/photos/jbcurio/262022418/
September 26th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Gotta go…the debate’s on and Obama’s already laid hands on six lepers and commanded a lame begger to walk…
September 27th, 2008 at 5:50 am
Well how did the debate go? We went to dinner with my granddaughter so all I got to see was the last ten minutes or so. I watched a little of the analysis on Fox News, one of the guys said if it were an eight round fight he would have given the first round (question, since there were eight questions) to Obama and the other seven to McCain with no knockout and not even a knockdown.
September 27th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
A poll released today showed 51% thought Obama won. 39% for McCain.
I watched the replay this morning and would have to agree, Obama came across with more thoughful solutions and overall, looked much more presidential.
Especially considering most of the debate was on foreign policy.
September 27th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
I’m reading the transcript now, I’m about a quarter of the way through. I haven’t seen much to be impressed with Obama about and I have found several areas where I thought McCain could have nailed Obama and didn’t, now of course I’m looking at it on Monday morning and I didn’t have a 250 pound linebacker in my face. The little I saw and the little I have read I though McCain was more presidential, but we probably disagree because we want a different type of president. I’m sure they were both fatigued and it seemed like Lehrer had them off balance a little. It seemed like they were prepared to give their stump speeches but were a little uncomfortable going one on one, Obama more than McCain. I wonder if Lehrer changed up the format a little. It will be interesting to see what adjustments both men will make in the next debate.
September 27th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
McCain, he “almost has to demonize the enemy in order to get into that fighting stance” What the hell does he mean by “almost”? Demonizing opponents is classic McCain, but that still doesn’t account for his failure to look at Obama. Something is very wrong (i.e. sick ) about McCain’s behaviour last night. www . youtube.com/watch?v=ty9BTcERiYY
September 28th, 2008 at 6:57 am
Of course were’re talking Chris Matthews here, nuf said. That is part of what I was saying to NL in my last comment, this is something I like in McCain, and something you guys don’t. You want a Neville Chamberlain, I want a Churchill. Does he have contempt for Obama, probably, and for good reason. Not because Obama is a bad guy, we (conservatives) just feel he will hurt the country we love, just as you think McCain and Bush have and will hurt this country. I’m not sure why Matthews thinks that just because Obama has the right to be on the stage as the candidate of his party he is exempt from contempt, you guys have contempt for Bush every time he is on stage. There is nothing wrong with McCain, that is just who he is, and I kind of like that part.
In that exchange I liked McCain’s actions more than Obama’s. I just don’t like leaders that won’t confront their opponents directly, that is fine for a senator because they live and die by the compromise, they are like middle management, but this is an executive position these guys are applying for.
September 28th, 2008 at 8:15 am
I’m coining a new phrase for us here on lies. It’s called ‘pulling a Chamberlin’ In the context of this board, when you have nothing meaningful to say but you still want to take a poke at your opponent, you can ‘pull a Chamberin.’ This is basically making an accusatory statement that when examined for more than 5 seconds, doesn’t make any sense. Here is an example:
“this is something I like in McCain, and something you guys don’t. You want a Neville Chamberlain, I want a Churchill.”
I’m now going to become a hypocrite, because I’m the guy that wanted civil discourse and to raise the tone here, but as the kids say, fuck it. shcb, I’ve always thought Enk’s insults to your intelligence were in poor taste, but if you think McCain is a Churchill, I think he may have been right. You have my condolences.
September 28th, 2008 at 8:59 am
So you think I’m going to be intimidated enough to not make apt comparisons where they apply by you guys stealing a line from the Democrats, “swiftboating”? Surely you know me better than that.
I think my comments were quite meaningful…
you may be right, Chamberlain probably wouldn’t have been that wimpy, I stand corrected.
September 28th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Naw, I wouldn’t ever say intimidated, I just think you’re full of shit at this point.
September 28th, 2008 at 10:33 am
shcb, what do think of all these conservatives calling for Palin to be dropped from the ticket?
And you need to watch the debate, not read it. Besides, that part you keep quoting was a pretty good moment for Obama. It looked like he didn’t want get nasty first but after Lehrer kind of prodded him, he turned and reminded him and the millions watching, that 10 days ago this man thought “the fundamentals of our enonmy were strong…”).
Like I said, you should actually watch it.
September 28th, 2008 at 11:10 am
NL,
I hadn’t heard of anyone wanting Palin to drop out, probably the same people that were saying Obama was going to ditch Biden for Hillary. You gotta dance with the one that brung ya at this point.
Actually the fundamentals of the economy are strong, but you can’t explain that simple statement in less than 20 minutes and without a bunch of mind numbing statistics. That was one of the places I wish McCain would have defended himself, but the format just wouldn’t have made that possible.
September 28th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6026225.html
September 28th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
shcb hasn’t heard of anyone wanting Palin to drop out; must be that his only source of news is from campaign headquarters.
NL is right, reading the debate transcripts allows shcb to ignore the 80% or 90% of communication that is non-verbal and insert his own fantasy world ideas about who said what how, and what their body language meant. LOL, shcb says he doesn’t like leaders who won’t confront their opponents directly and the freakish McCain couldn’t even look Obama in the eye, couldn’t even glance over at Obama for one second. Contempt? That’s being charitable to the old fart. McCain might have been a fighter in his youth, but at 72 and after nearly three decades in Washington he has turned yellow, both literally and figuratively. Yes, a coward who couldn’t even look his young opponent in the eyes.
September 29th, 2008 at 5:38 am
You are right Knarly, the reason I read transcripts is to insulate myself from the theatrics of a speech so I can focus on what someone said. Since I’m a conservative I am more left brain than you so the facts of a speech are more important to me than how pretty the candidate’s speech pattern was. Of course presentation is important, so I did watch some of the speech. After reading the transcript I must have seen more than ten minutes, I’m guessing twenty, enough to get a feel of the tenor. I thought McCain not looking at Obama was effective, I think it got under Obama’s skin just a little. If this tactic was intentional it was to make Obama feel like a Junior Senator from Illinois, like he is, make him feel that maybe he isn’t ready for this job. Since Obama called McCain John so many times I think it worked. The next debate Obama will be ready for a similar tactic and McCain will do something else to throw him off, maybe be overly friendly or constantly look at him in a stern manner of a disappointed father. It’s all a game. I’ve seen both men talk enough that I can visualize what they are doing with the transcript. In my example for instance, without seeing it, Obama was looking at his notes, lifting the front of the notes off the podium when he said ”I do not think that they are” he probably lifted his head about the word “think”
September 29th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Dude, sometimes you really crack me up!
September 29th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Of course he’ll change tactics next debate, if he tried to maintain the same loser stance his handlers would likely jump ship. Plus, it fits with his flip-flop character “No, I will not participate in the debate until we have a bail-out package.” “Yes, I will participate in the debate even though we do not have a bail-out package.” What a flake.
By the way, Churchill was a man for those times, which thankfully are long past. Before you continue to idolize him as the perfection of statesmanship, please consider why he proceeded with in ordering the Allies to destroy Dresden near the end of the war. In that city, 250,000 civilians (more than in Hiroshima) were burned alive in 12 hours despite the city having only one meaningful military target (the railyards, which were largely undamaged.) The slaughter was wholly unnecessary. May the world never see such barbarism from “civilized” nations again. And may we never elect such reckless leaders again.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
‘pulling a Chamberlain’
perfect!
McCain looked like he could barely contain himself from yelling racist epithets across the debate floor. If you can’t look Putin in the eye, will you still see his soul? And shcb’s ‘I’ll imagine it in technicolor!’ so he can slant it towards a totally awesome McCain victory is another classic wwnj moment. Bravo!
knarls, horrible things happen in war, not the flowers and sweets and roses fantasyland that is wwnj neocon ‘thinking’. WWII also had us nuking two Japanese cities to impress upon the USSR how ruthless we could be (and show the Imperials in Japan that we were willing to slag every one of their cities). This is why saner folks try their hardest to avoid unnecessary wars (and why McCain is so eager to “bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran”).
September 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Seems fitting that at the end of eight continuous years of Republican rule with wwnj policies: the financial markets are in shambles, oil is $100 a barrel and the Dow falls more in a single day than ever before.
After rising throughout the Clinton years, the Dow now sits just below the level it was at near the end of the Clinton presidency. Heckuva job Bushie!
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?Symbol=%24indu&CP=0&PT=10
September 29th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
yeah, you guys would have lost that war too.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
shcb, what the hell are you talking about?
September 30th, 2008 at 7:15 am
FDR (D) won that war
September 30th, 2008 at 9:59 am
I knew FDR, and you my friends, are no FDR :-)
September 30th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
This is what I meant by Palin back-firing…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbQwAFobQxQ
I suppose diehard Republicans will look past all this stuff, but they need to ask themselves: Is this someone I want representing my country on the world stage?
September 30th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
I don’t see your point. I thought she was great in this interview.
October 1st, 2008 at 9:46 am
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you, shocked!
Face it. She’s an idiot who is waaaay out of her league.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:17 am
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you, shocked!
A liberal underestimating the intelligence of a conservative. Let’s see there was Reagan, Bush, now Palin. You would think you guys would learn. Just because someone looks and thinks differently than you doesn’t mean they are an idiot. I though everything she said was correct and well thought out. She did seem a little nervous but she will get over that in time.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Underestimating Palin’s intelligence?
For the love of pete, she thinks Dinosaurs and people coexisted!
She gives a mean speech and can charm gullible doofuses, but on the issues facing our nation she is radically ill-equipped to take over from McCain. Say what you will about Hillary (I think she’s likable enough ;-) but she would have been more than capable enough.
Sarah Palin believes that the End Times are here. That they will happen in her lifetime. That witches are real (I know Halloween is coming up, not tricks r treats witches). The real question I’d like to see for the debate would be: Mrs Palin have you ever spoken in tongues? Followed up by: are you seriously stupid enough to think humans and dinosaurs co-existed? I guess a 166 Flintstones episodes can’t be wrong…
shcb, I understand that she has been cramming non-stop to try to shore up her meager stores of knowledge and experience, but her answers in the Couric interview were just short of gibberish. Was Tina Fey’s parody actually word for word Palin at the end there? Sure sounded like it to me.
October 1st, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Since you said you’d rather read this stuff shcb…
http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=22276
“Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy– Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions.”
lol… wtf!? Can someone please decipher that for me please!
For the record, I never underestimated Bush’s intelligence. I think it’s pretty obvious that he’s an idiot and has pretty much destroyed your once great and powerful country.
October 6th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
[…] a mess after the first storm, or, so I was told by a local lady, and I have no reason to doubt her small-town veracity. Unlike some politicians we all know, her word had a ring of […]
October 7th, 2008 at 2:02 am
Palin’s infamous Pegler quote: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10461
Knowledgable analysis supports Enk’s thesis.
October 7th, 2008 at 8:14 am
I would like to see a photo of Mr Palin without his shirt on (whoa whoa, I said MR, not MRS). More and more I get the feeling this guy is a Secessionist rwnj of the worst sort. I wonder if we ever saw Mr Moosehunt without his shirt on, would he look like Ed Norton’s character from the movie American X? You know, the guy with the giant swastica tattooed across his heart?
Face it, the McCain rallies are already yelling “terrorist” when they bring up Obama and then screaming “kill him!” It is only a matter of time before some McCain flunky (or the candidates themselves) slip and use the n word while a mic is still hot.
btw – McCain campaign, I am not listening to the smears, and since you haven’t articulated what you would actually DO in office, it makes you look small, really really small. Like shcb’s “honesty and sincerity and dignity” (or lack thereof).
October 7th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Whoa, Enk…this thread has certainly taken a sudden turn into “Mancrush Alley!” Palin’s a hottie, Ink, but I don’t think he’d get your nipples nearly as hard as Ed Norton obviously did in “American History X.” Is it the tattoos that get you the hottest, or is it just the whole neo-nazi “bend over a spread ’em” thing that rings your chimes? These genocidal, racist friends of your Dad’s you’ve been telling us about…they didn’t…touch you….did they?
October 7th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
It is tempting to delete your nonsense mcfrootloop
so did you blow Mr Palin? Can you confirm or deny his swastika tattoos?
How many? How large? Any other hate tatts?
Just asking.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
All of a sudden it smells like seagull shit in here.
Enk, there’s still an eternity left in this campaign, more than long enough for cool winds to blow back the Rethuglican “Lynch him!” tactic onto MCain’s faltering campaign and scorch what’s left of the earth containing voters lightly rooted on the Republican side.
I hope Obama obliterates the “terrorist” smear during the debate tonight in a way that illustrates that the McCain / Palin’s new smear tactics are ill-conceived, serious and so irresponsible as to underline that McCain and Palin are unfit to lead even a junior high student council.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Enk, leave lefty’s comment alone, it’s evidence that he is a complete idiot.
October 7th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Yes, Dear – you just ignore that mean boy. He’s just jealous because he doesn’t have nice big strawberry on his folder, too.
Delete my nonsense Inky? Oh, I forgot..you’re a big boy moderator now. What’s a matter did I hit a nerve? So it’s the tattys you like, huh? “How…uh…many? How…uh…large?”
October 7th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Go ahead and delete me. You’re a pussy, anyway.
October 7th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Mrs Moosehunt has a husband who is part of a Secessionist party in Alaska. This spring she recorded a video greeting to the party and there is some question as to whether she was actually a member. The founder of the Secesh party of Alaska was Joe Vogler. The guy who said “My government is my worst enemy. I’m going to fight them with any means at hand.”
Pegler/Vogler/McCain/Palin.
Quite the ticket.
October 7th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
really lefty, I am not your yMom (the name we gave to ymatt when he deleted comments he didn’t like from knarls and I)
I hope I am not breaking doctor patient confidentiality here, but your mommy was the one who abused you, not me, so please go take it out on her. Cheers.
October 7th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Doctor Patient cofidentiality? How can you be the Doctor when I’m the one taking your rectal temperature? “Oh, Doctor Palin…”
October 7th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
And speaking of child abuse, I certainly can’t be the only one here who has drawn a connection between Enkidu’s upbringing – raised by his father with the help of a shadey cadre of genocidal racists, and his overriding obsessions with nazism and gay Republican men. The nazi thing is a no-brainer, given Enk’s background, but the gay Republican angle is really creeping me out. What sorts of Tattoo’s did those guys have?
October 8th, 2008 at 5:23 am
I think I just found Enky’s dreamboat:
youtube.com/watch?v=WS5mQy9zV0s