Palin Says She Wants To Be 2012 Player If They Lose
When informed about this, a McCain aide was speechless. Normally, the answer is that you’re not looking past election day and you’ll then evaluate future plans. But Sarah Palin told ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas, “I’m not doing this for naught.”
Nicole at Crooks and Liars shows the Wolf Blitzer report with Dana Bash, who spoke to an incredulous McCain adviser about this:
BASH: I just got off of the phone, Wolf, with a senior McCain adviser and I read this person the quote and I think it is fair to say that this person was speechless. There was a long pause and I just heard a “huh” on the other end of the phone. This is certainly not a surprise to anybody who has watched Sarah Palin that she is interested in potentially future national runs, and she is being urged to by a lot of people inside of the Republican Party if they do lose, but it is an “if” and people inside of the McCain campaign do not want any discussion that has an “if” in front of it six days before the election, they don’t want any discussion at all, any kind of hypothetical talk about running for the next time around. So certainly, this is not at least initially being received well inside of the McCain campaign.
Hmmm….can’t say that it surprised me. She is known for kicking to the kerb, those who have lost their usefulness. Read the Alaska blogs and papers.
October 29th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Why should that surprise anybody, her stock with American conservatives would lead her to the conclusion that she might have a good shot at it
October 29th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Well that’s a long time from now, but personally I will find it quite delicious to see other Republicans, as knowledgeble and aggressive as they can be, doing battle with her in a Republican primary debate.
Fun times ahead!
October 29th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
There won’t be room for “players” until 2016. O will have the “players” locked out until then so 2012 is probably out of the question for Sarah to take advantage of.
But, good luck anyway.
By 2016 Sarah may have another chance, unless the Republicans have joined the Dodo birds in extinction by then.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Anonymouse
But what if he really splashs as a president like Carter did. Why not wait for him to get elected before saying he can last for a full 8 yrs.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Heck even Hillary is counting on that one
October 29th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Alan,
Respectfully…why do you have the typically democratic-leaning states a different shade of blue at the top of your page? I thought this was the “United” States of America. Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but my first impression after seeing that is that you are differentiating the typically liberal states from the typically conservative ones.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
“But what if he really splashs as a president like Carter did.”
I’m not so sure Carter exactly “splashed” but, in either case, Obama runs a tighter ship and he’s a better politician than Carter was/is.
As much a mess as Ford left Carter, Bush will be leaving a much bigger mess for Obama to clean up though. But the Iranians sided with Ronnie Reagan in 1980 to do Jimmy in and the Persians can’t play us again the same way in 2012.
Yes, it’s a bit early to declare Obama the winner but I can’t imagine a future under McCain/Palin. Four more years of Bush (McCain/Palin) would put the final touches on our national destruction. I’m a positive thinker though, so while not getting lazy about it, I’d prefer to assume Obama is going to win.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Anonymouse,
Good to be a positive thinker. It helped me all those long dreary years of the Clinton Admin. So hold to that thought. The Irnians sided with Ronnie, give me a break, they saw real strength, knew the gig was up, and got out while the getting was good.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
By the way, what mess exactly did Ford leave Carter, being serious, Ford is an after thought to most Americans. Mainly condemned for the Nixon pardon, outside of that I really don’t remember much of anything else. Even I was to young to care about politics at one point
October 29th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
I’m not so sure Carter exactly “splashed”
Dude, most a$$uredly the worst modern President has been Carter.
Bush will be leaving a much bigger mess for Obama to clean up though.
What mess is that?
sided
Um, betting they felt that a new world order was upon them.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
If Palin gets elected in 2012, I hope I’m long dead by then.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Larry,
Come on now, like I said, we survived Carter, Clinton, and now possibly Barrack. Keep the faith, if we can survive them, then surely Slashing Sarah will not be that hard to take.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
What do you know. A politician came right out, told the truth without playing any games,or speaking out of both sides of her mouth. She just said ‘yes I’m interested in running in 2012.’ What a novelty
October 29th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Carter’s saving grace is his performance as a former president. His term in office was very rocky (like Bush)
October 29th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
John Walker
Carters saving grace is his performance as a former president. Meeting with terrorist against our nations wishes. He has no desire’s beyond trying to repair his miserable legacy, and the only way he can do that is by betraying his country. I don’t like O’Bama, but if he is elected Okay, I will deal with it. I never liked Bill, but I survived, But Carter, Is a disgrace, as far as I’m concerened, he is a trouble maker, bent on destroying our foriegn policy, and going abroad undermining our leadership at a crucial time. I have nothing but utter contempt for the man.
October 29th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Palin in 2012, bwahahahaha, she has to get re-elected in Alaska first! She’s too dumb, she couldn’t find her ass with both hands! If the Palin-MaCain ticket loses, the right will slay her with the blame and she will be a footnote in history. Not bad looking though…for a scumbag!
October 29th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
@Derrick Touche. Good point. Carter’s come unraveled a bit in the last decade, but he had a pretty good run at N. Korea in the 90s. His approach was a good one, and it worked for a while. It’s just too bad that Kim Jung Il is a complete nutbag and didn’t accept the olive branch.
October 29th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
“… what mess exactly did Ford leave Carter …”
An energy crisis and stagflation. Although you could probably make the argument that the mess was actually left by Nixon for Ford who only passed it along to Carter. Carter (and Paul Volcker) had a good start on cleaning things up when Reagan moved in.
“The Irnians sided with Ronnie …”
Research “The Iran-Contra Affair”. Yes, Ronnie and the Iranians were friendly. How soon we forget.
October 29th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
@Okotoks Palin’s not dumb… she’s clever as a fox. Don’t underestimate her simply because she’s new, extremely polarizing, and has been given an opportunity she’s very likely not ready for.
She’s kicked ass in Alaska. Wish she’d have come from a state with double the electoral votes and that she’d been in the governor’s seat for at least ONE full term before getting to this point.
October 29th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
I’m researching Carter Stagflation and energy crisis. That was on his watch. North korea was a good thing, Kim Jong Il lead him around like a lamb. He wanted to believe he would make a difference with a bad man by just talking to him, sounds like O’Bama to me. So who is the fool Carter or Kim??
October 29th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Please. Carter doesn’t have a saving grace. For a while, he did – then, he started making all kinds of off-the-wall speeches and commentaries. I’m from Atlanta, and there are plenty of people here who just shake their heads and wonder what happened to the brief promise of the beginning of Habitat for Humanity. Now, he’s just a liberal mouthpiece and his post-presidency has become as useful as his presidency.
Just a thought: “Bush”’s mess is not his alone. The democratic senate, with the help of Queen Pelosi, King Frank, and King Reid, have plenty of culpability that is always shoved into the closet. Bush can’t be all bad: he led the golden democratic congress around by the nose about Iraq (presidents don’t declare war, congress does, so if congress had said no, Iraq would not have happened), for example.
The bias shown by the media in this election has been nothing short of shameful. If obama can’t win the election with all the unfair advantages he’s had, and I sincerely hope he can’t, then it’s a testament to the American people being tired of being lied to by the candidate and his cronies. Coverups don’t work in the long run, and Obama is covering up; problem is, a lot of it will only be uncovered after he’s elected and it’s too late. The ultimate bought election.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:07 am
“I’m researching Carter Stagflation and energy crisis. That was on his watch.”
I didn’t have to research it, I lived it. 1973 or so was about when the bad stuff began to happen. It peaked in 1980 or so. Carter (with Paul Volcker) finally beat inflation, although they almost crushed the economy in the process.
Then, as now, the root of our problems was the skyrocketing price of imported oil and budget busting spending on an overseas war.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:25 am
sarah palin will never go away.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Anonymouse
I was only 13 then, so was not really up on it as much as you are. Sounds like Ford did have the problem and handed it off to Carter, who fumbled it as well. But I can’t match the dates on Iran-contra. The Iranian Hostage release happened on April 24 1981, with Reagans inauguration, Iran-contra started in 1983. Was not Iran-Contra more 2 fold to help the moderate Iranians to gain more control of their country, and help the contra’s agains a communist Sandinista gov’t.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:32 am
Anonymouse
Also, you claim our 2 problems right now are the same as then
To much imported energy, and run away war costs. Then shouldn’t the answer be, drill here drill now. If they had done that in the 70’s this might have been avoided, or maybe the 80’s, 90’s. Technology has come along way in the oil field since then, and it would be safe now to do it. So why do the Dem’s stand in the way of drilling, when it is so important
October 30th, 2008 at 12:36 am
Also on the war in vietnam, did we not learn our lesson that if we go to war, we need to go and win. Defeating ourself, only cost us more in the long run. Look how much we wound up spending fighting communism, after they saw us turn and run. Was that not part of the Iran-Contra equation. A liberal Democratic Congress, would not stand up to communism in the America’s.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:41 am
So…if Obama adopts a stay the course attitude in Iraq, and decides to invade southern Pakistan, what will you liberals be saying then, hmmm…
October 30th, 2008 at 12:56 am
And what about this big leadership test Biden was talking about, what’s up with that?
October 30th, 2008 at 12:59 am
Oh lord! She is truly Bush in a dress~ Heaven help us if this woman if makes it to the spot!! We will all be working as Wal Mart Greeters or Cashiers! Won’t be a decent job left!!
GOBAMA 08!! GOBAMA 08!! GOBAMA 08!! GOBAMA 08!!
October 30th, 2008 at 1:14 am
I’m hoping Sarah Palin will just go away but I don’t think I’ll get my wish.
October 30th, 2008 at 1:36 am
I would welcome Sarah Palin running for president as the Republican Candidate. Not a cold days chance in hell she would win.
To be honest the thought of her as president scares the hell out of me.. the thought of the things her and the Radical Right Wing wooudl do to my beloved country is scary as hell
October 30th, 2008 at 2:46 am
Please explain to me what the “Radical Right Wing” is, and what do you think they will do to this country?
October 30th, 2008 at 7:38 am
Willy,
I can’t speak for Ceaser, but for many, what the “Radical Right Wing”
wants, (and has achieved somewhat under Bush/Cheney), is to move more and more towards the “unitary executive”, expanding the powers of the president.
We see this in the idea of the president getting to name anyone an enemy combatant and imprison and render them with no oversight or accountability.. to wiretap citizens without warrents.
To use more and more public funds to pay private mercenaries to replace the military, thus, removing accountability from the people.
To appoint more and more judges who believe in corporate personhood, and that corporations have more rights than people.
The belief that ‘my particular brand of my religion’ should play a role in governing a secular nation.
To use public funds to pay for corporate risks and losses, while privatizing the profits.
To make working people have to compete for the lowest wages, instead the corporations competing for our business.
When the left is carried to the extreme, the government controls business and media.
When the right is carried to the extreme, business controls the government and the media.
We need to beware of both.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Old Lefty
Also when the left goes to extreme they abolish private property rights (the EPA, Endangered species act), have a heavy progressive income tax on earnings (high corporate tax, tax the wealthy or job creators), abolish inheritance rights (inheritance tax), and control education (Dept. of Edu, and, I must say the National Education Association)
I agree we need to beware of both, but why is it that you never hear of the radical left in the mainstream news media? We never hear politicians like Obama labled liberal or Keith Olberman labled radical left.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:23 am
willy,
Nixon started the EPA.
I’m sorry, not EVERYTHING is private property. Will you allow them to pillage the Grand Canyon, or Yellowstone?
I remember strip mining…it was disasterous.
As for high corporate tax:
Most corporations, including the vast majority of foreign companies doing business in the United States, pay no income taxes, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday.
Is my opinion that Olberman is Slightly left of center….
To see HOW far the country has moved to the right, so that I think, most right wingers don’t recognize the center:
Teddy Roosevelt:
http://www.ssa.gov/history/trspeech.html
“We stand for a living wage. Wages are subnormal if they fail to provide a living for those who devote their time and energy to industrial occupations. The monetary equivalent of a living wage varies according to local conditions, but must include enough to secure the elements of a normal standard of living–a standard high enough to make morality possible, to provide for education and recreation, to care for immature members of the family, to maintain the family during periods of sickness, and to permit of reasonable saving for old age.”
Imagine a REPUBLICAN calling for a minimum wage to “make morality possible, to provide for education and recreation”!!!
AND Eisenhower:
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone.
It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.
. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This is, I repeat, the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron. [...] Is there no other way the world may live?”
-Dwight David Eisenhower, “The Chance for Peace,” speech given to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Apr. 16, 1953.
These guys are more far to the left than Clinton or Obama ever thought of being!
October 30th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Sarah will become a player in 2012 only and only if the national GOP become a party for the blinds.
October 30th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Old Lefty
I agree, corporations do not pay income tax. We pay the tax in the form of higher prices on their goods and services. That is why taxing corp. is in a sense punishing the “middle class” through higher prices.
Nixon turned out to be more of a liberal republican and I was dissappointe. He also took the U.S. off the gold standard, another mistake.
I disagree with Teddy in the fact that it is not the federal governments job to declare how much a private business must pay their workers.
No where in the constitution does is say that the federal government must build power plants or to build hospitals. It does not say in the constitution that the federal government must care for it’s citizens with a national health care system or a transfer of wealth, or as Obama said, “spread the wealth around…”. The constitution does not say that abortion is a “right”.
The constitution does say that the federal governments main priority is for the defense of this great nation. Therefore, building warships, missiles, guns, anti-missile defense, and other means to defend this country is first and foremost the federal governments top priority and therefore I have no problem spending money on such.
Nobody in this country loves war. We all detest it, but sometimes war is a necessity to defeat evil, i.e. Hitler, Togo, Mussalini, Saddam, terrorism, etc.
October 30th, 2008 at 9:40 am
If Sarah Palin thinks the polls are rough now, the gap between her and … well, pretty much anyone would be insane. I’d love to see her run against Hilary for president. Though I can’t stand Hilary’s policies regarding entertainment media enforcement.
Back on the issue of roughing things up for the next president – what about Bush’s midnight legislation coming up – even getting it in the motions this early is something of a concession speech for the Republican party, but why is so much centered on breaking key parts of American life? Outlawing birth control pills is clearly a silly law that’s designed to take up time. Venturing into Syria seems designed to make things difficult for an Obama transition. And letting local cops spy on citizens? Oh happy day Bush. Didn’t the White House Chief of Staff say legislation deadline was June 1st? Rules don’t apply to Republicans.
VOTE
.B
.A
.M
.A
October 30th, 2008 at 9:41 am
The constitution does say that the federal governments main priority is for the defense of this great nation. Therefore, building warships, missiles, guns, anti-missile defense, and other means to defend this country is first and foremost the federal governments top priority and therefore I have no problem spending money on such.
Posted by willy
………………………………..
Eisenhower (the general who won WW11), ALSO said:
” “We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. “
How do you know when the defense industry is working for defense of the nation, or lining their own pockets?
Those with close ties to the arms industry have supported both Iran AND Iraq in their war, they made a lot of money arming Sadaam,AND bringing him down, they chose to side with and arm Pakistan over India….all because it’s easier to do business with a dictator than with a democracy.
I feel that WW11 was the last war that was for defense.
The others have been at the behest of corporations.
Remember Bush’s Grandfather helped arm Hitler:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html
“President Bush’s grandfather was a director of a bank seized by the federal government because of its ties to a German industrialist who helped bankroll Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, government documents show.
Union Banking was seized by the government in October 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act ”
As for,
” It does not say in the constitution that the federal government must care for it’s citizens with a national health care system or a transfer of wealth,”
It doesn’t say the federal government has to give no bid contracts at cost plus, or use the treasury or military or CIA to overthrow democratically elected leaders, for corporations like, Massadegh, Allende, Arbenz, etc, but they do.
See ya for a while.
October 30th, 2008 at 9:59 am
If McCain wins, I hope he slaps her down BIG TIME. He needs to effectively lock her up in a power cage, or he runs the risk of dividing and weakening this country further.
Then again, that’s what corporate America wants. Divide and conquer.
Willy: “We pay the tax in the form of higher prices on their goods and services. That is why taxing corp. is in a sense punishing the “middle class” through higher prices.”
Let’s try to be a little honest with ourselves: Corporate America punishes middle-class America with higher prices on goods and services. That’s why the income gap has skyrocketed in the past 40 years. Big Business has gotten greedier and greedier, and it’s bankrupting our country.
Willy, you ARE right– the Constitution doesn’t include all the government programs and spending, it addresses basic rights, tenets and principles that, in the late 1700s, seemed pretty inalienable for future generations.
The constitution also doesn’t include funneling tax money to churches, or building roads, providing education, or caring for the elderly. It doesn’t talk about overseeing technology or media, and it doesn’t address invading other countries. It doesn’t talk about the stock market, or bailing out the private-enterprise failures you champion, and it doesn’t address universal healthcare for our elected leaders, either.
I think we can both agree, the country and the times are a dam site different than they were in the 1700s.
October 30th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Alan,
You’re misrepresenting the statement.
She wasn’t asked if she was running for 2012 – she was asked if she or McCain felt like giving up this 2008 race.
She said she would never raise the white flag of surrender in this campaign and would fight the rest of the days to win voters – I’m not doing this for naught.
STOP THE SPINNING!!
October 30th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Alan,
You seem to have given us Sarah’s answer without referring to the question. Certainly you wouldn’t want her answer taken out of context. Or would you?
“I’m not doing this for naught” could be taken many ways depending what the question was and how it was phrased.
October 30th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Obama just said, in Sarasota FL, that he wants to go back to the economy under Bill Clinton. Cool, I made a ton of money ‘93-’97 as many of us did. But, how in the world is this progress. Go back to move forward sounds more like running in circles to me. Besides that, Bill Gates deserves more credit for the economy of the ’90s that Bill Clinton, much more.
What economic bubble is Obama’s economy going to ride?
October 30th, 2008 at 11:46 am
What economic bubble is Obama’s economy going to ride?
Posted by Bernie in Michigan
……………………..
A green bubble?
October 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Posted by: Bernie
But, how in the world is this progress?
The opposite of regression is progress. Sure we go back to some older economic policies, but proven ones that work. Since Bush/Republican policies have regressed our economy so far behind where Clinton had it, even going backwards in policy is going forward.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I.E. Reversing the damage done.
Easy analogy: Coca-Cola
In the early 80’s, Coke decides to ‘try something new’ and gave us New Coke™. It failed horribly, so they went back to the original formula. It was technically stepping backwards, but it allowed the company to continue growing and overcome a mistake they made.
America needs to do the same thing.
(Sorry for the double post, accident with Tab key and spacebar.)
October 30th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Economically, the Republicans went all the way back to the Crash of ‘29, and they also seem to want to, socially-speaking, go all the way back to Pioneer and Wild West days of yore.
And that’s CERTAINLY not progress, in terms of civility.
October 30th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Sarah,
That is a really over the top statement. No repub’s want to take our country back to the depression, or back to the old west. We all enjoy our electricity and indoor plumbing to much for that. I’m happy my taxes go to roads, police, and free education. Politicians just need to be more accountable for what they are spending money on. We would just like them to justify what we all ready give them in the form of taxes. We think they all (Dem’s and Repub’s) have done a lousy job of it, and think that we should always strive to get gov’t out of the way. We understand you can’t always do that, there is a need for gov’t, just don’t let it run amok, like it currently is doing.
October 30th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Sarah didn’t imply that the Republicans wanted to run the economy into the ground Derrick, she just stated that it happened. (Or is damn close to happening.)
Dems in Congress are fairly new to this current financial crisis, remember the Republicans controlled the House for most of Bush’s 8 years.
Distortion in views is what you get when you watch FOX NEWS for your primary source. I do like Hannity and Colmes, although the timing for Hannity’s talking points is suspect as well. Fox is well known for distorting facts and omitting details in order to either boost the right or paint the left in a bad light.
Case(s) in point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3kI8LNTqNo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfy20gFChhI
October 30th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Derrick: “That is a really over the top statement. No repub’s want to take our country back to the depression, or back to the old west.”
Uh, not really. Have you been reading what Republicans (like Willy’s post, to which I was responding) have been posting here? If it’s not in the Constitution, they don’t want it. Case closed.
You might enjoy elecricity and plumbing, but god forbid the gov’t regulate or provide infrastructure for such public services and necessities (according to Willy’s brand of Republicanism).
As I said, Derrick, I believe you and I probably agree on more things than we disagree on.
But over-the-top statements like Willy’s deserve over-the-top responses, especially when it comes in the form of my (I think) astute observation that many Neocons want to deconstruct America, than build it back up.
October 30th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
The judicial philosophy of the Dem’s gave us the fairly recent “imminent domain” reinterpretation via the Supreme court, you know, government can seize private land and cede it to someone else for the betterment of society. Couple that with Obummer’s spread the wealth around and what do you get? SCARED, that’s what!
October 30th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
The judicial philosophy of the ‘Repubs’ gave us George Bush, and almost cost us habeas corpus.
Couple more with unitary executive philosophy and what do we become…A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY…. MY FRIENDS!
October 30th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Nice try, the court didn’t crown him king, they upheld that the people of Florida cast more ballots for dubya than gore. It was the dems vote farming in specifically liberal “cherry picked” districts that was seen as unconstitutional. And complete recounts affirmed that dubya received more votes than gore. Nuff said?
October 30th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Also, that same court was decidedly liberal in balance, so no claims to judicial fiat for the repub’s as you call them, that dog wont hunt.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
The dems attempted to give us “trickle down” voting, via the “hanging chad”
October 30th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
And let’s not forget the classic, “we must attempt to divine the intent of the voter” ruse, which party tried that kids?
October 30th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
trees are people too!
No,
NOT “NUFF SAID”!
The court ordered them to stop counting.
The The Media Consortium Florida Ballot Project found no CLEAR winner but Gore likely won.
After 9/11, it become politically incorrect to talk much about it.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Found no clear winner, but gore likely won? WHAT?? Did you arrive at this conclusion thru divination? Did you use a dowsing rod? The reason the “issue” went away is because after ALL the VOTES were recounted it could be determined that BUSH WON.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Adieu-Sarah- Adieu-Sarah- baby!
October 30th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
The “liberal” Media Consortium Florida Ballot Project. Lefty, you forgot a word so I took the liberty of adding it for you, hope you don’t mind
October 30th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
trees are people too!
Sorry, I realize that that facts have a liberal bias.
October 30th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Willy Says:
Please explain to me what the “Radical Right Wing” is, and what do you think they will do to this country?
Posted by willy
—————
Are you kidding me? Or are you being funny?
October 30th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
That’s why I love this country Lefty, we both get to have our say, I may not agree with you but I’ll never try and silence you.
October 30th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Nor I you, trees are people too!
It’s a big reason why I hate this accusation of Un American, because, what if those with the most heinous charges ARE right?
We Don’t have to believe them without evidence, but we should not call them them “anti American” for being concerned.
You know what they say…
Just because you are paranoid, doesn’t mean they are not out to get you.
October 30th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Hillary Clinton Supporters And Women For McCain Leadership React To Barack Obama’s Attack Ad “His Choice”
ARLINGTON, VA — McCain-Palin 2008 today released the following statements from former Hillary Clinton supporters and Women for McCain leadership in reaction to Barack Obama’s sexist attack ad “His Choice”:
VIRGINIA
Judy Black, National Co-Chair, Women for McCain: “Enough is enough! Senator Obama has stooped to a new low in his constant attacks on Governor Palin with his new ad titled, ‘His Choice.’ Barack Obama’s choice has been to attack, demean and ridicule women, first Sen. Clinton and now Gov. Palin. American women do not need any more of Obama’s sexist choices or attacks. John McCain made the choice to put a strong leader with a proven record forward as his running mate. As a woman, I am outraged by the over-the-top treatment of Gov. Palin and I urge all women to reject the double standard put forward by a man who was just a state senator in Illinois three years ago by voting McCain-Palin this Tuesday.”
Patty Denton, Washington County Republican Chairwoman: “We, as a country, should be past the days in which women were treated as inferior. Women are the backbone of this country. It’s disappointing for Senator Obama, who has proclaimed change’ as his mantra, to disregard the monumental progress women have made in this country. Governor Palin is an exceptional leader and has fought on the side of all Americans, regardless of race or gender. These types of ads show that the Obama campaign is willing to do anything to score a few political cheap shots at the expense of women. On November 4th, women will go to the polls and demand respect for themselves and their daughters from the type of negative attacks perpetrated by Senator Obama.”
MISSOURI
Representative Jo Ann Emerson: “With more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined, Governor Sarah Palin holds her own on the national scene and embodies the values that Americans want in those who will lead our country. This ad is just one more example of the constant attacks from the Obama-Biden campaign. With each attack, they attempt to dismiss the intelligent, qualified, and experienced woman who will soon become our next Vice-President of the United States.”
Sharon Barnes, Missouri State Chair Women for McCain: “These attacks on Governor Sarah Palin show the desperation of the Democratic Party to try to stem the overwhelming support for the maverick Republican team of John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin – a team dedicated to bringing about the right kind of change for the people of this country. The voters of this great nation will not be fooled. Gov. Palin is a proven leader and serious reformer with experience in economics, defense and foreign policy that the Democratic candidate for president can only wish he had.”
CALIFORNIA
Shelly Mandell, President of Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women: “I am outraged by the new ad put out by Barack Obama. It is sexist and demeaning to women. These tactics started with Hillary Clinton and continue, growing even more disgusting with Gov. Palin. I was a Hillstar for Hillary and an avid supporter. Trashing two women clearly in a sexist manner in one election is an outrage and must be identified and stopped. There must be consequences. Let female Obama supporters take a good look at this and still believe their candidate supports women’s rights and women’s dignity.”
Prameela Bartholomeusz, DNC Platform Committee Member: “I am once again stunned at the personal and sexist attacks by the Obama campaign against Gov. Palin. This latest ad is sexist and offensive. The Gov. of Alaska has been managing and balancing a budget of $10 billion; I think she knows a bit about economics. Sen. Obama never spoke up against sexism during the primary season, and is not speaking out against misogyny during this phase of the election season — he is contributing to it. I have no confidence that Sen. Obama will fight for women’s issues if elected. This sets women back decades.”
PENNSYLVANIA
Christine J. Toretti, PA Women For McCain Co-Chair, PA National Committeewoman: “Vice presidential running mate, Sarah Palin, is an experienced public servant. As governor of Alaska and as mayor of Wasilla she proved to be an effective leader and businesswoman. Senator Obama’s baseless attack on Governor Palin is preposterous. God forbid a leader is not only competent, but beautiful and wears a skirt!”
Bernie Comfort, Pennsylvania Women for McCain State Chair: “Senator Obama’s ad simply mocks Governor Palin. The real truth is Gov. Palin has experience dealing with the economy as an executive running the state of Alaska and as a business owner. She is the experienced leader we need to lead this country with John McCain.”
Stephanie Bressler, Ph.D, Hillary Clinton supporter, University of Scranton women and politics professor: “It’s a sexist example of reducing a woman to an object – a wink – and denying her a voice. Her lips are actually moving, but she’s not allowed to be heard.”
OHIO
Barbara Rosier-Tryon, Member of the Warren Republican Women’s Club: “This is yet another sexist cheap shot on Gov. Palin’s image from the Obama-Biden campaign. Sarah Palin’s record of reform and experience as governor of Alaska and commander of the state’s National Guard is more distinguished than Barack Obama’s one and only term in the U.S. Senate.”
NORTH CAROLINA
Martha Jenkins, North Carolina Women for McCain State Chairman: “Barack Obama chose Joe Biden to make up for his own lack of foreign policy expertise. He has absolutely no reason to criticize McCain’s pick of Palin. Gov. Palin is infinitely more qualified than Barack Obama. In running this ad, Obama is acknowledging that Gov. Palin is an effective and a positive part of John McCain’s candidacy; otherwise, why focus on her at all? Barack Obama is using this ad to divert attention from the fact that the American public is realizing that Obama is just as radical as his associates, and that he lacks the experience and judgment to be President of the United States.”
FLORIDA
Albert Chang, Regional Director of Citizens for McCain, a group that includes Democrats and Independents: “We look forward to winning Tampa and the surrounding counties for McCain-Palin. This ad is a distracting personal attack on an experienced executive and the voters of Florida will see through it. This campaign will remain focused on issues impacting the everyday lives of Floridians and Americans.”
Mary Calderon, Tampa, former Senator Clinton supporter: “I’m disappointed that Senator Obama has resorted to personal attacks at this point in the campaign. Would any male candidate for vice president of the United States be afforded similar treatment by the Obama campaign? I would say not.”
INDIANA
Judy Singleton, Indiana Women for McCain Co-Chair: “Obama seems to have a problem with strong, smart women. Ask Hillary. Running an ad like this is an affront to talented women everywhere. To imply that Gov. Palin doesn’t understand economics because she’s pretty and winks is ridiculous. As a governor, she’s proved she understands the economy better than Barack Obama, who hasn’t completed his first term in the Senate, does. All one has to do is look at her record of leadership on economic development and then look at his.”
NEW YORK
Amy Siskind, Ambassador for Hillary: “When Senator Hillary Clinton was demeaned and degraded during the Presidential Primary, many of us of, myself included, vowed ‘never again’. The treatment of Governor Palin by both the main stream media, and now the Obama Campaign, shows that the misogyny fest is alive and well in our country. There has been a complete and utter smear job of our fellow citizen, Sarah Palin, who is only trying to serve her country.” .
October 30th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
You know what sets us women back decades?
Women who behave like crying little spoiled brats because their favorite candidate didn’t win, and the candidate’s a favorite, most likely, ONLY because she’s a woman.
Know why Hillary didn’t get it? We didn’t want to see a repeat of the blugeoning the Neocons gave Bill. We deserve a freaking break.
Would she have been excellent? Without a doubt. But we needed a mature grownup, and Obama is that grownup.
October 30th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Sarah, do you reaaallly think the left has been fair to Gov. Palin? The left attempted the policy of character assassination on a plumber from Ohio. Why? Because he dared to ask his holiness a fair question. Asks yourselves this, why has Obama been allowed a pass by the majority in the media? The country is about to elect someone we know little or nothing about, who has a lot of EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE ASSOCIATIONS and little experience and none as an executive. Obama is dangerous
October 30th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Oh, and by the way…the Obama youth are a little disturbing. If a right winger had anything even closely resembling this what would your HONEST reaction be? I’m curious
October 30th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Palin/Quayle 2012
October 30th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
“Oh, and by the way…the Obama youth are a little disturbing.”
wha?
October 30th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Trees: “Sarah, do you reaaallly think the left has been fair to Gov. Palin?”
Do you reeaaally think it was smart of her to decline every single interview invitation in the first half of her nomination? The Republican Party kept her under wraps, which naturally results in the press digging for any information they could get about her– good, bad and ugly. I think Gov. Palin has been grossly unfair to McCain, the press, and the American people.
Trees: “The left attempted the policy of character assassination on a plumber from Ohio. Why? Because he dared to ask his holiness a fair question.”
McCain’s the one who plunged him into the public spotlight during the debate. Know why the press is finding out more about him? Bingo! Because Joe’s courting the limelight and asking for it. He’s done nothing of note. He’s just a willing tool wanting to make a buck off his 15 minutes, and spread dirty lies that even FOX NEWS CAN’T ABIDE. Ask yourself why YOU are championing his cause.
Trees: “Asks yourselves this, why has Obama been allowed a pass by the majority in the media? The country is about to elect someone we know little or nothing about, who has a lot of EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE ASSOCIATIONS and little experience and none as an executive.”
Palin’s a dolt, but you seem to be in love with her lack of experience. And Obama HASN’T been given a free pass, they’ve done the research and uncovered a TON of lies started by the GOP.
With so many lies and inaccuracies spread by the GOP, they’ve damaged their credibility to the point no one knows when or IF they’re ever telling the truth.
To you, however, it doesn’t seem to matter. Everything they say is golden.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Oh, and the Obama youth? Not nearly as disturbing as the daughters of fundamentalist men, who write their 16-year-old daughters weird love letters encouraging chastity.
Or the McCain kids who handle guns and shoot animals. And look askance, like their parents, at anyone who looks different, eats different food, or worships differently.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
I’m a woman who begs to “differ” greatly with Sarah Palin’s “folksy” image. I’m from the South originally, this woman is pulling the wool over some people’s eyes…but not mine. I thought Barack Obama’s “honest” ad about John McCain’s pick as VP highly amusing. It was not an attack, it was the truth! Sarah Palin was called “Baracuda” that doesn’t jibe with an innocent folksy darling who just walked out of the sticks of Alaska….Sarah Palin, unlike her husband is highly ambitious and is a man eater. It would be funny except her true image is not representative of what she actually is. It’s just a “cute” school girl image on a vastly approaching “middle aged woman” trying to pull the wool over some voters eyes….but not mine!
October 30th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Why has there been so many Journalist, starting to say they are even becoming embarrassed by their profession’s whole hearted support of O’Bama, and starting to feel bad about it.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I think John McCain would have done much better if he had of rolled out a “real woman” and not this fake folksy darling from the sticks of Alaska to try and fool the American Public. Forget “Caribou Barbie” I just call her “Spackled and Pasted” barbie…..She’s awful. Every time I look and think about Sarah Palin….I imagine a badly paint chipped wall in great need of new “White wash.”
October 30th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
I’ll vote for her in 2012. By then everyone will have figured Barrack was a liar. They’ll be crying over the high taxes. Naw they’ll be patriotic and pay those taxes. Baaaa Baaaaa What a bunch of sheep being led to the slaughter Baaa Baaa Baaa
October 30th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Joe- plunge- joe -punge- baby!
October 31st, 2008 at 9:30 am
No more Paling,please! It hurts.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:49 am
Joe the Plumber, I’ll give you this, the Republicans are the kind of sheep who aren’t LED to slaughter….
Republican sheep actually interview the slaughterer, give him all the money and power, and then, while their families are being slaughtered in front of them, they push more of their own toward the blade and blame all the deaths on the sheep who hang back, the ones who didn’t really like the idea of hiring a slaughterer, from the get-go.
October 31st, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Hillary should have won and we wouldn’t be in this mess.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:31 am