Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
April 28, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Ear to the Ground
Email this item Print this item

Fact Check: Palin’s Dishonest Speech

Posted on Sep 4, 2008
Flickr / buddhakiwi

The AP took a closer look at some of the claims in Sarah Palin’s speech Wednesday and found that the VP nominee, like some of her allies, is simply full of it on a number of points.

AP via Yahoo:

PALIN: “I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere.”

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a “bridge to nowhere.”

PALIN: “There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform—not even in the state senate.”

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

Read more

Lockerdome Below Article
Get a book from one of our contributors in the Truthdig Bazaar.

Related Entries

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every day.

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By cyrena, September 8, 2008 at 9:51 pm Link to this comment

By Leefeller, September 8 at 6:21 am #
If indeed Obama was not born in the USA, I believe my vote for him is more likely.  Not sure but I heard somewhere Palin wants Alaska to succeed from the USA, does it have something to do with Polar Bears? Maybe she can get the USA to succeed from the USA?


Ah Leefeller, why’d ya have to go and complicate things? wink

Here’s how we’re gonna do this stuff from now on. WHEREVER or WHATEVER, everybody wants him to be, THAT’S what it will be. From here on out, it’s ALL gonna be in ‘the eyes of the beholder’. You want him born someplace besides Hawaii, just let it be that.
As for the secession, I’ve gotta confess that my national patriotism has long ago fled the coop. I’ve been wanting California to secede for the past 6 years, at least. Instead, we got stuck with this asshole Arnold the terminator.

Speaking of which, I just got word that there’s been a recall of his butt. Paperwork was just filed today. Now you know that’s how we got stuck with him in the first place. They recalled our former Governor, Gray Davis. (well, *I* didn’t but there was a vote, and that’s what the outcome was). So, never let it be said that Californian’s aren’t ready to switch-up, when it’s required. I just don’t know that it always has the best of results.

I doubt the Polar Bears have anything to do with why Palin wanted Alaska to secede though. I think it’s more about the OIL. Isn’t everything?

Report this

By Sepharad, September 8, 2008 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

troublesum, I agree, the whole thing is scary. Ben Stein’s too far right for me, but he’s smart and if he’s scared I’m REALLY scared. Anyway, what we should be doing now is figuring out what great appeal Palin has because her selection has caused the election prediction polls to really jump.

If it really is bluecollar/underemployed/cowboys/Christian conservatives/union members in Ohio and PA (a union organizer in those areas said, somewhat abashedly, that lots of their union’s members are against Obama because he’s black), we need to figure out which of those groups the Dems can peel off. The Christian conservatives are a hopeless cause, at least those who are Creationists. No logic need apply. Racism is another stonewall. But for blue collar, underemployed, cowboys and other rugged individualists, it would slightly negate the appeal of Palin’s on-steroids Walmart moose mom mantra if bicoastal liberals stopped looking quite so far down their noses at some of the other groups—blue collar, underemployed, cowboys (most of whom are riding John Deeres, mostly unhappily, nowadays) et al. They aren’t aliens, they are patriots, and if we’d just talk to them directly without snickering at their non-urban non-cool non-sophisticated ways, they might believe us when we appeal to their self interest AND patriotism AND their concerns for the neglected wounded vets returning from Iraq. Republican records on all of these things are TERRIBLE. These people are not stupid: Palin’s inexperience would be anything but good for their country; McCain’s policies won’t do much for the present and future vets—there won’t be any money left for them at all. The Nation’s late Cary McWilliams, the old lefties, the Wobblies and Woody Guthrie could pull these people in in a minute. And the Obama campaign has to figure out why they have been having such crumby luck so far with their pathetic hectoring of this group. Maybe the smooth, academic lecture-cum-revival meeting isn’t going over well. Maybe just talking with people who respect them, understand and share some of their “differences”—i.e. people who have grown up in the same places, faced the same difficulties or have parents who faced the same difficulties—would make more of an impact than showboat Palin ever could. We have to try SOMETHING.

To anyone the least enamored with Intelligent Design or Creationistism, we could simply ask them to take a look at their situation, the far worse situations their counterparts around the minimally-developed Third World are enduring. This stuff is so bad that you’d have to doubt the intelligence of any Design responsible for it. But as an aethist I wouldn’t be the right person to say this. Biden is making a good beginning at some bridge-building, pointing out that he believes conception is the beginning of a human life. (I happen to believe that too, but am not religious so it would mean more coming from him.)

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 8, 2008 at 7:21 am Link to this comment

If indeed Obama was not born in the USA, I believe my vote for him is more likely.  Not sure but I heard somewhere Palin wants Alaska to succeed from the USA, does it have something to do with Polar Bears? Maybe she can get the USA to succeed from the USA?

Report this

By cyrena, September 7, 2008 at 1:54 pm Link to this comment

By RightWing, September 7 at 10:00 am #

and again if it is about Ob it must be a lie, your brain washed.


Actually right wing, I’m just the opposite of brain washed…I’m like a bona fide skeptic, and a serious researcher/scholar…

SO….I go to the original source for all of it…I look for QUOTES from the horses mouth so to speak. I go to the RECORD. What have they said, (themselves) and what have they DONE (themselves). I don’t go for sloppy dot connecting. And, I’m perfectly capable of making my own educated assessments based on factual information.

Report this

By RightWing, September 7, 2008 at 11:00 am Link to this comment

and again if it is about Ob it must be a lie, your brain washed.

Report this

By Maani, September 7, 2008 at 8:41 am Link to this comment


“Executive experience” is hopelessly overrated. An “executive”-minded president was “coronated” in 2000 and re-elected in 2004.  And that hasn’t worked out very well, now, has it?


Report this

By cyrena, September 6, 2008 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment


Just as sort of an ‘fyi’...nobody believes anything from so called ‘fact check’, which is a right wing ideologically driven media outlet…part of the many of the swiftboat associations this season.

That is ‘not’ the same as the title of the article/editorial on Palin, which was put together by reporters from the AP, via Yahoo. Did you even bother to read the entire article? Here’s the title and author info

~Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention~   

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press Writer – Wed Sep 3, 11:48 pm ET


It’s a piece of journalism, simply reporting some basic FACTS. It’s not like the these are stats that happen to be a fatwa or something handed down from the bible.

Rather, the information is simply what it is. If anyone is in doubt, they can always check it, but it all looks true enough from what I can see.

As for ‘fact check’’s just another of the jillions of columns that post whatever on the internet. ALL of it has to be taken in context.

Now the latest is the crazies trying to claim that Obama was born in Kenya, instead of in Hawaii. Now that’s insanity, and a blatant ‘lie’, but you’d probably find it on something called ‘fact check’.

Now, how much of a lie is it that Sarah Palin has 5 kids, (though I have a colleague who doesn’t believe it’s really her kid, and thinks it could be one of the daughters’ kids..which is only so much more rumor). But we at least know that she’s a crazy, whacked-out fundamentalist because THAT much, is either directly from her own mouth, or documented as having come directly from her own brain/mouth..if she has them. (I heard the speech was written ‘for’ her, and that’s not such a surprise…she doesn’t come across as particularly bright in the academic sense).

So, none of this stuff about her is anything that cannot be independently corroborated.

It is what it is, which isn’t the same as the BS that you ‘submitted’ on Obama. That too is what it is, which is all unproven bullshit smearing.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 6, 2008 at 3:34 pm Link to this comment

So Palin lied and blamed Democrats for everything wrong with Washington that was caused by Republicans?

Why is that a surprise or shock?  That’s what Republicans have been doing at their conventions since 1980.  Feed raw meat to the reactionary right. Throw any negative lie against the wall just to see if it sticks.

Beware the latest “Swift Boat”: Fox Noise fanatics are now spreading the rumor that Obama wasn’t born in the US, but that he was born in Kenya and therefore isn’t eligible to President.  But nobody’s questioning whether McCain is eligible since he was born in Panama, in the Canal Zone.

Beware!  This is coming…be ready to prove it the Re-thug-lick-con it is.

Report this

By troublesum, September 6, 2008 at 5:22 am Link to this comment

There is no end to republican hypocrisy.  With their US senators propositioning men in public restrooms and being indicted on corruption charges, with their children in trouble with the law for public intoxication and DUI, their daughters pregnant but unmarried at 17, still they don’t STFU with preaching morality to the rest of us.

Report this

By RightWing, September 6, 2008 at 4:38 am Link to this comment

Well mr Peefella, those facts on Obama came from Factcheck ,just as Palins did, But like i said they must be right wing lies if it would be about Obama.

Report this

By cyrena, September 6, 2008 at 1:53 am Link to this comment

Re: Leefeller, September 5 at 8:03 pm

Leefeller, I LOVE it! smile

I guess this means moose guts don’t work so good as condoms, eh?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment


Wolf Killer Palin, actually used the moose guts to make condoms for her husband and her daughters boy friend, all in a days work before going to hospetal.

Right Wing, thanks for the factoides, now I know the real skinny on people who watch Fox News and why they know so much more than rest of us.

Must say after so many facts,  I am leaning toward voting for crash the old war hero and his vice president Mrs Congeniality. 

There are some rumors which may or may not be true.  Story has it the one other contestant in the annual Snow Queen Miss Congeniality contest,  ended up missing her glasses. 

As far fetched as this is, an other rumor is the one other contestant was discovered bound and gagged by moose guts in the janitors broom closet,  while missing her glasses.

Report this

By wildflower, September 5, 2008 at 8:04 pm Link to this comment

Re: “Palin is a female Dick Cheney.  She was vetted alright. The people running the GOP are not dumb.  Ideologues and fascists.”  [Ga]

Speaking of the Bush/Cheney administration, ideologues and fascists, John Dean has an interesting article on the Findlaw site.  He talks about Palin and “Why McCain’s Inexperienced Running Mate Falls Short of Meeting the Implicit Constitutional Qualifications For Vice Presidents.” 

“. . . Governor Sarah Palin Does Not Qualify Under the Implicit Constitutional Standards: When Nixon selected Ford to be his Vice President, and Ford selected Rockefeller, the government was divided, with the Democrats controlling Congress. Yet a Democratic Congress approved both Ford and Rockefeller to be Vice President based on inter-branch comity. Surely no one would argue that Sarah Palin is in a league with Ford and Rockefeller when it comes to experience.

Nor does Palin possess anything close to the experience qualifications of the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, or the President pro tempore of the Senate, Robert Byrd. Indeed, I feel confident that Palin could not get confirmed for any of the top presidential succession posts, namely the posts of Secretary of State, Treasury and Defense. Palin’s lack of qualifications have been widely noted. Newspapers from her state have raised questions of her qualifications.”

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 6:13 pm Link to this comment

Right Wing
If McCain voted exactly as Obama did then he would also have been right 97% of the time instead of wrong 90% of the time.  It’s very simple.  What part don’t you understand.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment

Now the facts from both sides, and this is only the first page of Obamas.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:05 pm Link to this comment

Gee it sure looks a little like we dont tell the whole TRUTH or we just didnt DIG deep enough. We checked the accuracy of Obama’s speech accepting the Democratic nomination, and noted the following:

Obama said he could “pay for every dime” of his spending and tax cut proposals “by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens.” That’s wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain’s, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts.
He twisted McCain’s words about Afghanistan, saying, “When John McCain said we could just ‘muddle through’ in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources.” Actually, McCain said in 2003 we “may” muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.

He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of “working” families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain’s plan at 66 million and finds that Obama’s plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.
Obama asked why McCain would “define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year”? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, “But seriously ...”
Obama noted that McCain’s health care plan would “tax people’s benefits” but didn’t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.

He said McCain, far from being a maverick who’s “broken with his party,” has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.

Obama said “average family income” went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn’t correct. An aide said he was really talking only about “working” families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accepted his party’s nomination Aug. 28, speaking before more than 84,000 people in Denver’s Mile High football stadium. Some of his comments were worthy of a ref’s yellow flag.

Not Quite Every Dime

Obama reassured voters that he can pay for all his spending proposals:

Obama: Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I’ve laid out how I’ll pay for every dime – by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don’t help America grow.

This is misleading. Even by his own campaign’s estimates, closing corporate loopholes and tax havens won’t pay for all of Obama’s new plans. In July, the campaign told the Los Angeles Times that they estimate the yearly cost of their proposed tax cuts at $130 billion. They put revenue from closing tax loopholes at just $80 billion. Obama also proposes to raise taxes to pre-Bush levels for families earning more than $250,000 a year and singles making more than $200,000, yielding additional revenue. But he didn’t mention that in his speech.

But Obama’s claim is misleading on another level. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, “without substantial cuts in government spending” Obama’s plan – and McCain’s, too –  “would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years.” Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor told that the Tax Policy Center’s analysis “fails to take in account Senator Obama’s spending cuts, including ending the Iraq war.” That’s true, but Obama’s proposed cuts are dwarfed by the Tax Policy Center’s projected deficits. Obama’s new spending programs might be completely offset by new revenue and spending cuts. But overall spending will still exceed overall revenue, and the nation would face at least 10 more years of annual deficits.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:02 pm Link to this comment

Afghan Muddle

Obama twisted McCain’s words about Afghanistan, incorrectly implying that McCain saw no need for more troops there.

Obama: When John McCain said we could just “muddle through” in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11

Actually, McCain said in 2003 that the U.S. “may” muddle through, not that we could or would. He also said he was very concerned about a rise in al Qaeda activity there. He said then that he was “guardedly optimistic” that the government could handle it.

McCain, 2003: I think Afghanistan is dicey. I think that there are certain areas of the country, particularly along the Pakistani border, that are clearly not under the control of either Pakistan or the Afghan government. ... There has been a rise in al Qaeda activity along the border. There has been some increase in U.S. casualties. I am concerned about it, but I’m not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I’d be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that – in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan.

So I’m guardedly optimistic, but I am also realistic that the central government in Kabul has very little effect on the policies and practices of the warlords who control the surrounding areas.

Recently, however, both candidates have called for an increased troop presence in Afghanistan. In July, Obama proposed sending two more combat brigades, drawn down from Iraq. McCain immediately followed this with a call for three more brigades, but later clarified that some of those troops would be NATO forces. A McCain spokeswoman said that the U.S. would “contribute” troops to the increase under McCain’s plan.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

Tax Spin

Obama said: “I will cut taxes ... for 95 percent of all working families.” And he said McCain proposes “not one penny of tax relief to more than 100 million Americans,” a claim his running mate, Joe Biden, made the night before.

Obama is right about his plan’s effect on working families. More broadly, though, the plan cuts taxes for 81.3 percent of all households in 2009, according to the Tax Policy Center. The TPC also says McCain’s tax plan would leave 65.8 million households without a cut, not 100 million.

The TPC’s calculations factor in what’s in effect a hidden tax on individuals that results from taxing corporations. McCain proposes to lower the corporate income tax rate, and Obama proposes billions of dollars in increased corporate taxes in the form of “loophole closings.” Individuals wouldn’t experience those changes as an increased tax bill from the government, but both the Congressional Budget Office and TPC allocate all corporate tax to owners of capital rather than to consumers. That means rather than flowing through to consumers in the form of higher prices or lower wages, corporate tax changes would show up as higher or lower returns on investments, which typically come in the form of corporate dividends, and profits or losses from stock sales.

Only by ignoring the hidden benefit to individuals can McCain’s plan be said to produce no cut for 100 million households. According to a calculation the TPC did at FactCheck’s request, 101.9 million see no benefit if the effects of a corporate reduction are set aside.

For the record, Obama aides say the indirect effect on holders of capital won’t be as large as TPC says. “We dispute TPC’s methodology here,” says Brian Deese of the Obama campaign. He says several of the “loophole closers” that Obama is proposing won’t affect corporations or are on offshore activity that will not directly filter through.

We’d also note that retirees would fare quite a bit less well than working families under Obama’s tax plan: The TPC estimates that 32 percent of households with a person over age 65 would see a tax increase.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:00 pm Link to this comment

Rich Humor

Obama used a clumsy attempt at humor by McCain as evidence of his supposed insensitivity to middle-class economic realities:

Obama: Now, I don’t believe that Senator McCain doesn’t care what’s going on in the lives of Americans; I just think he doesn’t know. Why else would he define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year?

What McCain actually said at the Saddleback Church forum on Aug. 16 was that he favors low taxes for all income levels. He drew a laugh, then said, “but seriously” as he struggled to make his point:

Pastor Rick Warren, Aug. 16: [G]ive me a number, give me a specific number - where do you move from middle class to rich?

McCain: I don’t want to take any money from the rich – I want everybody to get rich. ... So, I think if you are just talking about income, how about $5 million?


But seriously, I don’t think you can - I don’t think seriously that - the point is that I’m trying to make here, seriously – and I’m sure that comment will be distorted – but the point is that we want to keep people’s taxes low and increase revenues.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 6:00 pm Link to this comment

Health Care Half Truths

Obama gave only half the story when he described a feature of McCain’s health care plan:

Obama: How else could he offer a health care plan that would actually tax people’s benefits…

McCain proposes to grant families up to a $5,000 tax credit to use for health benefits. The flip side of that proposal, which McCain seldom if ever mentions, is that the value of employer-sponsored benefits would also become taxable. Both candidates are trading in half-truths here; McCain talks only about the pleasurable side of his plan, while Obama’s speech mentioned only the painful aspect. Neither gives a complete picture.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 5:59 pm Link to this comment

Party Hearties

Obama painted McCain as a Republican partisan who’s supported the unpopular President Bush consistently:

Obama: And next week, we’ll also hear about those occasions when he’s broken with his party as evidence that he can deliver the change that we need. But the record’s clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush 90 percent of the time.

It’s true that McCain’s voting support for Bush policies has averaged slightly above 89 percent since Bush took office, according to Congressional Quarterly’s vote studies. But it has ebbed and flowed. It reached a low of 77 percent in 2005. Last year it was 95 percent. By comparison, Obama’s own record of supporting Bush policies has averaged slightly under 41 percent since the senator took office. However, Obama’s voting record is no less partisan than McCain’s. He has voted in line with his party an average of nearly 97 percent of the time. The truth is that neither candidate can claim a strong record of “breaking with his party” if Senate votes are the measure.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 5:59 pm Link to this comment

He Didn’t Mean It

Obama also pulled some sleight of hand when he stated that “the average American family” saw its income “go down $2,000” under George Bush. That’s not correct. Census figures show average family income went down $348.

As it turns out, when Obama said “average family income,” he didn’t mean “average,” and he didn’t mean “family,” either. An Obama aide says he was really referring to median income – which is the midpoint – and not to the average. And Obama was talking only about “working families,” not retired couples.

For all families, median family income actually inched up under Bush by $272.

– by Brooks Jackson, with Viveca Novak, Justin Bank, Jess Henig, Emi Kolawole, Joe Miller, Lori Robertson and D’Angelo Gore

Burman, Len, et. al. “An Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans: Revised August 15, 2008.” Tax Policy Center, 15 Aug. 2008.

Table T08-0182, Senator McCain’s Tax Proposals as Described by his Economic Advisors, Distribution of Federal Tax Change by Cash Income Percentile, 2009. Tax Policy Center, 19 July 2008.

Gleckman, Roberton Williams and Howard. “An Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans.” 28 August 2008. The Tax Policy Center. 29 August 2008

Nicholas, Peter. “Adding Up the Cost of Obama’s agenda.” 8 July 2008. The Los Angeles Times. 29 August 2008

CQ member Profiles: Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). 1 Apr. 2007. Congressional Quarterly, 9 June 2008.

CQ member Profiles: Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill). February 2008. Congressional Quarterly, 12 June 2008.

Transcript, “Saddleback Presidential Candidates Forum” 16 Aug. 2008.

Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, “Table T08-0203 - Senator Obama’s Tax Proposals of August 14, 2008: Economic Advisers’ Version (No Payroll Surtax), Distribution of Federal Tax Change by Cash Income Percentile, 2009” 14 Aug 2008.
Related Articles
Context Included: Obama on Iran
McCain ad cherry-picks Obama remarks on Iran, twisting his meaning.
Obama and ‘Infanticide’
The facts about Obama’s votes against ‘Born Alive’ bills in Illinois.
Rezko Reality
McCain misfires as he attacks Obama’s home purchase.
Reed Reality
Key facts are missing in an Obama ad linking McCain to Ralph Reed.

Report this

By Ga, September 5, 2008 at 5:58 pm Link to this comment

wildflower: “McCain says Palin is his soulmate, and I suppose we should take his word for it.”

These people do not mean what they say. They say whatever they think their audience will like to hear. The RNC was entirely scripted, probably written by a committee of Gingrich-esqe GOPACers.

At times, Palin looked like she was reading her script for the first time.

Stepford Wive? Hardly. Palin is a female Dick Cheney. She was vetted alright. The people running the GOP are not dumb. Ideologues and Fascists, but not dumb.

Report this

By RightWing, September 5, 2008 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment

Lets see we fact check one party and it is gospel, well lets look at the Obama fact check.

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 5:27 pm Link to this comment

I don’t think women are stupid.  But I do agree that it is frightening.  I wouldn’t vote for Nader now under any circumstances. 
I was just watching Ben Stein, no friend to democrats, on youtube recorded at the republican convention.  He said that Palin was the weirdest vp choice in history.  He said she is “backwoods, fundamentalist christian” with absolutely no knowledge or experience in economics or international relations.  “I don’t know if she scares Obama”, he said, “but she scares me.”

Report this

By wildflower, September 5, 2008 at 5:19 pm Link to this comment

Re: troublesum

Guess time will tell how tough Alaska’s legislature really is. In the meantime,  did you note this business about Palin’s lawyer? 

Anchorage Daily News.

“. . . Gov. Sarah Palin’s lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, made an absurd threat in his battle to get the Legislature to back off its ethics investigation of the governor and her staff.

Van Flein said legislative investigator Steve Branchflower tried to call First Gentleman Todd Palin directly on “a secure and confidential line. This represents a serious security breach that we may be obligated to report to the Secret Service.”

Hello? Branchflower is acting on behalf of the Legislature. That’s a security breach?” . . .

Report this

By Sepharad, September 5, 2008 at 5:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Forget the moose and Stepford jokes—this is scary. After Obama announced coal as the next big fuel, I swore I’d vote for McKinney or Nader. But then McCain picked Palin, and some of the post-convention polls have the race too close to call, esp. in PA and Ohio and many other states Obama couldn’t carry in the primaries. Now I don’t have the luxury of voting for anyone but Obama, who’s retreating from his idealistic primary declarations as fast as possible. Hope Hillary (and Bill)can save O’s bacon, ‘cause nobody else will be able to.

It’s really, really insulting that someone would toss a warm female body out there just to get the womens’ vote. But McCain knew what he was doing, I’m afraid. He’s pulling back all the alienated conservative Christian right people, maybe most of the working-class blue-collar men and women, even some of the independents who like to think of themselves as unpredictable, feisty and iconoclastic. So the race is too close to call in some states the Dems MUST carry to win. My only consolation is that if Obama—Mr. Change We Can Deceive In—wins, I’m OK with Biden, who has come out CLEARLY against attacking Iran. (As a Zionist, I’m also glad that Biden’s told Israel’s rightwing religious guys to learn to live with a nuclear Iran—that gives tons of support to the majority of sane Israelis who, like me, are betting that the mullahs are not self-destructive, no matter what Ahmadinejad says.)

Palin? I’m still stunned. There has to be a bottom of the barrel somewhere, but they just keep going deeper and deeper.

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 4:59 pm Link to this comment

Reguarding “troopergate”, the Alaskan state senator who is in charge of the investigation said today that they were not going to be pressured by the McCain campaign to delay the results of the investigation until after the election.  He said the results would be made public in early October.

Report this

By wildflower, September 5, 2008 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment

McCain says Palin is his soulmate, and I suppose we should take his word for it.  But now I’m thinking she may also be a soulmate of George W. Bush:

Anchorage Daily News:

“. . . Gov. Sarah Palin is taking the wrong approach to Troopergate. She should be practicing the open and transparent, ethical and accountable government she promised when running for governor and boasts about now that she’s on the national stage.

Instead, Gov. Palin has begun stonewalling the Legislature’s attempt to get the bottom of allegations that she, her family or staff violated ethical or state personnel rules. . .

The allegations are that she, her family or administration improperly pressured then-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire Gov. Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten, who had been in the middle of a custody dispute with Palin’s sister.

In July, when legislators started talking about conducting an investigation, Palin denied any wrongdoing and said she welcomed an investigation.
“Hold me accountable,” she said.

The Legislature took her up on that offer. But this week, she basically told the Legislature, “Never mind.”

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment

It was a link to a cartoon showing “Mavericks for McCain” all lined up in a group - Big Oil, Big Gas, Big Coal, AMA, Big Pharma, Wall Street, K Street, etc.  Business tycoons in pin-stripe suits.  I don’t know why it doesn’t work.

Report this

By rage, September 5, 2008 at 3:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yeah, Caribou Barbie is so busted. The media and the bloggosphere caught every single damned lie SaraCuda told! This is exactly why Team Grampers is screaming for a media blackout. Miss Wasilla couldn’t even be beneficially cute and stupid right with the aid of a telepromter, and she calls herself a one-time Juneau media putz. Between this and all her family scandals, Palin is shelling Gramps for the Dems. Palin can’t open her mouth without sticking both her feet halfway down her throat with her shoes still on. As if that ain’t bad enough, Joe Biden is already asking what wine best complements Caribou Tartar. If the blogosphere or the National Enquirer drags one more skeleton out a closet of the Alaska Governor’s mansion to throw onboard the Straightjacket Regress, that campaign is going to spontaneously combust, killing both the Geezer and the Tease.

Truth is, we’re only seconds away from Gramps having that prophesied moment of rage provoked by Miss Wasilla’s cerebral flatlining at the worst possible moments. All we on the left request is that you Rethugs drop us a hint or something, just a subtle heads-up, you know, a quick nod, to let us know Gramps is about to cut loose and holla’ “CUNNNNNT!!!!!!!!!” at his candy heiress. C’mon, don’t y’all be dirty, and cut us out of that pleasure. That would be so wrong. We helped y’all with Bill Clinton. Do us that solid in return. We know it’s coming! Miss Wasilla is a quarter gaffe and a half scandal away from Gramps’ bringing that ruckus with green tobasco! Just holla’ at your gang over here!

Report this

By cyrena, September 5, 2008 at 3:46 pm Link to this comment

By Leefeller, September 5 at 2:14

Good one Leefeller. smile

I’m really impressed about the parka’s. You’re probably right about Hillary and breaking the nail, but at least Hillary doesn’t wear glasses that she doesn’t need, just to make herself ‘look smarter.’ And, you’ve gotta admit, Hillary *is* smarter.

Now of course if it were me and the breaking of the waters, (and it has been) I’d be hollering for an epidural, (and I have). I don’t find anything the least bit admirable or heroic or anything else, about suffering pain unnecessarily. In fact, I think it’s stupid.

My mother likes to remind of how she ‘fought off’ the ether that they gave women in childbirth, back in the ‘olden days’ when she delivered me to the world. Then she follows it up with the casual mention that she was only in labor for 20 minutes with me anyway.

Hell, anybody can stand 20 minutes. Try 36 hours.

Anyway, I guess Sarah used to the guts to make Moose Stew???

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 3:46 pm Link to this comment

Thinkprogress is reporting that Bush’s name was mentioned only once from the podium by any of the main speekers at the 5 day republican national convention.  This is unprecedented in American political history that the name of a sitting president could not be mentioned at his party’s national convention.  (They invoked Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Reagan - anybody but W.)  The republicans were thereby admitting that the last 8 years of republican government have been an unmitigated disaster for the nation and they were ashamed to mention their leader’s name.  Cheney’s name was mentioned 0 times.
Thank you republicans for giving the world your assessment of the last 8 years.

Report this

By wildflower, September 5, 2008 at 3:24 pm Link to this comment

RE: “The introduction to John McCain at the Republican National Convention last night was all about family values . . . Oddly missing . . . was a single mention of McCain’s first wife. . .  the one who stood by him, raising their three kids . . . only to be dumped . . . for a younger woman, despite, or because of, her having suffered . . . disfiguring injuries in an auto accident . . . “  [Robert]

Yes, I noted this too, but, of course, if McCain’s first wife had been mentioned, the convention balloons might have burst or the warm illusions of the crowd might have been spoiled, which could have led to some kind of unpleasant mental activity about McCain’s adultery or even worse sparked thoughts of decaying moral values or breakdowns in family values.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 3:14 pm Link to this comment


From what I have been told by reliable sources, after gutting the Moose, she made Parka’s for the whole family, then lobbied to collect $1500 from the oil companies for the new baby, all before going to Hospital. What a women, Hillary would have been worried about breaking a nail instead of water.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment

Rus, the WMD Iraq had were used after the first Gulf Conflict, and the remaining ones were dismantled surreptitiously.

I wonder, though, do you think we should invade every country who talks about America in a bad light? We’d have to invade many more countries, then. If we also invaded every country where an American or a few Americans were killed, we’d have to invade China because of what happened on the first day of the Olympics this year.

Perhaps some people think military action is the first and best way to respond, but they are profoundly misguided in their ideology for thinking so. There was no reason to invade Iraq.

Furthermore, I’ve answered questions from you several times, and not once have you acknowledged my response. Why should I bother answering random factoid questions when you fail on every account to clearly answer any question we have for you?

Like, how do you win an occupation? How is John McCain going to create jobs in America? What does “Victory” mean in Iraq since we ended active military operations in that country in 2003?

Report this

By cyrena, September 5, 2008 at 2:08 pm Link to this comment

•  “Stepford wives comes to mind, now the breaking water thing and not going to the hospital, instead dragging and gutting a Moose is a little different I kind of admire that.”….” Pretty is in the eyes of the beholder, since I am a hateful and bigoted person, her personality and persona make me want to gag, the pretty face does not do it for me…”


You read the thoughts of my own mind. In fact, we were JUST saying the very same thing, (Stepford Wives) about Palin last night. BUT, I find her far more dangerous than any of the Stepford’s.

And indeed pretty is in the eyes of the beholder, because I’ve yet to see anything ‘all that’ about Sarah here. In fact, I think she’s pretty ~plain~ if not outright frumpy. Even pantsuit Hillary has a whole lot more going for her, and she’s 2 decades older. That is if we’re talking about physical traits, and I’m just not sure why that’s even important in the selection of anybody for anything. Ah but this is America, so physical appearance means everything.

This is the first I’m hearing about dragging and gutting the moose after the breaking of the water, (instead of going to the hospital). I don’t think it much matters whether she went to the hospital or not, but I don’t get the obsession with the animal killings. Why the huge pile of antlers and carcasses piled up at the driveway? WHAT is the purpose of hunting and killing these animals other than for folks to eat? How many deer/moose/caribou does a family of 7 need to survive on? I mean, wouldn’t one do it for an entire winter, like back in the days of the Indigenous, before we were wiped out?

Seriously, ONE bear would last a year. ONE Moose could provide food, clothing, shelter, for an entire family for at least a year. What’s up with the multiple killings? I don’t get it. But then, I never have understood hunting for sport.

So, what did she do with the moose after she gutted it?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment


You link will not work, keeps going to, so I looked up gutting a Moose instead.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 1:34 pm Link to this comment


“Foiled again by a pretty face” Interesting you say that, her face and looks coupled with her lack of demureness I find very spooky, for I have seen the same face and similar attributes in several other women, very much clones.

Stepford wives comes to mind, now the breaking water thing and not going to the hospital,  instead dragging and gutting a Moose is a little different I kind of admire that. 

Pretty is in the eyes of the beholder, since I am a hateful and bigoted person, her personality and persona make me want to gag, the pretty face does not do it for me. Now McCain on the other hand, may disagree with me about her pretty face and other attributes he has checked out with has special war hero x-ray vision.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 12:51 pm Link to this comment

It’s fine, Cyrena. I’m aware. All it is for me is good practice for debating people in my area. Better to begin with Rus and end with a neighbor in my book.

Report this

By cyrena, September 5, 2008 at 12:31 pm Link to this comment


I see you’re the latest rus7355 target. But, it could be anybody, since it has been at least a dozen of us that have been front man or woman in formation for his attacks. Rus7355 has been at this for months, targeting various posters as they come on line, and always with the EXACT SAME MO. I swear, it’s like a standard protocol or the ‘training manual’ for Repug/neo con operatives. It’s not even original. The verbiage is even identical. He starts out asking what ‘qualifications’ Obama has, and when provided with a full list, (including bills sponsored and passed into law) he ignores or dismisses them.

Then he moves into his next obsession over Saddam and the illegal attack on Iraq, attempting to defend the indefensible, and he never gives up. Anything to muddy the waters and distract from the total failure of this gangster regime of the past 8 years.

Then he kicks in with personal attacks and name calling against anyone who challenges the bullshit. He’s always careful to claim that he ‘likes’ Obama, (that much be in the training somewhere) only to then launch into the attacks and smears on how he isn’t qualified.

Anyway, he apparently missed you before, and while Maani’s idea is a good one, (ignoring him) he still finds a way to suck people into his ridiculous and malicious attacks.

Report this
Robert's avatar

By Robert, September 5, 2008 at 12:23 pm Link to this comment

September 5, 2008

What About McCain’s First Wife?

The Things They Left Behind


“The introduction to John McCain at the Republican National Convention last night was all about family values. There was the paean to his mother and father, the touching story of his and Cindy’s adoption of a baby girl from India, and then there was Cindy herself, who was the focus of much of a gauzy introductory film on McCain, and who also did the introductory speech, and who brought all the kids up on stage with her at the end.

Oddly missing from this warm, feel-good picture, however, was a single mention of McCain’s first wife Carol Shepp—the one who stood by him, raising their three kids, through his trying five years in a Vietnamese prison, only to be dumped upon his heroic return for a younger woman, despite, or because of, her having suffered permanent disabling and disfiguring injuries in an auto accident during his absence.

Now I’m not faulting McCain for leaving his wife for a younger, richer woman. Who knows what the relationship was like at the time. Maybe Shepp wanted him out of her life by the time he started slipping off to date beer heiress Cindy Lou Hensley. But if McCain and his campaign staff wanted to make him a poster child for “family values,” they should have had the basic integrity to explain that he didn’t always consider marriage a binding covenant, for better or worse,  richer or poorer, and in sickness or in health. (If you want an unvarnished view of the real John McCain, read an interview with Carol McCain published last June in the UK newspaper, The Mail, headlined “The Wife US Republican John McCain Callously Left Behind”.)”

“There was the long list of speakers touting America’s “freedoms” as, outside the convention hall, police thugs dressed in military gear, and armed with huge batons and assault weaponry were bashing in doors and terrorizing journalists, arresting others and dragging them face down along the street, using teargas against peaceful demonstrators and arresting them by the hundreds.

There was McCain talking about how everyone, including the “child of Latino immigrants,” is an American, to an audience of Republicans that was so embarrassingly white that you had to shield your eyes from the glare of the screen.

There was Sarah Palin, complaining about a media focus on her pregnant 17-year-old daughter Bristol, all the while shamelessly parading that same daughter and her 18-year-old impregnator, who was dragged down to the convention to be shown off after the two had been somehow convinced to get married and make the baby “legal.”

There were the repeated characterizations of McCain as a battler against corruption and the influence of “special interests,” without a word of mention of his having been the recipient of over $100,000 in cash from Paul Keating, a corrupt banker whose interests McCain shamelessly pimped for in Congress, only narrowly escaping indictment himself.

Perhaps the most outrageous hypocrisy of all was claiming that the McCain/Palin ticket would be “taking on” the corrupt Washington Establishment, as though that establishment hadn’t been predominantly Republican for most of the past decade, and as though McCain and Palin hadn’t been an integral part of it.  McCain, after all, has spent those years dutifully voting with his Republican peers over 90 percent of the time, shoveling out perks to the rich and the corporations, while Palin, first as mayor of the small town of Wasilla, and then as governor of Alaska, employed an Abramoff-linked Washington lobbyist to help win massive amounts of corrupt “earmarks” for her town and state. She even backed the notorious $400-million earmark for the “Bridge to Nowhere” until it became a national joke, yet there she was, in her acceptance speech, claiming to have opposed that outrageous taxpayer ripoff.”

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment

We are a bunch of hateful fear mongering bigots, saving one of our fellow posters,  from interrupting his special time staring at the corner of in his room. How low can we go?  Maybe I will try staring into the corner of my office and see if I can even conjure up how the other side makes comments without thought or reason. Attempt to try erasing thought from my gray cells, grasping onto undeveloped enlightenment and obtaining the gift of being unreasonable and argue with thoughtless one liners.

Actually, it has been stated that right wingers are born that way, usually starts with a drop on their head.

Since we are losing our Liberties, maybe we can have a voting test, sort of like a driving test, people would have to show some sort of ability to use thought and reason before being allowed to vote.  Then of course, Bush would not have been allowed to run for President, I have my doubts about McCain also.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

Making a war hero out of someone who had 20 hours in a cockpit dropping bombs on unknown targets, does not make a hero, being shot down and caught, does not make a hero, being a prisoner of war does not make a hero. 600 other POW’s do not feel they are hero’s, so why does McCain feel he should be an exception? 600 other POW’s are not running for president, they have comment sense and integrity.  Calling oneself a hero does not a hero make.  What! Did McCain have cards printed?

If one really looks at the facts, Obama is worthy of everything he has made of himself, he worked for it, opposed to Palin the PTA president and McCain the war hero, promoting themselves like political whores. One big difference, with McCAin and Palin is we are buying two pigs in a poke,  with a lady of the night, you know what you are going to get for your money.

Vote “wolf killer and hero”, sounds like a novel. Find out which one is the trusty dog?

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

How does having your aircraft shot down make you a hero??  McCain’s life was made by a Vietcong soldier with and anti-aircraft gun and a good aim.

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 11:51 am Link to this comment

There’s a reason why the republicans focus so exclusively on the fraction of his life that McCain spent in Vietnam: the rest of his life doesn’t bear close scrutiny.  He graduated at the bottom of his class at Annapolis either because he never openned a book or because he doesn’t have a lot to work with upstairs.  He got into Annapolis because his grandfather and father were admirals in the US Navy.  He started his senate career by becomming a member of the “Keating five.”  He abandoned his first wife for one who had more money and who could give him the lavish lifestyle he desires.(He’s a wife-made man not a real man) He committed bigamy when he married his second wife because he wasn’t divorced yet from his first wife.  He had a sexual affair with a lobbyist four years ago (as revealed by the NY times last spring) while the senate was considering legislation which the involved the corporation which the lobbyist worked for.  When ever possible he votes on both sides of an issue for instance on authorizing the use of torture by the CIA.  He votes both for and against it at different times.  He spoke out strongly against the use of waterboarding during the primary elections and then went back to Washington and voted for legislation authorizing the CIA to use it.  The list is endless.  Better focus on that POW camp in Vietnam.

Report this

By Maani, September 5, 2008 at 11:39 am Link to this comment

Two more for your reading pleasure…LOL:

A zinger from Gail Collins (the last line hits it out of the park!): clinton biden&st=cse&scp=23&pagewanted=print

A solid assessment by Paul Krugman:


Report this

By Cran Berry, September 5, 2008 at 11:32 am Link to this comment

Foiled again by a pretty face. The voters will bend over backwards to elect the republicans once again. It’s all based on looks, not substance.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

Maani, the “Big Tent” the GOP has comes from all the money shoved down their pants. };>

Report this

By Maani, September 5, 2008 at 11:18 am Link to this comment


Your “list” response to Rus re Obama’s “leadership” skills was superb.  It is obvious that Rus is a right-wing troll.  He has every right to his opinion (no matter how absurd or insupportable it may be), so the best thing to do is ignore him: you are only feeding his need to provoke (as well as his poor debating skills and circular logic…LOL)


Re the possible bait-and-switch re Palin and some other VP choice, remember what happened in 1972: when McGovern’s found out about the “skeletons” in Tom Eagleton’s closet, Eagelton pulled out and McGovern chose Shriver.  Thus, it would not be a first.  In this regard, I would bet on your horse here.


There is one aspect of the RNC that I have not seen one word about from any reporter or pundit (though, of course, I could have missed it).  I watched Palin’s speech (which, by the way, was written FOR her), and in the 38 minutes she spoke, the camera panned the audience numerous times.  Yet there was not ONE SINGLE face of “color”: not a single Black, Asian, Latino or non-white face.  It might as well have been a white supremacist meeting.  So much for the “big tent” of the G.O.P.

A couple of interesting items for all:

From someone who lives in Wasilla:

A two-part article on Alternet:

Part 1:

Part 2:


Report this

By dale Headley, September 5, 2008 at 11:17 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Associated Press is showing leadership on an issue that the mainstream press irresponsibly ignored during the Bush Administration: actual fact checking.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 11:08 am Link to this comment

I’ll tell you another question which goes unanswered. How on Earth is John McCain or Sarah Palin going to solve the housing crisis or improve the economy?

Where were Palin’s great insights into public and foreign policy in her speech? MIA are any ideas for America from John McCain and Sarah Palin. What will either do about Health Care?

Why don’t the Republican candidates talk about these issues instead of drumming about how the surge worked. Why are they living in the past?

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 10:54 am Link to this comment

Hussein wasn’t a threat. No more than Ahmadinejad is. They talk tough, but there is little venom behind what they say.

You can’t control this conversation, Rus. You’ve not answered my questions. Where in your inquiry is the answer to where the WMD are? Where in your inquiry shows imminent threat to the sovereignty of the United States of America?

Why do you need to answer my questions with an inquisition of your own? Maybe it’s because you lack real answers.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

I’m not concerned why Clinton attacked Iraq because I was against those bombings as well. It was another military move of political expediency as far as I’m concerned.

None of those citations are causes for war either. Those are merely weak points contrary to the reasons cited for invading, which were mainly WMD and a loose link to 9-11 that was completely false. Don’t try and test me on random facts while evading my questions completely.

Heritage Foundation paying you, then? You didn’t answer that one.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 10:35 am Link to this comment

Rus, that’s nonsensical swill. What is executive experience other than being responsible for making decisions? Being the president and chief editor of the Harvard Law Review requires decision making. Writing bills and deciding what issues need to be pressed on in the halls of congress requires decision making.

Once again, you fail to make a valid point. McCain has experience in being a lousy Keating 5 traitor to America.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 10:26 am Link to this comment

Self Defense? Iraq hadn’t threatened America. We invaded a sovereign nation for no purpose at all other than political expediency and re-distribution of wealth.

How was it self-defense, Rus? Where are the WMD, Rus? Who’s paying your salary, Rus?

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 10:19 am Link to this comment

Rus, making a claim doesn’t make it true. If you know anything about Barack Obama, you are sure as hell doing your best not to say anything positive about him.

Being a Senator in both Federal and State arenas means having leadership skills.
Being a successful community organizer shows he has excellent leadership ability.
Running the Harvard Law Review means he has excellence in leadership.
Winning a race against the most popular name in the Democratic party means Leadership Success.
Co-writing, sponsoring and getting passed into LAW sweeping ethics reform since Watergate in his first year in the Senate means Obama is quick to lead and succeed.
Winning a Senate seat while opposing a military invasion at a time where it was unwise to question the Iraq War means ethical leadership.
Working to make sure police interrogations are properly monitored means ethical leadership.
Being able to unite a party after a bitter battle and bringing together Independents, Central Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Progressives of all races, creeds and walks of life absolutely requires STRONG LEADERSHIP.

Your candidate has nothing on Obama, and I’m talking about John McCain not Sarah Palin. Practically every opinion you push in has no substance. None. McCain-Pain will lose in the fall. Your next president of the United States of America is Barack Obama.

Report this

By mlb, September 5, 2008 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

Republicans are immune to the moral effects of telling lies and to the shame of hypocrisy, for they have no shame, and they have no shame because they have no morality.  If Sarah Palin spouts nothing but lies and ultra right demagogic bullshit for the rest of the campaign (which she surely will), the Democrats will scream bloody murder, and that will make Democratic voters hate Palin a little more, but it won’t cost McCain a single Republican vote.

Looks like Obama is screwed.  In one fell swoop the Republicans have reeled in the disaffected far right phony Christians.  It won’t cost them support from corporate Republicans either, because they know that if Palin were to became president, she’d be putty in their hands. 

The Democrats have done just the opposite.  Obama’s immediate and dramatic lurch to the right after securing the nomination, culminating with his corporatist/fascist constitution trashing police state FISA bill, has seriously alienated progressives and may well cost him the election. 

The pathetically stupid thing about it is that Obama was already the corporate choice.  There was no need for him to lick the boots of his corporate and Zionist masters as ostentatiously as he has.  Now he’s blown it.  Obama has turned out to be less politically intelligent than he might have seemed. He doesn’t have that magic touch that Bill Clinton had in his prime.

I voted for Clinton twice.  I liked Al Gore and was happy to support him. (though I was more politically naive before Bush woke me up) I was very disappointed in Kerry’s pro-war stance but I still liked him and went along with the “no one’s as bad as Bush” thing, so I held my nose, and gave him my vote. 

This time around is completely different for me.  I’ve never really liked Obama. He strikes me as an arrogant and insincere, just another slick political operator, though for a while there I thought I could vote for him.  Now I’m so disgusted and angered by his treachery and his wholesale adoption of the neocon imperialist foreign policy agenda that I’ll vote for Nader or McKinney.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 10:15 am Link to this comment


Maybe in all you wisdom you can explain why we went to war in Iraq, please explain it to me, and while you at it why was it good to dump the Geneva Convention?  Torture accepted by you? Do you really find it necessary, for what, they have proven it does not work and only gets whatever they want, any information to stop the torture.  Your are the fear monger, the past eight years has been a fearfest, sponsored by your special Commander in Chief, maybe the worst president in US history. 

Rus, if you have an opinion on why the last eight years have been so great, I would love to hear it, because I doubt if you have more than one.

My main fear is the corrosion and attacks of our Liberties, you seem so blindly to ignore.  If you like imperialism so much why don’t you support it with some reason or opinion, instead of calling everyone who disagrees with your view a bigot.

Report this

By Keith, September 5, 2008 at 9:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush called the Constitution just a “goddamn piece of paper.” STFU!!! Please.

Report this

By felicity, September 5, 2008 at 9:37 am Link to this comment

re: Rus7355

Have you noticed that McCain is not running on his ‘accomplishments,’ his ‘experience’ (other than his stay at the Hanoi Hilton) or his ‘leadership’ background?  Perhaps you shouldn’t bring it up in regards to Obama - might open up a can of worms that McCain may want to keep the lid on?

Nope, unlike Eisenhower who scoffed at the idea that his military career in any way qualified him for the presidency, McCain tells us repeatedly that his POW background does somehow qualify him to be president.  But hell, Ike wasn’t a POW so what does he know.

Report this

By Aegrus, September 5, 2008 at 8:06 am Link to this comment

Rus, the fact check is:

Obama has leadership skills John McCain doesn’t have.
Obama is running against McCain and not Palin.
Obama has more accomplishments for time spent in Washington than McCain when you take account how long he has been in Washington.
Rus, the “accomplishments” you listed for McCain previously are mostly trumped up appointments and titles that Obama has too, but I’m not so shallow as to place titles side-by-side with accomplishments.
You’re being used by meaningless rhetoric.
Obama has better ideas for America than McCain
Barack Obama is a self-made man.
The only division and blind hatred here is that proposed by the Extreme Right Wing, and you are an example.

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, September 5, 2008 at 8:03 am Link to this comment

McCain made this election a very interesting one.  Choosing Palin as his running mate was both strategic and tactical.  Tactical in that the GOP took the headlines; strategic in that Palin may absorb some of the “Hillary” voters and solidifies his conservative base.  Based on their own private polls and surveys, McCain and his staff know they have an uphill battle.  The mantra of this election is “Change.”  Palin offers the GOP the image of change.  By going for experience, Obama’s selection of Biden diminished his aura of change.  Politics is really a chess game, but sometimes the person who goes first is at a disadvantage.

However, even with McCain’s bold move he is still behind, but he knows that there is an under tow of an anti-black vote. Depending on how much McCain entices the women vote and the extent of the anti-black vote, the GOP could pull this out.

Also, the debates will be interesting not that they will change the electorate per se because they are usually well planned and the parties depend on the campaign itself to sway voters, but will someone make a major blunder?

Report this

By felicity, September 5, 2008 at 7:57 am Link to this comment

Cyrena - repeat lies often enough and they become truths.  That technique is heartily subscribed to by Rove, a self-described devotee of Machiavelli.  Hitler’s Goebbels used it extensively in the final days of WWII, telling the German people that Germany was winning the war knowing all along that she was actually in the last throes of death.  Birds of a feather…?

Palin is being marketed as a commodity - cite the positive, leave out the negative.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 7:56 am Link to this comment


Your inclusive dissertations on issues and facts is mind boggling and so very enlightening.

No lets attack with issues that affect everyone, like the gays, the right to choose and of course you always have the illegals to beat on your real steak and potato kind of issue. 

Ignore the last 8 years of destruction of the Constitution and our Liberties.  Hell with the Geneva Convention. Which type of torture do you prefer?  The list goes on.

How about that war, no death in a war? Four more years, Four more years!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, September 5, 2008 at 7:34 am Link to this comment

McCain and Palin have set their agenda, which is to show no agenda, only attack Obama and keep away from the issues.  What war? Economy?  Our future as a nation?  Their job it to keep the focus on non issues, keep the flack going so voters with little time for retrospect,  accept lies as truths and vote again, against their own best interests.  Call attention to anything but what is real, use key words, socialism, Communism, even use the Nazi word. Drag the gay issue all over the place, and a favorite divisive one Choice.  Dissemination of our Liberties, Palin has already shown her hand and done a nice job on saying are we going to read terrorists their rights? 

The sickness has no cure!

What war?

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, September 5, 2008 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

“Beware the ambitious…”

To which I hasten to add, especially if they look, sound and behave as does Palin.

What’s with this woman? Her hairdoo is right out of the 50s & HeeHaw, her makeup looks as if it was designed and applied by Tammy Faye Baker, and her cute little pink & black outfit would fit right in on an episode of “Eight is Enough” or “Ozzie & Harriet.” And when she speaks… good grief! Shrill, aggressive, combative… all the qualities one wants in someone who wants to “work for you” - right?

AGGRESSION seems to be a positive attribute ONLY in the USA and other nations whose GNP is largely based in making and using military hardware. Everywhere else people consider ASSERTIVE as positive and aggressive as a hostile, unfriendly and dangerous trait. Americans don’t know the difference.

I have no idea whether what Palin claims is the truth, the whole truth, or a complete pack of fabrications. And I don’t care. I wouldn’t trust her out of my sight.

Mark my words. If America elects McCain/Palin, there will be CHANGE alright… and the world isn’t going to like it one bit.

But then… perhaps I shouldn’t worry. With the rise of both China and India, and the re-emergence of Russia as power players on the world stage, the USA is likely heading the way of Great Britain… a HAS BEEN in terms of threat or control. THAT, I submit, paraphrasing Martha… “is a GOOD thing.”

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, September 5, 2008 at 6:25 am Link to this comment

Wait for it, it’s coming!
She is the most ridiculous and reprehenisble person they could find for the ticket- Intentionally.
Oh they Vetted her alright and she had all the qualification to play ‘Perfect Patsy’
Whether she is disgraced into stepping down after gettting her ‘Nose Bloodied’ by Biden in the 1st VP debate, or a Family issue. Or Mac having to ask for her ‘resignation’ because her affiliation with a group of Successionist In AK, reveals her to be too UnPatriotic, she’s going Down.
ETA about Mid Oct. Too late to Vet anyone else.Hmmm who would be a Experienced and knowledgeable replacement…HEY THERE’S DICK!
I am NOT suggesting NOT taking her down and out, but be ready for the Ol’Bait & Switch. Come On who thinks aftr nearly 40 of manipulating the Gov’t, Industry and the People/World, Cheneycorp is going in to the ‘Sweet Goodnight’?
Granted she seems to have the same IQ and EGO of W, making it easier to manipulate her.But Why take the chance.
Of All the years that have passed (24) since the Dems had a Female VP candidate, Why did they wait til now to offer a Republican Female VP. To gain Hillary’s supporters? Palin is the Best qualified Female they could Find in the Party? Her stances are so far away from Hillary’s, did they think women were so stupid they’d cut their noses off to spite their face? No, they put her up to undermine the idea of a woman is actually smart enough and knowledgeable enough to run the country- She’s intended to discredit future Female Up and Comers n(Remember Palin!).
She’s already done some dumbass things which will justify throwing the Womens movement back about a 2 Millenia.She can’t even prioritize Delivering a child over Delivering a speech!What does that tell US about her ability to choose the real Priority,Her level of Arrogance and Ignorance( She is NOT a Fetal Monitor to determine Fetal Distress in a month early Premie birth, She is not a OB/GYN who specializes in Births which may pose Complications- and neither was the Airlines Staff!)
She has NO Real Political Office Credentials ( AK pop 600,000?) Her State equals One moderately sized metropolitan city in the lower 49!
Her Economic experience is Fishing,and Oil Rigging.
Her foreign exposure is indiginous Eskimos & Polar Bears.
Her Environmental Experience is Drilling for Oil and shooting Wolves from a Plane.
Her only claim to fame is she is capable of dropping 5 kids (and not such good marks on that ‘expertise’)

This whole VP Pick smells of BS! A set Up!
I’ll bet they cut the Switch so close to the Election, the Ballot will Still Read McCain/Palin and Not have been revised to McCain/Cheney.

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 5:12 am Link to this comment

So the republicans present to us this family from Pusbucket, Alaska to make people think that the republican party represents good ole down home folks so that they can continue the policies which have led to the greatest imcome disparities the country has ever seen.  Now that one tenth of one percent of the people own 90% of the wealth in the country they aim to keep it that way, and the nice family from Pusbucket is there to put a nice face on it.

Report this

By troublesum, September 5, 2008 at 4:54 am Link to this comment

Dr Know it all
Since W prepared for the presidency with alcohol and cocaine abuse they figure anyone can handle the job.

There’s something else going on here though.  They keep talking about Obama’s lack of accomplishments to cover up the lack of their own.  Both George Bush and John McCain were given the best educational opportunities this country has to offer due to their family connections and like spoiled, pampered brats they squandered those opportunities.  McCain graduated at the bottom of a class of nearly 900 at Annapolis by never cracking a book, while W played animal house at yale and graduated with C’s.  Obama came from a poor, single parent home and graduated Harvard Law with honors by the sweat of his brow, not because of family connections.  So if they want to talk about accomplishments they ought to start with was going on at age 21.

Report this

By Fahrenheit 451, September 5, 2008 at 3:33 am Link to this comment

@ Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD;

Nice one, well said.  And so true.

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, September 5, 2008 at 2:37 am Link to this comment

What kind of ego does it take to accept the position of “a heartbeat away from the presidency” realizing your resume shows you’ve been the pres. of a PTA, the Mayor of a town of 9,000 in the wilderness, and the governor of a state little known to the world, receiving 48% of a couple hundred thousand votes?

Wouldn’t you think if a person had even the slightest inkling of what the job POTUS entailed, he/she would respectfully decline the invitation to join the ticket?  That she didn’t decline should be reason enough for reasonable people to flat out reject the McCain/Palin ticket.

Maybe she should give long consideration to how she’ll react to a 3 AM phone call, “Madam Veep, the president bought the farm.”

Report this

By davr, September 5, 2008 at 1:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yeah but, she’s a CREATIONIST!!!  Doesn’t that count for anything with you really good Christians?t

Report this

By cyrena, September 4, 2008 at 11:24 pm Link to this comment

By Inherit The Wind, September 4 at 8:06 pm

Inherit, you always put it so much better than I can..

“.. Best defense is to accuse the accuser of what you are doing..”

Yep, isn’t that EXACTLY what they do best.

And this is perfect…

...repeat continuously..!! smile

How many times has the lying bush said as much..just keep repeating the lies until everyone believes them.

I say it’s a matter of continuously slinging the shit with the hope that some of it sticks.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, September 4, 2008 at 11:19 pm Link to this comment

Doesn’t it seem strange that our last shotgun VP came from the highly unpopulated (I believe the least populated), obscure state of Wyoming and now we have an AK-47 totin’ VP contender from the 3rd least populated state of Alaska.  What’s going on here…?  Is it just easier to “pay to play there” or what?  Remember, Bill and Hill from little ol’ Little Rock, AR.?  It’s like deja vu…..
(I’m not blaming the people of these states, I figure they’re victims of this facade as much as the rest of us.  Maybe more.)

Of course, our new contender is a true blue or true red (I guess) hick.  She’s gonna have herself a shotgun weddin’ here real soon.  Ya’ll invited now, ya hear…?  You betcha.

Of course Sarah Palin doesn’t see herself this way at all, apparently she feels she’s more of a “rouge cou”.  And I’d agree.  Because you gotta like some rednecks, they’re alright.  But those “rouge cou” ones…well…they ARE pitbulls with lipstick.  They’re certainly not the ol’ friendly hound dog type. Grrr…rrr

Those poor kids.  I feel so bad for them.  I hope they at least have some fun at their shotgun wedding.

Report this

By wildflower, September 4, 2008 at 10:24 pm Link to this comment

One more Palin mess coming up.  NBC News has just reported that Alaska’s police officers union has filed a complaint:

“An ethics complaint obtained by NBC News was filed Wednesday by the police officers union in Alaska, requesting a probe into possible wrongdoing by the governor or her office. It was brought on behalf of state trooper Mike Wooten, an ex-brother-in-law of Palin who is at the center of the “Troopergate” scandal.

The complaint alleges that the governor or her staff may have have improperly disclosed information from Wooten’s personnel records. The complaint alleges “criminal penalties may apply.”

John Cyr, director of the union that filed the complaint, told NBC News, “It seems obvious to us somebody has improperly accessed [Wooten’s] personnel file.”

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, September 4, 2008 at 9:06 pm Link to this comment

So she lied about EVERYTHING—you expected anything less?

Best defense is to accuse the accuser of what you are doing.

“Change”—from Re-thug-li-con to Re-thug-li-con.

Oh…And John McCain’s a war hero. (repeat continuously)

Report this

By JimM, September 4, 2008 at 7:06 pm Link to this comment

What is good is bad and what is bad is good.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook