By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 09:22 PM
 Internet sleuths are really something else, I swear.
Someone digging around over on Reddit discovered an article entitled “Palin Pleased with Obama’s Energy Plan”, including some downright awesome comments from the woman herself:
“I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential Alaska’s natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and sound jobs,” Governor Palin said. “The steps taken by the Alaska State Legislature this past week demonstrate that we are ready, willing and able to supply the energy our nation needs.”
You may notice that I linked to a cached version of the page. There’s a good reason for that. If you actually go to the current version of the page… it’s been removed. All that you’ve got now is a list of recent articles mentioning Palin.
Clearly someone’s trying to erase history here.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 05:42 PM
 Maybe I’m alone here, but I’m getting absolutely sick of the GOP suddenly being best friends with Hillary Clinton. I just saw an ad highlighting her brief praise of McCain, and in Palin’s acceptance speech she invoked how Clinton put “18 million cracks” in the glass ceiling and that she’d be taking the torch.
This is just treating women like morons. The implication is that McCain and the GOP think that women will vote for any woman at all even if they’re diametrically opposed. Apparently women don’t pay attention to politics, so no matter what woman’s running, they’ll vote that way.
Not to mention we’re really only talking white women. Go ahead, check out those videos fo PUMA activists and the various Clinton loyalists. Any black women there? No? That’s probably because they’re all over at the Obama rally. It’s a move that’s both sexist and racist. Sorry, that’s just how she flies.
Speaking of Clinton, I really think McCain shot himself in the foot there. One of the reasons people said Obama needed to pick up Clinton was that he’d get all the benefits of the Clinton machine: fundraising, stumping, media appearances, the works. Bill Clinton is a powerhouse and without his wife on the ticket, so the wisdom goes, there’s no way Obama will get any of it.
Let me ask you this: if Clinton is really that singularly-focused, that self-interested, does anyone honestly believe she wants to see another woman become the first in the White House before her? The answer rhymes with HELL NO. If it’s true that she’s miffed about not being on the ticket, the last thing she and Bill want is some other woman to get in there first.
By the way, did everyone get amnesia and forget how absolutely brutally the right vilified Hillary for the past few years? They called her shrill, they called her bitchy, they said men cross their legs around her, they said all they hear is “TAKE OUT THE TRASH!” when she talks. Sexist, vile attacks over and over. But now it’s “let’s give a hand to Hillary for her historic campaign, and keep it going!”
One more thing. Wasn’t it Karl Rove that was ripping into Richmond, VA for being a little city? Palin was mayor of Wasilla, AK. A city with less than 6,000 people in it. The entire state of Alaska is about 680,000 people. Richmond has 1.2 million if count the metro area (which I believe is part of the mayor’s jurisdiction). Not that I’m holding my breath for anything resembling consistancy with these guys.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 02:34 PM
 So now that Palin’s been confirmed as the VP, I just can’t get over it. This may be the moment that McCain’s campaign goes down the crapper.
I make fun of the GOP base a lot of the time, but there is one thing that can’t be denied: they really aren’t that dumb. They’re going to see that Palin isn’t experienced enough, she undercuts their own line of attacks on Obama, and she was chosen not on her qualifications but in a weak attempt to pull some Hillary supporters over.
That’s even left the previous “short listers” Romney and Pawlenty pissed, since they realize they were “decoys” after McCain made his decision but kept floating their names around in order to keep it a surprise. I’ve no doubts that McCain thought he was sitting on an absolute bombshell, that he’d drop this one and the whole country would stop what they were doing and stare in awe at his brilliant move.
Nuh-uh.
The thing everyone’s forgetting is that Hillary’s PUMA brigade didn’t just want a woman, they wanted that woman. It’s already happening, as we have in the WaPo article: “I know Hillary Clinton, and Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton.” These women wanted Hillary, not anything with two X chromosomes, and they’re not going to fall for the ploy either.
Oh, and also, she apparently has no idea what the job entails, as this video from last month shows:
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loUHRv3ipLE
Was she trying to be funny? No idea, but wow that’s just begging to turn into a political ad. And even over at The New Republic they aren’t impressed, saying her speech sounded like “one of those regular person testimonials where somebody gets up and talks about their family and their blue-collar job — except then she says that she’s on the ticket.”
This was a bad choice, and it’s gonna bite McCain on the ass. Mark my words.
UPDATE: Oh wait, she’s a creationist, too! Fantastic. That rounds things out pretty nicely. No experience, corruption investigation, creationist. Anything else?
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 11:57 AM
One presidential candidate is a young, fresh-faced black man. He’s broken racial barriers at Harvard, and in his political life. He’s beloved worldwide and so popular his opponents attack him as messianic. After a hard-scrabble childhood where he worked for every dime he owns, he’s become the first black nominee for president, and delivered a historic speech on the 45th anniversary of MLK’s “I have a dream” speech.
His opponent is a doddering, 72 year old white man. He can’t remember basic facts about politics, what he’s said in the past, or even his own personal life. He stumbles his way through speeches with constant “senior moments”, and has been known to get snappy and yell at reporters and colleagues. He didn’t work for his riches, he married an heiress and has been leeching off of her, and all he can do is flog his “war hero” story constantly.
Folks, I don’t know how to tell you this, but… we’re living in a Spike Lee Joint.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 11:25 AM
 Well here’s a bit of a head-scratcher. CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and Associated Content are all reporting that Alaska governor Sarah Palin will be John McCain’s running mate. Keep in mind they scooped Biden as Obama’s, so this is pretty reliable, I’d say.
Now, whenever something like this happens, what do I tell you all to do? That’s right, head over to OnTheIssues, and they’ve got a nice big page dedicated just to Governor Palin, so let’s take a look.
Sarah Palin on Families & Children
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.
Sarah Palin on Foreign Policy
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.
Sarah Palin on Free Trade
No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org.
That’s weird. It seems like almost every issue has a “no issue stance yet recorded” message underneath it. And even the ones that have something under there are based on one or two votes or public statements. Not really a whole lot there. Is OnTheIssues falling behind on their job?
Oh wait, no, Palin took office in December of 2006.
For all the yammering about experience, McCain may be choosing someone who has a whopping twenty months of experience in the government. Now this is different from Obama who, aside from doing a whole hell of a lot during his four years in the Senate, was also a state legislator from 1997 to 2002. That gives him a total of 11 years experience in politics, not less than two. Yes, I’m aware she was city council in the early 1990s and mayor in 1996, but c’mon. Really.
Palin’s not an awful example of a Republican, either. Pro-life and stands behind it (one of her children has Down’s), generally pro-GLBT except in terms of marriage. But that’s just it: there is no way Palin would be chosen for any reason other than she’s a palatable woman, with the GOP hoping to use her to peel off some of those disgruntled Hillary supporters. Only this isn’t Hillary. This is Random Republican Woman, and it’s going to be painfully obvious that she was chosen simply for being a woman.
By the way, the Dallas Morning Views has a great list of why this is a stupid choice anyway. If this is legit.
UPDATE: Via AmericaBlog, the WSJ was reporting just earlier this year that Palin is under investigation for corruption and could potentially face impeachment. Excellent.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 10:47 AM
 Well, color me surprised. The United States launched its own investigation into a military operation getting negative press and, amazingly, found out that it was really not as bad as everyone was saying!
A U.S. military review of an airstrike last week in western Afghanistan maintains that only five civilians were killed, Pentagon officials said yesterday, a finding that starkly contradicts reports by the United Nations and Afghan officials that the civilian death toll from the bombing was at least 90.
The completed review corroborates an initial assessment by the military of the operation Friday by U.S. and Afghan forces in a village in Herat province. The review determined that 25 militants, including a Taliban commander, and five civilians had been killed, the officials said.
“We did not kill up to 90 civilians as has been alleged,” one U.S. military official said. The review “comports with our operational understanding” of the events, said the official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.
Why does it seem like every single time the United States disagrees with the findings of either an international body or the country we’re in, the US’s findings are way more positive? Has there been a single instance where the US tallied more civilian casualties of a US-led strike? Electrical grids, body counts, costs and length of engagement, it’s always more favorable when the Bush-led investigations happen.
Ministry of Truth indeed.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Obama took the stage and hit it out of the ballpark. Tough when he needed to be, critical of McCain when necessary, but not venomous in any way. Inspirational.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ato7BtisXzE
Transcript below.
Read More ->
Obama took the stage and hit it out of the ballpark. Tough when he needed to be, critical of McCain when necessary, but not venomous in any way. Inspirational.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ato7BtisXzE
Transcript below.
Read More ->
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 12:47 AM
 I’m half tempted to make an entire section of this site dedicated to the bullshit coming out of the AP, because at this point they’ve cast all objectivity aside and now they’re just spewing GOP-endorsed propaganda.
But instead of dwelling on specifics, he laced the crowning speech of his long campaign with the type of rhetorical flourishes that Republicans mock and the attacks on John McCain that Democrats cheer.
…
For instance, Obama said it’s time “to protect Social Security for future generations.” But he didn’t mention his main proposal, which is to add a new Social Security payroll tax to incomes above $250,000 a year.
He said he would “cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families,” but did not say how.
Once again, the AP has bought hook, line, and sinker into the GOP line, even echoing the crap I heard on FOX right afterwards: Obama said he’d change Washington, but he’s just doing the same attacks everyone else is, and he never says how he’s going to deliver on his promises. Somehow, McCain tirelessly calling Obama a vapid celebrity who’d rather lose a war than win a campaign, while claiming he’ll cut taxes and balance the budget while winning the Iraq and Afghanistan wars never seems to arouse the same scrutiny.
By Hanlon, on August 29th, 2008 at 12:06 AM
If the majority of Americans end up on the “liberal” side of most polls (gay marriage, abortion, health care, social security, Iraq) by a near 2:1 margin, doesn’t that mean our little left-right spectrum needs recalibrated?
|
|
|
