By Will, on October 1st, 2008 at 11:59 PM
 The vice presidential debate is tomorrow evening, time to stock up on liquor. Rather than just drinking yourself into a stupor to numb yourself from realizing that Sarah fucking Palin might be a heartbeat away from the presidency within three months, enjoy yourself with this handy drinking game.
Most of the rules apply to any future speeches Palin might make, but unless you live in Alaska, you’ll probably never, ever fucking hear them.
- If Sarah Palin mentions her executive experience, take a drink from a Shirley Temple or Virgin Mary.
- It Sarah Palin mentions Russia, take a small sip of vodka.
- It Sarah Palin mentions Putin specifically, take a shot of vodka.
- If Sarah Palin depicts Putin as some sort of evil supervillain, take a shot of vodka and threaten to poison of the person to your left.
- If Sarah Palin depicts Ahmadinejad as some sort of evil supervillain, take a shot.
- If Sarah Palin depicts Ahmadinejad as some sort of evil supervillain in response to a question that wasn’t about Iran, take a shot of tequila because if she’s not going to even try to make sense, neither am I.
- If Sarah Palin mentions her faith, take a drink from a Witch Doctor (If you don’t want to mix them, straight shots of Hypnotiq work).
- If Sarah Palin repeats a lie, take a sip of beer and pour the rest out in memory of Keith Olbermann’s wallet (You’re going to need at least three cases of beer and a Rug Doctor for this one).
- If Sarah Palin answers a question by repeating that question and then repeating a barely connected talking point, take a drink.
- If Sarah Palin answers a question by answering the question, finish your beer and take a shot.
- If Joe Biden says something that makes sense but you know will get twisted into a “gaffe” the morning after, take a shot.
- If Joe Biden makes a genuine gaffe, take a shot and try to think of a major city in Delaware. If you can’t think of one, take another shot.
Hanlon’s Razor is not liable for any alcohol-related injuries, diseases, or other ailments caused by the strict adherence of this drinking game.
By Hanlon, on October 1st, 2008 at 11:54 PM
 Oh the rabbit hole goes so much deeper. I’m almost giddy.
Yes, I know Palin has been central to a lot of news cycles, but dammit it’s almost fun at this point. She’s been in a total of four interviews (depending on how you slice up her dance with Katie Couric) and each one is so chock full of amazing it’s like watching the Olympics; everything keeps one-upping itself.
Everyone’s been harping on Palin’s inability to name any Supreme Court cases other than Roe v Wade, but I neglected to realize just how fantastically bad it was right before that admission. TBogg highlighted it with a nice simple Oh. My. Gawd.
Couric Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?
Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states’ issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I’m, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it’s no secret that I’m pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that’s what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.
Couric: Do you think there’s an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?
Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.
Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.
Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.
My guess is that she wanted to sound less extremely right-wing than she really is (at another point she dodges when pressed upon why abortion for rape victims should be illegal), but in the process she may have severely screwed the pooch*.
Palin probably thought she was sounding artful, avoiding any mention of saying abortion should be illegal, but what she ended up doing was implicitly admitting that the states have the right to make abortion legal. If you boil Roe v Wade into a federal vs states issue, then you make an allowance that you’re not fighting to criminalize abortion at all.
Bush hit the same problem when he said gay marriage should be left up to the states. It came across as him not objecting to the actual issue, just who should be in charge of legislating it. This didn’t make the religious-right base happy at all, to the point that he finally crumpled and tried to get a Constitutional amendment pushed through.
This was an amazingly odd response. It almost sounds like she’s not trying to overturn Roe v Wade to get abortion banned at all. She’s just fighting for states rights. If I was Joe Biden, I’d have this sumbitch bookmarked, and be ready to smash her over the head with it. Corner her on it. Ask if it means she’d also agree to overturn the SCOTUS’s support of a partial-birth abortion ban. Ask if it means she’d have no problem if all fifty states independently decided to keep abortion legal with no restrictions. Watch her squirm.
Normally I hound Palin for just being dumb and not knowing something. This time I’m rolling that she let that one rip and didn’t realize what she was admitting to.
By Hanlon, on October 1st, 2008 at 11:08 PM
By Hanlon, on October 1st, 2008 at 06:49 PM
 As I troll the wild internets, I keep finding the bloggers talking more and more about John McCain’s health. Let me see if I can handle this post without putting any partisanship in it.
My grandfather is 83 years old, and he started declining when he was in his late 60s. By the time he was McCain’s age, he needed help remembering his medication. John McCain will be nearing his 77th birthday when his first time ends (if he’s elected), and a staggering 82 if gets a second. When grandpa hit 77 he was ready for nursing home care. Currently he doesn’t know where he is.
Alzheimer’s and the effects of aging are not a joking matter. There are people who can continue on despite advanced age, but when you start to see signs of problems, you have to look closer.
AmericaBlog is examining a facial spasm McCain seems to have had on television, finishing with a moment of confusion as he gets lost on stage, and have wondered about his possibly sagging left eye for some time. Multiple bloggers are asking for a longer look at his medical records (the 3 hours was far from adequate). He has shown moments of almost frightening bewilderment, contradicting himself and in one famous incident forgetting what he had been asked as soon as the person stopped talking.
Some politicians are known for being a little absent-minded. Bush is a good example. Yes, there’s a famous “is Bush going senile” video going around, but that was contrasting his strong suit with something he’s weak on. Bush, even as a younger guy, bumbled his words and could come across as somewhat dim. Biden is known as being gaffe-prone, and we know Kerry + words = uh-oh. Some people are natural bumblers.
This is new for McCain. We went from a sharp-minded man who carried the media with him everywhere and, for any political issues you have with him, he never appeared to have issues with mental acuity. In 1999 no one aside from Karl Rove was accusing McCain of having mental issues. Sure he was an angry dude, but senile? Forgetful? Doddering? Not at all. If 2008 McCain was the same as 2000 McCain in this sense, there wouldn’t be a problem.
McCain is an old 72, not a fresh 72. His age is a liability. But how much worse would he have to get before anyone finally brings it up in the media? What would it take for talking heads to ask if McCain is too old to be president?
I’m not saying this out of bias, I think similar things when I see Robert Byrd or think about Strom Thurmond’s final years. Ted Kennedy’s recent health issues as well. This is why I couldn’t throw my full support behind Mike Gravel, as much as I agreed with his policies. In Congress it’s one thing, as there is a large safety net of other members and they aren’t making executive decisions.
I see McCain’s slide and I think of my grandfather, and it concerns me. On a personal level, my sympathy goes out to him.
By Hanlon, on October 1st, 2008 at 02:33 PM
 Every day the polls seem to get better for Obama. As in, frighteningly better. To the point that I’m waiting for Obama to get hit by a falling satellite or Joe Biden to spontaneously combust. Something’s gotta give.
Polls are showing Obama up by giant margins nationally as well as in the crucial states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Unsurprisingly, the McCain camp isn’t happy with that, so they’re firing back with various dumbassery.
FLORIDA: Obama 51 – McCain 43 post-debate
OHIO: Obama 50 – McCain 42 post-debate
PENNSYLVANIA: Obama 54 – McCain 39 post-debate
McCain pushback on Florida polls: “Our polling shows us up 7. My guess is they over sampled blacks and under sampled Cubans.
Ah yes, clearly your internal polling is unbiased, it’s those mean ol’ “every other polling place” people that are screwing things up. There’s no way your internal polling would be slanted towards your candidate. No sire. Nope.
McCain pushback on Q-polls: “These polls are laughable. We hope Obama thinks they’re true. The national tracking is clear: Some polls have us down 2 percent, some 4, some as high as 6. How could you have national numbers like that, but have those kinds of numbers in three of the largest, most competitive states in the country? These states are bellwethers because they closely mirror national demographics. Given the volume of campaigning in those states, we expect that they are close to the national track – if not tighter.”
Math is fun. See, if you’re ahead by 4 nationally but severely ahead in swing states, it means that your victory margin in the safety states isn’t gigantic but you’re losing overwhelmingly in the other states. By the way, Gallup had Obama ahead 50-42 two days ago (down to 4 points now).
Of course, there’s a reason they’re harping on these kinds of polls, as opposed to tracking things in the aggregate. FiveThirtyEight is reporting a 336-202 lead for Obama in the Electoral College, and USAElectionPolls (who leave out “undetermined” states) is giving it Obama 308, McCain 194. Maybe McCain’s people can argue that they’ve got a few more points in a national poll or this and that, but when you look at how things are shaping up state by state, McCain is in serious trouble.
|
|
|
