Countdown to Election Day: Six Reasons Why Sarah Palin is Not Qualified to be VP (part 4)

Reason Number Three: She Speaks without Understanding 

Conservative Wall Street Journal columnist, Peggy Noonan, wanted Palin to succeed.  She had hoped that she would be a woman of substance, someone who could be an asset to the McCain ticket.  What she discovered after seeing her on a national stage was less substance than symbol, a person who "just says things" without the kind of understanding you would hope for in a candidate for high office. 

Noonan represents an interesting phenomenon: conservative columnists, often women, who have become Palin's harshest critics.  It's a phenomenon driven by a deep sense of disappointment that of all the highly qualified female candidates McCain could have chosen, he chose a woman of such little substance. 

Here's Noonan's devastating critique:

--------

From the Wall Street Journal:

We have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for? For seven weeks I've listened to her, trying to understand if she is Bushian or Reaganite—a spender, to speak briefly, whose political decisions seem untethered to a political philosophy, and whose foreign policy is shaped by a certain emotionalism, or a conservative whose principles are rooted in philosophy, and whose foreign policy leans more toward what might be called romantic realism, and that is speak truth, know America, be America, move diplomatically, respect public opinion, and move within an awareness and appreciation of reality.

But it's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just . . . says things.

Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she's not a big "egghead" but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts? "I'm Joe Six-Pack"? She does not speak seriously but attempts to excite sensation—"palling around with terrorists." If the Ayers case is a serious issue, treat it seriously. She is not as thoughtful or persuasive as Joe the Plumber, who in an extended cable interview Thursday made a better case for the Republican ticket than the Republican ticket has made. In the past two weeks she has spent her time throwing out tinny lines to crowds she doesn't, really, understand. This is not a leader, this is a follower, and she follows what she imagines is the base, which is in fact a vast and broken-hearted thing whose pain she cannot, actually, imagine. She could reinspire and reinspirit; she chooses merely to excite. She doesn't seem to understand the implications of her own thoughts. . . . 

In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It's no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism.

FULL ARTICLE

Countdown to Election Day: What We Have Learned About Sarah Palin (part 3)

Top Six Reasons Why Sarah Palin is Not Qualified to be Vice President (much less president!)

****

Reason Number Four: She is a serial hypocrite. She can't be trusted.

The word "hypocrisy" comes easily to mind in reviewing what we've learned about Sarah Palin so far. It may be what is most definitive about her.

Here are a few examples:

• Yesterday she launched into a tirade against Obama's supposed inability to meet a security threat, this, the most calming, thoughtful, steady-in-a-storm presidential candidate we've had for a long time.

And who is she? She is a person who touted her national security credentials on the basis of being governor of a state that borders Russia. Never actually met anyone from Russia. But there they are, right next door! She also went to the airport to send off a national guard contingent heading for Iraq. That qualifies her for "commander in chief."

America at crisis with Sarah Palin in the White House (horrors!) may signal the end of the free world. But we can't trust Obama . . .

• She derides Obama (wrongly - as is true with most all of her accusations) of being a "socialist," when, in fact, she presides over the most socialist state economy in our country. But don't take my word for it. You can read it on Fox News: LINK.

The only truly socialist governor in our country attacks Obama for a socialism he has never espoused.

• She touts her qualifications as a crusader against pork. But those who have watched her astonishing rise from small town mayor to governor of a small state, note that she has had her hand out for pork from the beginning. It's one reason she's been so popular. And then there's that bridge she was for before she was against.

She is against ear-marks except when she is for them.

Sarah Palin is a hypocrite. She cannot be trusted.

Countdown to Election Day: What We Have Learned about Sarah Palin

Call this the highlight reel, a chance to go over what we have learned since Sarah Palin made her astonishing appearance on the public stage as John McCain's running mate. We've got six days. Each day I'll put up something we've learned that underscores what was apparent from day one: this woman is not qualified to be vice president much less (God forbid!) president.

THE TOP SIX REASONS WHY SARAH PALIN IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE VICE PRESIDENT:

Reason Number Six: She abuses power for her own gain

Evidence: Highlights from a letter from woman who has known her since high school.

From Alaska:  The Palin Letter

                        A note to all by Anne Kilkenny
Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the
last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in
common: their gender and their good looks. :)

Thanks,
Anne

ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992.
Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a
first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her
father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a
first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more
City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the
residents of the city.

-----
Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000
(at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about
670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running
this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been
pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had
gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had
given rise to a recall campaign.
---------

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office 
redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.
------------

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas
or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by
her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the
basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian 
because the Librarian refused to consider removing from
the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents
rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's
attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew
her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the
Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for
Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin
fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as
Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, 
creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally 
grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to
further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the
case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated” her,
she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring
of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him,
but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he
wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper.
--------

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. 
The City Council person who personally escorted her around town
introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council
became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. 
She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who
didn’t like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything
publicly about her.


As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens.
Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the
“bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

---------------------

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. 
They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness.
Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made
point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected
member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
-----------------------------

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a
heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more
knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are
regretting it.



Anne Kilkenny
August 31, 2008

The Polls

Since I got off topic on the last post, I need to follow up with this.  

Despite what you've heard about a couple of polls showing McCain making a move on Obama, they are not at all representative of what all the other polls are saying. 

Remember - trust the numbers.

-----------

The Latest Polls: Oct 23, 2008

Poll Date Sample MoE Obama (D) McCain (R) 

Spread RCP Average 10/16 - 10/22 – – 50.1 42.6 Obama +7.5

====
CBS News/NY Times 10/19 - 10/22 771 LV – 52 39 Obama +13
Rasmussen Reports 10/20 - 10/22 3000 LV 2.0 52 45 Obama +7
Gallup (Traditional)* 10/20 - 10/22 2384 LV 2.0 50 46 Obama +4
Gallup (Expanded)* 10/20 - 10/22 2299 LV 2.0 51 45 Obama +6
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby 10/20 - 10/22 1208 LV 2.9 52 40 Obama +12
Hotline/FD 10/20 - 10/22 769 LV 3.5 48 43 Obama +5
FOX News 10/20 - 10/21 936 LV 3.0 49 40 Obama +9
ABC News/Wash Post 10/19 - 10/22 1335 LV 2.5 54 43 Obama +11
IBD/TIPP 10/18 - 10/22 1088 LV 3.0 45 44 Obama +1
GWU/Battleground 10/16 - 10/22 1000 LV 3.1 49 45 Obama +4
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/17 - 10/20 1159 RV 2.9 52 42 Obama +10
Associated Press/GfK 10/16 - 10/20 800 LV 3.5 44 43 Obama +1
Ipsos/McClatchy 10/16 - 10/20 773 LV 3.5 50 42 Obama +8
CNN/Opinion Research 10/17 - 10/19 764 LV 3.5 51 46 Obama +5
Pew Research 10/16 - 10/19 2382 LV 2.5 53 39 Obama +14

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Revisiting 2004: Assessing the Polls

This represents a diversion from the normal topic of this blog. But it struck me that with all the back and forth on the polls - one suggesting McCain gaining, most not, that it would be good to re-visit an assessment that was done after the last presidential election. What they found is that a majority of the polls - the same ones that are showing Obama with commanding leads - were essentially correct within the margin of error.

But don't take my word for it. Check out it out below. And note, if you will, how close it was. The difference now is that Obama is polling far ahead of where Bush was at this time. Believe the numbers.
--------------

From the Pew Research Center:

November 23, 2004

Pre-Election Polls Largely Accurate

Lessons From Campaign '04

Facing an array of new and difficult challenges, the pre-election surveys performed fairly well in predicting the outcome of this month's election. Once again, the final surveys by most national polling organizations fell within the margin of error, in spite of widespread concerns over rising refusal rates, "missing" cell-phone-only voters and supposedly flawed likely voter screens. In the wake of such a demanding election, there are a number of lessons to be drawn from the performance of the polls in Campaign '04:

Follow the Data. The campaign showed the dangers of making a priori judgments about voter opinion. This concern arose, most notably, with the practice of weighting polling data to meet predetermined parameters of party identification. Until recently, this approach has been mostly used by partisan pollsters but it also has been adopted by some media polling organizations.

As we noted in an earlier commentary, weighting results on the basis of party in the same manner that pollsters weight data to meet demographic parameters is misguided for a number of reasons (see "Party Affiliation: What It Is and What It Isn't," Sept. 23, 2004). It represents a fundamental misreading of party identification, which is an attitude that changes over time and not a demographic characteristic.

The election exit poll underscored the problems inherent in weighting by party. According to the exit poll, the electorate had equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats (37% each). That represents a change from the past three presidential elections, when Democrats held a slight edge in party identification. Consequently, pre-election surveys that adjusted the partisan composition of likely voters to the exit poll results from 2000 would have misrepresented the partisan make-up of the actual electorate.

Follow the Data (Part II). Among the staples of conventional wisdom in this campaign was that, in an incumbent election, voters who are undecided in the late stages of the race break overwhelmingly against the incumbent. Historically, this so-called 'incumbent rule' has proven to be predictive.

But this year's exit poll showed that Kerry had only a modest advantage among the late deciders. Among those who decided in the final three days before the election, Kerry led by 53%-44%. That was a far cry from what many analysts and pundits had predicted. Pew's analysis of undecided voters for its final pre-election estimate which was based on statistical modeling and follow-up questioning of the undecideds predicted they would break about evenly with a small advantage for Kerry.

This proved more reliable than history in gauging their intentions. There is no doubt, however, that predicting the vote among the undecideds and estimating the final outcome are among the most formidable challenges confronting pollsters.

Cross-Pressured Voters Are Hard to Read. The national polls were fairly stable during the summer, with most showing the race about even or Kerry with a slight to modest lead. But in the wake of the GOP's successful convention in late August, voter opinion was less stable and much harder to track. Similarly, the polls fluctuated after the three presidential debates; most polls showed Bush with a lead, though they differed over its size.

Much of the movement in the polls came among cross-pressured swing voters. These voters, who still comprised about 14% of the electorate in Pew's final pre-election survey, were not happy with the president yet still could not comfortably support Kerry. And they wreaked havoc with the polls, as Pew Research Center Director Andrew Kohut observed in the New York Times (Oct. 21, 2004):

"The round of national surveys taken after the third presidential debate indicates that the polls are not going to give us a clear picture of who will win the election until the final days of the campaign, if then. This is not because polling no longer works it's because voter opinion is highly unstable."

This turned out to be the case. Pew and Gallup had similar pre-election results before making their final estimates Pew showed Bush with a three-point lead among likely voters (48%-45%), while Gallup had Bush up by two points (49%-47%). The CBS News/New York Times survey also showed Bush with a slight 49%-47% advantage.

Although the three polls ended up in pretty much the same place, they all got there differently. The Pew survey showed Bush gaining some ground since mid-October, while Gallup showed Kerry gaining over the same period. The CBS News/New York Times survey showed voter opinion as more stable. Consequently, one could draw very different conclusions about the direction of the race by looking at these polls over the last few weeks of the campaign.

State Polls: Helpful But... The number of horse race polls has been rising for the past several elections, and this year brought an increasing number of polls in the battleground states. Facing a difficult political terrain by definition, all of these states were closely divided the state surveys had varying degrees of success.

In Michigan, for instance, most of the final week polls showed Kerry with a slight advantage. Of the six polls conducted between Oct. 25 and Nov. 1, the website RealClear Politics found that, on average, they showed Kerry with a 3.5% lead; Kerry won Michigan 51%-48%.

By contrast, the polls did not fare nearly as well in Florida, which Bush won by a fairly comfortable margin (52%-47%). Four polls conducted in the campaign's final weeks had Bush ahead anywhere from a point to as many as eight points; three others showed Kerry leading, with Fox News showing Kerry with a five-point advantage. The main shortcoming of the state polls is that typically they have small samples. But even some that had sizable samples missed the mark in Florida. The highly diverse make-up of the Florida electorate may present special challenges to polling.

Cell Phones: Not a Major Problem Yet. Throughout the campaign, pollsters were frequently asked about the potential bias created by the fact that cell phones are not reached in telephone surveys. A growing number of people, especially young people, are believed to be relying solely on cell phones for phone service.

The exit polls indicated that approximately 7% of all voters are cell phone-only; this group skews heavily toward younger voters, with about half of them (48%) falling under age 30. But although cell-only voters were somewhat more Democratic than the electorate as a whole, the difference was relatively small. Cell-only voters went for Kerry by a margin of 54% to 45%, compared with Bush's 51%-48% advantage among all voters. This difference, and the relatively small size of the cell-only group, was not large enough to create an error in pre-election poll estimates.

Moreover, young voters with and without cell phones were virtually identical politically, suggesting that young people reachable by conventional land-line service remain representative of their cell-only counterparts. About one-in-five (19%) voters under 30 years of age indicated they relied solely on cell phone service. These voters favored Kerry by 58%-41%, close to the advantage he had among the rest of this age cohort (56%-43%).

Sarah Update: 1) Another Scandal 2) More People Get it: She is NOT qualified to be president

Here's the latest on the most under qualified candidate  ever to grace a presidential campaign.

We start with the latest scandal:  more proof that this woman has been treating the governor's office like her own personal fiefdom.  

------------------

From ABC News:

AP INVESTIGATION: Palin charged state for children's travel, later amended expense reports

By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE, ADAM GOLDMAN and MATT APUZZO Associated Press Writers

The Associated Press

ANCHORAGE, Alaska

Gov. Sarah Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended expense reports to specify that they were on official business.

The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.

In all, Palin has charged the state $21,012 for her three daughters' 64 one-way and 12 round-trip commercial flights since she took office in December 2006. In some other cases, she has charged the state for hotel rooms for the girls.

Alaska law does not specifically address expenses for a governor's children. The law allows for payment of expenses for anyone conducting official state business.

As governor, Palin justified having the state pay for the travel of her daughters — Bristol, 17; Willow, 14; and Piper, 7 — by noting on travel forms that the girls had been invited to attend or participate in events on the governor's schedule.

But some organizers of these events said they were surprised when the Palin children showed up uninvited, or said they agreed to a request by the governor to allow the children to attend.

FULL ARTICLE

------

From NBC News:

Finally, more people are getting it. She is NOT qualified to be  president, much less vice president. Governor maybe . . .   well, I'll have to think about that. 

Huge Crowds!

The McCain camp has been crowing about the large, enthusiastic crowds Sarah Palin has attracted. And she has. Or mobs. Some have had more of the characteristic of a mob. But, certainly, there is no doubt that she has her fans.

The crowds are large. Even huge. Some say these may be the largest crowds any politician has attracted during a presidential campaign.

Just consider the crowd in St. Louis today. Estimates put it at 100,000.

The crowds are overwhelming.

For Obama.

From the Washington Post: Obama Draws 100,000

Palin's Joe, McCain's Joe: Who Cares?

Sarah introduced us to Joe Six Pack. Senator McCain to Joe the Plumber. Both were determined to convince us that they were champions of the "little guy." They cared. They were there for the "little guy."

Then the truth came out.

Sarah Palin cared so much for a popular sheriff that she used her muscle to get him fired. Tried to get a small town librarian fired, too, but the "little people" she claims to care so much for stood up and shouted "shame!" and she was forced to back down.

Turns out Sarah Palin does care . . . for herself.

Senator McCain tried to convince us that he was there for Joe the Plumber, this poor man who wouldn't be able to start his own business because evil Barak Obama was going to take away his hard earned money. Evil Barak Obama didn't care for the poor plumber who only made $250,000 a year.

Then we find out that: A) McCain didn't ask Joe's permission to use his name. Now the poor guy is being harrassed to death. B) McCain had no idea who Joe was. Turns out he's not anywhere near to making $250,000 nor opening his own business. Turns out, in fact, he isn't even a licensed plumber. And he owes $1,200 in back taxes. And the court has a lien on his house for failure to pay those taxes. Turns out he doesn't only not want to pay taxes on $250,000, he doesn't want to pay taxes at all!

Senator McCain was using Joe. That's how much he cares for the "little guy." Feigning a concern so he could claim a "gotcha" moment with his opponent, a man he hates so much that he'll do anything to make sure he doesn't get elected. Even use a "little guy" like Joe the Plumber.

Senator McCain cares like Sarah Palin cares . . . . for himself.

And he is still so clueless that he thinks a person who makes $250,000 a year is "middle class." But then how can he know? He doesn't even know how many houses he owns.

They don't care. That's why they're going to lose. They don't care.

Palin and Ayers: Clueless Again

Buried on the fifteenth page of today's Chicago Tribune is an article by Eric Zorn that needs wide exposure. Zorn, it turns out, did an extensive historical fact check on the person Sarah Palin calls a "terrorist" and found, much to the surprise of no one, that whatever Ayers may have done in the past, he can no longer by any stretch of the imagination be called a "terrorist" today.

What continues to be puzzling to many is why the press hasn't pushed the McCain camp to explain how Obama's associations with William Ayers in the 1990's has anything to do with anything except what it was always about - working with someone who is a noted expert on educational reforms. "Paling around with terrorists" (note how Palin always uses the plural - as though Ayers is representative of a whole group of shady characters Obama consorts with) suggests at the very least that Obama and Ayers were hatching plots against America. If that were the case, if Ayers was, indeed, a "terrorist" when Obama was meeting with him, well, then our law enforcement officials have fallen down on the job. He should be in jail. He isn't because he isn't.

Here's just a few of the things Zorn turned up in his research:

• The late celebrated Tribune journalist, Mike Royko, once wrote that Ayers was a jerk with a shady past. But now he ". . . is working for a good cause, improving public education. He's become a leader in the so-called school reform program."
• Other articles written in the 90's did refer to Ayer's radical past, but most didn't. In fact, only two articles out of 60 mentioned it. Most referred to the books he had published on education reform and his laudable work to get grant money for schools which landed him the honor of being recognized as Chicago's "Citizen of the Year" in 1997 (the time when Obama was "paling around" with him).
  

Noting this, Zorn says:

Today, some would say that this was an outrage. Ayers should have been shunned and marginalized, loudly criticized, not embraced, by the city's political and academic establishment.

But the record shows he just wasn't a very controversial figure. Aside from Royko's "I still think he's a jerk" column in 1990, I found only two objections to Ayer's civic rehabilitation in the decade's news archives: a 1993 letter to the Tribune and a 1999 guest editorial.

Zorn goes on to describe McCain and Palin's attempts to smear Obama with Ayers as "revisionist history" of the worst sort, particularly in their use of the "implicit present tense" as though Ayers is still a terrorist, a charge that has not been challenged as it should be by the mainstream press. He is not, says Zorn. Nor was he a terrorist when Obama met him to discuss educational reforms in the 90s, he as well as many other prominent Republicans and Democrats who care about the education of our children.

Zorn's most cutting comment cuts right to the heart of the matter when he says:

If Ayers is a terrorist, then McCain is an adulterer and I am a 6th grader.

Which brings to mind another article that is worth reading - the Rolling Stones Magazine expose on a past that John McCain is desperate to keep buried.

You can read that one by clicking on the picture below.

From the Rolling Stone Magazine:

Make-Believe Maverick

A closer look at the life and career of John McCain reveals a disturbing record of recklessness and dishonesty

Sarah Palin: But I didn't break any laws (wink, wink)

Here's a headline from the New York Daily News:

Sarah Palin: Troopergate Probe Findings Show I didn't Break Any Law

This is Sarah Palin's defense in the face of the damning evidence of her abuse of office. "But I didn't break the law!"

What's disturbing about this is that she actually believes this exonerates her. Which only underscores a point many have made about her. She really is George Bush in a skirt. And not only because of the way she tortures the English language.

Here's the point: the Bush administration has made a fine art of skirting the edges of legality. Wire tapping? We didn't break the law. Torture? Where does it say we can't do that? Getting rid of lawyers we don't like? Can't convict us of anything here.

That, essentially, is Sarah Palin's defense. Can't convict me, so it must be OK. Never mind evidence of the abuse of power. In Palin's eyes its OK as long as she didn't "break the law."

It's George Bush in a skirt.

When Barak Obama says that John McCain means Bush redoux what he usually has in mind is the way McCain has walked in near lock step with the Bush agenda over the past eight years. We can now add another element to this. To elect a McCain/Palin ticket is to have a Bush clone a heart beat away from the presidency.

God help us if that happens.

McCain/Palin: Guilty as Charged

With the revelation of Palin's guilt in the Troopergate scandal we now know the difference between the McCain/Palin team and the Obama/Biden team.

It's guilt by association versus just plan guilt.
----------


The McCain/Palin team have done their best to smear Obama using the classic Republican tactic of "guilt by association." Obama, they say, is ill suited to be president because of the company he has kept in the past. It's what others have done rather than what he has done that convicts him, even though the ties they cite are inconsequential.

With the Republicans, on the other hand, its simply guilt.


McCain's abuse of office through unwise dealings with Savings and Loan shark, Charles Keating: Guilty.







Palin's abuse of office for a personal vendetta: Guilty.







Big difference between the two.

Someone Like Me!!

I saw a woman being interviewed today on CNN who was ga-ga over Sarah Palin. Ever since she first laid eyes on her she was head over heels.

This, according to the reporter, is an indication that Palin speaks to a certain demographic, in this case middle aged blue collar women; evangelical middle aged blue collar women. That's been her appeal all along. Not that she's qualified for this office. Not that she has the kind of knowledge and experience we usually demand in a vice presidential candidate. No, it's because "she's just like me."

I understand this. I want a candidate who is like me, as well. Which means first of all a "he," not a "she." That's what I am. I'm a "he."

He also has to be well educated and well traveled; have midwestern roots and like to listen to NPR. Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me will be his favorite show. His musical tastes should run to new age (instrumental only) for background music while reading, classic rock when he wants to kick back and let loose, the Waifs to get into a zone.

He has to be a Christian. Evangelical, but leaning more left than right. Politically progressive.

As for tastes in food and clothing, well, I'm a blue jeans kind of guy. He should be too. And pizza. He has to like pizza. Lot's of pizza. And Indian curry. The hotter the better.

That's the person I'm looking for. Someone who meets most if not all of those criteria.

If, perchance, I can't find someone like that, well, then I just won't vote. That'll show em. It'll show those Republicans and Democrats that next time they go to all the expense of running a big national campaign, they need to keep my kind of person in mind.

Experience in working with congress? Doesn't matter. Proven leadership abilities? Not important. Broad knowledge of national and international affairs. Who cares? The only thing that matters is that it be someone like me. I will only vote for someone like me . . .

My Tea with a 'Terrorist', or Yet Another Reason Why Sarah Palin is Clueless

So the second presidential debate is over. If anyone still thinks that John McCain is a compelling presidential candidate after this, well, they must have just arrived from Mars.

But this is a blog about Sarah Palin, so let me leave you tonight with a great piece from a man who . . . are you ready for this . . . . had tea with the notorious William Ayers. Yes, that's right. He had tea with a terrorist.

Are you listening, Sarah Palin??

From Seattlepi.com

Connelly: My tea with a 'terrorist'

By JOEL CONNELLY
P-I COLUMNIST

AFTER HEARING the unleashed Sarah Palin accuse Sen. Barack Obama of "pallin' around with terrorists" -- and John McCain's brother call northern Virginia "communist country" -- this scribe is moved to a confession.

Onetime Weathermen leader William Ayers, the target in Palin's day of rage, was once a guest in my kitchen. Not only that, but I brewed him a pot of tea and heated up a bagel.

Ayers consorted with our family's standard poodle, S'Murphy Brown, after she extended a paw to the top of his knee.

Circumstances don't matter in wing nuts' land of guilt-by-association, but I had no choice.

The Hi Spot Cafe, notorious liberal hangout in Madrona -- Seattle's equivalent to Chicago's Hyde Park -- had just closed. We needed to do an interview about Ayers' memoir "Fugitive Days," a timely topic since the terrorist atrocity of 9/11 had taken place just 16 days earlier.

The 2008 presidential campaign has taken an ugly turn. In tones reminiscent of Joe McCarthy in the 1950s, John McCain's campaign seeks to tie Obama to Ayers. (The two men are Hyde Park neighbors.) Media have been targeted: An African-American journalist at a Palin rally was reportedly told by someone in the crowd, "Sit down, boy."

It represents an incredible turnaround for a candidate who denounced guilt-by-association just last March.

Asked about Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright, McCain said: "I think that when people support you, it doesn't mean that you support everything they say. I know that, for example, I've had endorsements of some people that I didn't share their views but they endorsed mine. And so I think we've got to be very careful about that."

McCain has since put his soul in blind trust.

Breathlessly, Tuesday, the McCain-Palin campaign put out a "damming" release confirming that Obama "continued to serve on a charitable board" with Ayers even while knowing he participated in such Vietnam-era actions as the "Days of Rage."

What they were doing was deciding how to spend an educational grant from Walter Annenberg, a Republican and Richard Nixon intimate who served as ambassador to Great Britain.

Of Ayers, I am reminded of an old quip by longtime University of Notre Dame President the Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C. He reversed the adage about giving people enough rope and they'll hang themselves.

"If you give student dissenters enough time, they'll redeem themselves," said Fr. Ted.

FULL ARTICLE

Countdown: Joe Six-Pack, Sarah Palin, is a Millionaire

till the Palin-Biden Debate



Sarah is a Millionaire

Turns out that Sarah Joe Six-Pack Palin, is actually Sarah Champagne Palin. That's according to an article in the Anchorage Daily News which reveals that Todd and Sarah Palin are millionaires; millionaires who also got their cut of the oil revenues paid out to all citizens in the socialist state of Alaska, which last year came to $1,654 for each member of the Palin family.

Yet another anomaly in the mythology being woven around the saga which is Sarah Palin -- a millionaire masquerading as "an everyday, working-class American."

Here's the article:


Estimates show Palin assets top $1 million


By SHARON THEIMER and BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE
The Associated Press

(10/01/08 16:10:45)

WASILLA - Sarah Palin and her husband have pieced together a uniquely Alaskan income that reached comfortably into six figures even before she became governor, capitalizing on valuable fishing rights, a series of land deals and a patchwork of other ventures to build an above-average lifestyle.

Add up the couple's 2007 income and the estimated value of their property and investments and they appear to be worth at least $1.2 million. That would make the Palins, like Democratic vice presidential rival Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, well-off but not nearly as wealthy as multimillionaire couples John and Cindy McCain and, to a lesser extent, Barack and Michelle Obama.

One measure of financial health: While there is a home loan, Palin reported no personal credit card debt on her most recent financial report as Alaska governor. That compares to average household credit card debt among Americans of $9,840 last year.

A more complete picture will come when Sarah Palin outlines her personal finances in federal paperwork in coming days. It will include details of any mortgage debt and at least rough dollar totals for bank accounts and investments.

Palin this week characterized herself as "an everyday, working-class American" who knows how it feels when the stock market takes a hit.

The Palins' total income last year was split almost evenly between Sarah Palin's white-collar job and her husband's blue-collar work. Sarah Palin's salary as governor was $125,000; Todd Palin took in $46,790 as a part-time oil production operator for BP Alaska in Prudhoe Bay, plus $46,265 in commercial fishing income and $10,500 in Iron Dog snowmachine race winnings. These figures do not include nearly $17,000 in per diem payments Palin received for 312 nights spent in her own home since she was elected governor; she also has received $43,490 to cover travel costs for her husband and children.

In addition, each member of the Palin family received $1,654 in state oil royalties paid to all Alaskans.

FULL ARTICLE

Finally Someone who Gets it: Straight Talk from Newsweek Columnist

More Days Till the Palin-Biden Debate




Palin is Ready? Pleeeeeeeeeease.

Senator John McCain likes to characterize himself as a "straight-talker." Then he says: "I'm John McCain and I approve this message" for political ads that are blatant lies. Then he chooses Sarah Palin for his running mate. And she is only allowed to repeat memorized talking points. So much for the "straight talking express."

There's some talk that this could change at the debate, that they're going to "let Palin loose" and be herself. But that's what happened with the Katie Couric interview. We know how well that went. This "straight talking express" is a train wreck waiting to happen.

Finally the mainstream press is getting it. One of my favorite columnists, Fareed Zacharia who often writes for Newsweek and Time, more or less makes that point in a hard hitting article that will appear in this week's Newsweek magazine. This is the kind of straight talking we need.

* * *

From the October 6th issue of Newsweek Magazine:

Palin Is Ready? Please.

McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, that is simply not true.

Fareed Zakaria

NEWSWEEK

From the magazine issue dated Oct 6, 2008

Will someone please put Sarah Palin out of her agony? Is it too much to ask that she come to realize that she wants, in that wonderful phrase in American politics, "to spend more time with her family"? Having stayed in purdah for weeks, she finally agreed to a third interview. CBS's Katie Couric questioned her in her trademark sympathetic style. It didn't help. When asked how living in the state closest to Russia gave her foreign-policy experience, Palin responded thus:

"It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state."

There is, of course, the sheer absurdity of the premise. Two weeks ago I flew to Tokyo, crossing over the North Pole. Does that make me an expert on Santa Claus? (Thanks, Jon Stewart.) But even beyond that, read the rest of her response. "It is from Alaska that we send out those …" What does this mean? This is not an isolated example. Palin has been given a set of talking points by campaign advisers, simple ideological mantras that she repeats and repeats as long as she can. ("We mustn't blink.") But if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly, gibberish.

FULL ARTICLE

Countdown: She's Really a Good Girl

More days till the Palin-Biden Debate



Palin's Parents Say She's a Good Girl!

Here's a surprise: Sarah Palin's parents think she's a swell gal and they don't like the media questioning that.

That's what they told CBS news yesterday. And CBS news thought that was actually news-worthy. But isn't that what parents are supposed to say? Wouldn't Biden's mom say the same thing about the dirt the Republicans have been digging up about him, or Obama's parents, if they were still alive, about him? And would CBS news have a special report on that, as well?

Here's what Palin's parents need to understand. When a person runs for the second highest office in the land they open themselves up to an intense scrutiny that is sometimes fair, sometimes not. Too much is at stake for a candidate simply to be allowed to let their parents or their bowling buddies tell us who they are. We need to hear from everyone who knows them and examine everything they have ever done. And because this is politics and not the PTA there will be many who will be out to discredit this candidate because the party whose candidate they oppose will be doing the exact same thing to their candidate.

Information that reporters have dug up on their daughter suggest, in fact, that this is how Sarah Palin has gotten to where she is today - by dissing anyone who gets in her way. She, in other words, is just as good at digging in the dirt as anyone else. While I would rather see no one engage in this kind of politics, its much harder to feel sympathy for someone who does it themselves.

But here's what Palin's parents really need to understand. What the press is doing for the most part is helping us understand whether or not their daughter is qualified for the second most important political position in the most powerful country in the world. This has nothing to do with how nice she is. This has to do with her qualifications for national office. We are willing to believe that she is a good mother and a hard worker. We understand that she is extremely talented and a natural leader. All of these things that her parents wish us to understand about her, we do understand. What we don't understand is why Senator McCain thought she was qualifed for this position.

In the few times she's been allowed to respond to questions with her own thoughts she has evidenced a pitiable lack of knowledge about the very things a vice president needs to know. I don't care how quick a read she is, there is simply no way that she can get up to speed within two or three months. This is not an SAT exam. This is holding responsibility for the administration of the world's most powerful country. No major corporation would even begin to consider someone with insufficient experience or knowledge to be a vice president in their company. Why should we consider putting in office someone with as thin a resume as their daughter?

Mr. and Mrs. Palin: we think you have a fine daughter. She is charming and charismatic and has gone far with grit and determination. She is a gifted leader on the local and state level. She has a wonderful family; a model for working mothers everywhere. But she is not qualified to be vice president of the United States. That more than anything else is what the investigative reporting you are so critical of has determined. She is not suitable for this position. I hope you understand that this is not personal. It's the truth.

Countdown: Women Who Hate Sarah

More Days till the Palin-Biden Debate





While we wait for the debate it may be good to ponder a few interesting developments in the Palin saga. One is the almost visceral hatred certain women have for Governor Palin. And, according to columnist, Mary Schmich of the Chicago Tribune, it is only tangentially related to her conservative political bent. More to the point is what she symbolizes. Here's what Schmich says:

From: "Tracing Source of Women's Hate for Palin"

I relate to the betrayal, insult and worry the choice of Palin as John McCain's running mate stirs in many women. Do the guys who picked Palin in the hopes of nabbing Hillary Clinton supporters really think one size fits all? We've waited so long for a woman to make it to the White House and the closest we can come is one who can't volley with Katie Couric? And what if Palin's deficiencies make it easier to claim that women aren't fit for high public office? At its most logical, the hatred many women profess for Palin is rooted in the feeling that she has ascended to power she hasn't earned and that she could turn that power against the beliefs and best interests of most women. But the way some women talk about her risks making us look like the very thing she is sometimes accused of being: mean girls. Palin is an ambitious, smart, energetic woman, who through work, luck, pluck and, yes, a ruthless streak common to politicians, has invented an uncommonly full life, which includes being governor of Alaska. There's a lot to admire. If she'd also been wise and humble, she would have said, "Not yet," when she was asked to play in the big leagues. But what gutsy woman would have said no? By the end of last week, even a couple of Palin haters I know had softened, slightly. It hurt to watch her fumble through her interview with Katie Couric and pose nervously with Henry Kissinger. Her weak week was enough to make at least a few people recognize that the real bad guys were the folks who seduced her for their political gain into thinking she was ready.