John McCain, the Michael Brown of politics.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was not subjected to a lengthy in-person background interview with the head of Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential vetting team until last Wednesday in Arizona, the day before McCain asked her to be his running mate, and she did not disclose the fact that her 17-year-old daughter was pregnant until that meeting, two knowledgeable McCain officials acknowledged Tuesday.
You just know the McCain team has fingers and toes crossed that Sarah Palin doesn’t embarrass them more than she already has between now and election day. Or maybe she and hubby don’t think these things count because they happened in Alaska, and as far as they’re concerned, not technically in America. It’s like Dick Cheney thinking he’s a fourth branch of government to himself.
“The other finalist was Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty. One of the officials said Culvahouse was chasing down last-minute information about Pawlenty at the request of the campaign as late as last Thursday, the day McCain offered the job to Palin and she accepted.”
The Dems dodged a bullet. Pawlenty was the only one on McCain’s short list that I was worried about. However, now if Palin drops out to ’spend more time with her family’ and they choose Pawlenty, he will be perceived as McCain’s second choice, and thus the weaker of the two.
Or he might turn to the Christian right and say, ‘Screw you guys, I’m going with Lieberman.’ which would be awesome. Well… Awesome for the Democrats.
So according to this story, McCain knew about the pregnancy (which you said didn’t matter) BEFORE he announced her as his pick.
Wow. Breaking News. Great scoop! Is there any other information McCain knew about BEFORE he announced her as his pick we should know about? You know — just in case McCain might be surprised by the release of information he knew about beforehand.
Hey, I like John McCain! He just isn’t ready to be President. Never will be. As David Brooks mentions, McCain’s decision method is off-the-cuff, instinctual, often with disastrous results.
Such as when he crashed a training plane in the Navy. He didn’t even bother to read the manual and when he crashed it, he was under water and didn’t know how to pull the ejection lever as he didn’t know where it was. Only with luck and desperation he grappled the top of the cockpit off and barely survived. And wasted a airplane.
He barely got out alive in the Navy mostly due to his powerful Admiral’s dad’s influence.
Far as I know, he picked Sarah for her ample bosom and shapely legs. Ask his first wife about McCain. Nice guy but pretty “instinctual”. And he’ll have the nuclear bomb all to his self.
Ahhh — another “enlightened” liberal! Slap this comment on a commercial and watch McCain tank!
Lieberman?
Don’t know if we dealt with that scum. He did his best to defeat his partner, Al Gore in 2000. Giving Dick Cheney a pass, and kissing up to the Oil Company executive. Then he gives one of the most exuberant speeches of his life for the opposition.
The fact is Lieberman only cares about Israel, that his obsession. He might be right that Israel is threatened and needs his obsession…but his support for the Right is in fact his special pleading for his homeland. His betrayal of Al Gore and the Democrats is a smear on other American jews imo.
He smeared Obama (maybe secretly thinking O is a threat to Israel??) with essentially a lie:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/
Lieberman Misleads on Obama’s Record
The Fact Checker is away. In the interim, we bring you the best of PolitiFact, a fact-checking project from the St. Petersburg Times and Congressional Quarterly.
The Statement
Politifact
Obama voted “to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield.”
–Joe Lieberman on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 in St. Paul, Minn.
If Obama voted against funding the troops, so did Lieberman
Joe Lieberman, the independent senator from Connecticut, alleged in his speech at the Republican National Convention that Sen. Barack Obama had voted to cut off funding for men and women in uniform.
Rating: Barely True
Lieberman issued the attack almost as an aside as he praised Sen. John McCain’s approach to the war in Iraq.
“When others were silent about the war in Iraq, John McCain had the guts and the judgment to sound the alarm about the mistakes we were making in Iraq,” Lieberman said. “When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, which would’ve been a disaster for the U.S.A. – when colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield – John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion, advocate the surge, support the surge and because of that, today, America’s troops are coming home – thousands of them – and they’re coming home in honor!”
Republicans have made similar charges in the past, such as when McCain himself said on Aug. 11, 2008, that Obama “tried to prevent funding for the troops who carried out the surge.” We evaluated that claim here.
To support the charge, the McCain campaign has cited Obama’s vote of May 24, 2007, against an appropriations bill that included funding for the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan (and passed, 80-14).
So was that a vote “to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield”?
Not primarily.
Obama was fighting at the time for a requirement that President Bush begin to bring the troops home from Iraq. The bill in question did not include such a requirement, and that is why Obama voted against it. Obama said at the time that he wanted to fund the troops, he just didn’t want to fund the particular military strategy that the bill would enable.
“We must fund our troops,” Obama said at the time. “But we owe them something more. We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war.”
Clearly Obama wanted to provide funding for the troops — just not the president’s military strategy.
If, by voting against funding for a strategy he opposed, Obama voted to “cut off funding for the troops,” then so did almost every Republican in the Senate — and Lieberman himself — when they voted against a $124-billion appropriations bill on April 26, 2007, that would have funded operations in Iraq and Afghanistan but also required Bush to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. (McCain missed the vote on that bill, which passed 51-46 and was subsequently vetoed by Bush.)
In a very narrow sense, yes, those votes were against military funding — a portion of which goes to equip and pay the troops. So there is a grain of truth to Lieberman’s attack. But because it is so misleading — treating a strategic disagreement as a stand against men and women in uniform — we find it Barely True. “
“The other team didn’t practice enough!”
McCain put Palin through the same long process as everyone else. He was satisfied that she was the candidate he wanted. The voters have plenty of time to decide for themselves, based on whatever relevant information they can find.
Complaining about McCain’s process for selecting a VP is frankly pretty weak.
“McCain put Palin through the same long process as everyone else. He was satisfied that she was the candidate he wanted. The voters have plenty of time to decide for themselves, based on whatever relevant information they can find.
Complaining about McCain’s process for selecting a VP is frankly pretty weak.”
So what you are saying is the process wasn’t flawed, and they wanted to pick a V.P. nominee this completes toxic. Is that correct?
If that’s how you see her — then, yes, you are correct. Please spread all these horrible and toxic complaints to everyone you see.
Palin is not toxic…if you would step out of the echo chamber for a little while you might notice that the Right and plenty of the Middle are extremely fired up about her. It is completely fair to compare her credentials with Biden’s (which are substantial,) but the stuff you consider “toxic” is laughable.
The Obama campaign is still trying to convince people that Obama is more qualified than Palin. How pathetic is that?
He is. He’s served in national-scale Government.
That’s not the point — the point is that he keeps having to explain that he’s more qualified than his opponent’s VP pick. That’s something to be proud of!
That’s not the point — the point is *stamps feet*
Sarah Palin was completed vetted by John McCain’s campaign. They knew that Palin’s daughter was pregnant and that it was known most people in the small town and they won’t talk because of Palin’s 80% approval rate.
John McCain and his campaign’s strategy
1) It’s a privacy issue
2) No one in the town will talk
3) the 20% who don’t approve of Palin don’t know daughter is pregnant.
John McCain and his campaign’s counter strategy if pregnancy is revealed.
1) Make an announcement that its a privacy issue and you can’t talk about it because she’s a minor.
2) Blame the Democrats, the media, the internet rumors
2) Dispatch a swat team to tell the town folks not to talk to media.
3) Get that damn myspace page of Levi Johnson down that says “he’s a f****** redneck and he doesn’t want any kids.
4) If Levi doesn’t want to get married remind him about the statutory rape charges he will face if he does smile and marry.
5) Get Levi on an airplane to the RNC
6) Slap the shit out Levi
7) Get Levi ready to act in the made for prime time TV teen love story.
But wait a minute. The internet rumors WERE NOT about Bristol’s pregnancy. The rumors were about Palin, her incredulous at-risk pregnancy water breaking a life threatening 8 hour flight from Texas to Alaska passing by several Alaskan medical facilities to get to her hometown to have a baby and show up to work three days later with baby in tow because she’s SuperMom and SuperGovernor full of supercrap.
We all know Gov. Palin was the wrong choice for the right…It seems that Terry Trippany over at News Busters feels McCain’s ill-advised decision is Barack Obama’s fault.
Oliver,
If Sarah Palin is such a joke, why are you and the other Obama supporters here expending so much time and energy trying to point out what a ridiculous pick she is? Who are you trying to convince? Yourselves? If this is an election killer for the GOP, then shouldn’t you be cheering on her selection (while chuckling privately to yourself “Yeah, good luck with THAT pick, guys”). Or at the very least, ignoring her as inconsequential?
The fact that you’ve got 20 posts (and counting) about Palin in the last 5 days makes it very clear that you ARE worried about the impact she can have on the election. And the fact that you’re pushing every anti-Palin rumor out there, whether they’re truthful or not (She laughed at a cancer survivor! She’s not the real mother of her child! She’s a secessionist! No, wait, her husband’s a secessionist… but she recorded a video for a party that a handful of members claim wants secession, so, yeah THAT makes her a secessionist!) indicates just HOW worried you are.
I guess you should be.
Oh, and if you’ve got datadave arguing for your side, you REALLY need to be worried.
Like I said before, Palin is a target rich environment. How could I not post about the least vetted veep in U.S. history and her endless drama?
Yep — it’s “her drama” alright! Keep it up! Please don’t stop! Push Obama to make commercials to pound this “drama” to the voters!
No-one, it’s profoundly obvious that she’s a momentously bad pick, like twenty-eight Dan Quayles added together and multiplied by Spiro Agnew, so why not use that fact as the brilliant gift it is?
I don’t know about this idea that Obama supporters are going after Gov. Palin because she scares them (us). They’re going after her because, obviously, they find her unqualified and find her politics to be essentially the opposite of the country’s current needs. Did you conservatives go after Sen. Biden because he ’scared’ you? Or did you go after him because you thought he’d be a bad vice president?
I went after Biden because Oliver and other commenters around here told me he was “racist” and an “idiot.” I thought those charges might be true. I guess I was wrong as soon as Biden was on the good list again.
Did you conservatives go after Sen. Biden because he ’scared’ you?
Who “went after” Biden? The only thing I recall, on this site anyway, was a discussion about Oliver’s opinion that he was a racist idiot. Did I miss something?
“Palin is not toxic…if you would step out of the echo chamber for a little while you might notice that the Right and plenty of the Middle are extremely fired up about her.”
Got any evidence of that? And I don’t mean anecdotal evidence, I mean real evidence. I want real evidence showing the right and plenty of the middle are fired up by Palin.
Personally, I think you have no evidence and just made the claim hoping I would accept it. In other words, I think you are lying.
“If Sarah Palin is such a joke, why are you and the other Obama supporters here expending so much time and energy trying to point out what a ridiculous pick she is?”
Cause it is funny. That’s why most people laugh at a joke.
Like I said before, Palin is a target rich environment. How could I not post about the least vetted veep in U.S. history and her endless drama?
Yeah, despite the fact that many of those targets are fabrications by the left to try to justify their own attacks.
Yeah. She’s got a fake son, is a “bitch of a mother,” and got her job from the “casting couch.”
You leftists are hilarious!
YES JWG EVERYONE WITH A POLITICAL VIEWPOINT LEFT OF RICK SANTORUM SAID ALL THOSE THINGS SIMULTANEOUSLY BECAUSE WE ARE OF COURSE A GIGANTIC HIVE MIND LIKE THE FREAKING BORG OR SOMETHING GOOD JOB CHAMP HUGLAGHALGHALGHAL
So now Nimrod is arguing that associating with a group of people does NOT mean you are part of a hive collective.
It’s hard to keep the logic straight the way it spins around so often!
No, that’s just where you have the powers of reason of a three-year old child.
Once again, C.S., I believe you have failed to identify the subtle difference between fact and opinion. Of course I have no non-anecdotal evidence to support my belief, not being a pollster and not talking directly to more than a few people about it. But you would have to have a very narrow scan indeed to not see the numerous expressions of support in many different media. In a discussion that can roughly be described as “what everybody knows about the quality of McCain’s VP pick,” I think this is sufficiently well-founded to warrant a mention.
despite the fact that many of those targets are fabrications by the left to try to justify their own attacks.
This must be a new perspective caused by a Democratic front-runner. Perhaps you remember a few years ago when a highly decorated combat veteran had his distinguished military service trashed by a bunch of liars. Did you defend Kerry then?
I don’t know which if any of the many charges made against Palin are true, but there certainly are a lot of them, so it will be interesting to see if she will ever submit to, you know, QUESTIONS.
Would you agree that the public deserves to have her deposed, under oath, penalty of perjury and all that, about the issues regarding her purported interference with a civil servant with regard to her ex-brother in law? In the search for truth, of course, which I’m sure you support.
Surely you wouldn’t suggest that Governor Palin has immunity to being deposed, of a sort not granted to sitting president Bill Clinton.
Dave ‘o sowcow,
If you are so happy with Sarah and John, why are you here defending them?
Personally, I think she’s kind of attractive. It’s her national following and abstinence only sex education (or no sex education) that bothers me. And that she’s the biggest welfare Queen in America. She doesn’t work, except she gets Oil Companies and the Federal Govt. to bribe her citizens.
Actually, I am told Democrats in Alaska love her more than the Republicans…why? They’re getting that extra 1200 dollar welfare check from big Oil too. Besides, she did embarrass some Republicans there. I expect her to do the same to the National Republicans too.
But, she should stay in Alaska. They love her there more.
“Yeah. She’s got a fake son, is a ‘bitch of a mother,’ and got her job from the ‘casting couch.’”
Have I said any of those?
“Once again, C.S., I believe you have failed to identify the subtle difference between fact and opinion.”
No, Scratch, you presented opinion AS fact, which is a lie.
“…not being a pollster and not talking directly to more than a few people about it.”
I’m not a pollster either, but I have read polls in the matter, and they are not good for Palin.
You see, I had the evidence before I made the claim. You must do this to prevent yourself from lying.
a highly decorated combat veteran had his distinguished military service trashed by a bunch of liars. Did you defend Kerry then?
You mean like Kerry’s ‘Christmas in Cambodia’? Or the magic hat?
No I didn’t support him. Regardless of how he acted during combat and in country, when he returned to the states he voluntarily flushed his integrity with his Winter Soldier lies and slander of his former brothers in arms.
I don’t know which if any of the many charges made against Palin are true, but there certainly are a lot of them, so it will be interesting to see if she will ever submit to, you know, QUESTIONS.
And you don’t care if any of them are true. They serve your purpose. As far as answering questions, the Democratic investigator on Troopergate has already said that Palin has very cooperative and forthcoming with his inquiries, so much that subpoenas haven’t been needed. How much more should she “submit” to questioning? Would you prefer she be taken out back and beaten with a rubber hose until she confesses to her crimes.
And before she is forced to answer all of those other burning questions that you and the people on the left have for her, I have a laundry list of my own questions that Obama needs to address. In the interest of fairness and full disclosure, of course.
Would you agree that the public deserves to have her deposed, under oath, penalty of perjury and all that, about the issues regarding her purported interference with a civil servant with regard to her ex-brother in law? In the search for truth, of course, which I’m sure you support.
Sure. And before Obama is given access to the most powerful position in the world, we need clear up his relationship with a known domestic terrorist. Purely as part of the vetting and background check for someone seeking such a powerful job. Under oath, penalty of perjury and all that. OK with you?