Everything. Everything they say is a lie.
Sarah Palin’s visit to Iraq in 2007 consisted of a brief stop at a border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait, the vice presidential candidate’s campaign said yesterday, in the second official revision of her only trip outside North America.
Following her selection last month as John McCain’s running mate, aides said Palin had traveled to Ireland, Germany, Kuwait, and Iraq to meet with members of the Alaska National Guard. During that trip she was said to have visited a ‘military outpost’ inside Iraq. The campaign has since repeated that Palin’s foreign travel included an excursion into the Iraq battle zone.
But in response to queries about the details of her trip, campaign aides and National Guard officials in Alaska said by telephone yesterday that she did not venture beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border when she visited Khabari Alawazem Crossing, also known as ‘K-Crossing,’ on July 25, 2007.
I wonder if her name is really Sarah?
UPDATE:
“The McCain campaign said Governor Palin opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, but now we know she supported it. They said she didn’t seek earmarks, but now we know she hired a lobbyist to get millions in pork for her town and her state. They said she visited Iraq, but today we learned that she only stopped at the border. Americans are starting to wonder, is there anything the McCain campaign isn’t lying about?” said Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor.
“it’s okay to lie if you’re white, Charlie”-Sarah Palin
Anybody else share my weird affection for JR’s one-liners?
yes. i do!
Ditto. Been meaning to mention that. TFJ, jr.
Oddly enough, if you look at the transcript of the Gibson interview, and not the butchered version ABC aired, you find this was the exchange in question:
Also, I find it interesting that no one has ever found Palin saying that she ALWAYS opposed earmarks. We need not look far to get the opinions of the Democratic nominees, though; Biden’s steered millions in earmarks to the clients of his lobbyist son, while Obama made sure that his wife’e employer got a seven-figure earmark right after they more than doubled her salary.
I’d love to hear a spirited defense of earmarks from these two champions of them, but they seem strangely silent — all they want to do is take the heretic Palin and burn her at the stake for daring to reject their opinions. Oh, and she also rejected their earmarks — both men voted for the Bridge To Nowhere twice: first when it came up initially, then later, when it was on a long list of earmarks to be scrapped and the money instead put towards Katrina relief.
So, why is it so scandalous that someone who once thought earmarks were bad has changed her mind, but just ducky that these two guys have made sure their relatives have benefited quite nicely from them?
Palin Changed her mind, and gives us Hope for reform on earmarks. The Democratic nominees only offer us More Of The Same.
J.
What I find funny Jay is that Palin’s position on earmarks is exactly the same as Obama’s: she’s not opposed to all earmarks all the time, only the ones which are kind of secret deals slipped in at the last minute, and without knowing who they belong to. Obama has worked extensively toward transparency in government and has demanded exactly this kind of openness. I think Obama should make an ad “I am glad Gov. Palin has gotten around to supporting my position on earmarks…”
JT,
Where do you suppose the “aide” who said Palin had visited Iraq got her information? Did he/she just make it up?
Wouldn’t anyone who made up stuff about their boss get fired, and wouldn’t the press be alerted that this lying scumbag is now a FORMER employee?
Hey, didja hear the one about the Alaska National Guard general (Craig E. Campbell) who said last week that Palin had zip to do with the ANG command structure and had never issued a single order, then got an entirely unexpected promotion from the governor from major general to lieutenant general, and simultaneously changed his mind and said she was integral to the command structure? That promotion was her FIRST order to the ANG since she took office.
Do you think that it was a coincidence that his opinion of the governor changed one hundred eighty degrees on the day he got that third star? Do you think that one order, a promotion, suggests a close association and integral status to the ANG of the governor?
No, Repack, I thought those aides were never named, just blamed in public. At least, that’s what the Obama camp does. Hell, they even had to invent a word for it — “inartful.”
J.
OK, Jay Tea, you got your clever retort in. Wickedly clever, as you always are. Now please reply to the “didja hear the one about” part.
JT,
You deflected the question in an attempt to get in your knee jerk ODS Obama slur. The question was, where do you suppose the “aide” got the erroneous information about Palin visiting Iraq? Or visiting Ireland, for that matter, when the “visit” consisted of waiting in a plane on the tarmac during refueling?
The part about the general, that was gratuitous, but so juicy I couldn’t pass it up. Got any thoughts on that?
Give him a minute, he’s looking it up on Republicansarealwaysrightandnevertoblame.com
“Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by stpuidity.”
Obama talked about “my Muslim faith.” Joe Biden can’t tell a brigade from a battalion. McCain heard “Palin put the jet up on EBay” and presumed that it actually sold. Obama talked about 57 states. During the DNC, his kids asked where he was and he answered with two different cities.
Here’s an innocent explanation: the aide remembered Palin had traveled to visit Alaskan troops deployed in the Middle East, and had talked about visiting those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. They put two and two together and came up with five — that Palin had actually gone into Iraq, instead of right next door in Kuwait.
Only hyperpartisan, hysterical assholes immediately start screaming “TEH LIES!!!!!” at every opportunity. Honest ones look at things and try to differentiate between real lies (as in, “deliberately stating things the speaker knows to be false”) with misstatements, errors, and cases where the speaker sincerely believes something that later turns out to be false.
My current favorite example is when Obama said his uncle had helped liberate Auschwitz. That struck a lot of people — including me — as a flat out-and-out LIE and an attempt to grab some personal grandeur that he did not deserve. This was based on two absolutely incontrovertible facts: Obama has no uncles on his mother’s side, and Auschwitz was not liberated by Americans. The only way his story could be true would be if his father’s brother had done the deed, and there were damned few Kenyans in the Red Army back in 1945.
Considering Obama’s own history of just plain making up shit about his background (his parents were inspired to marry and have him in 1961 by a march in Selma that happened in 1965, and his views on race were shaped by an article in Life Magazine that was never published), calling the “uncle at Auschwitz” a story a lie was certainly justified — at first.
Then the details came out: Obama was actually referring to his great-uncle, and that uncle participated in the liberation of Buchenwald. A stupid mistake, but a trivial one — and one that I do not consider a lie, even though what Obama originally said was completely and utterly false.
Oh, and one piece of tactical advice that I’m sure you’ll ignore: don’t get hung up on every single verbal slip or misstatement. With the walking gaffe machines the Democrats have on their ticket, that WILL come back and bite you on the ass. And it already is.
J.
JT, she didn’t reject those earmarks AT ALL. First of all, she lobbied for the Bridge to Nowhere, even campaigning on it. HOwever, Congress removed the earmark BEFORE she was elected. She didn’t tell ANYONE “thanks but no thanks.” Furthermore, SHE KEPT THE MONEY and got a super-earmark out of it…money to use however she wanted.
Obama’s state gets roughly $35/person. Alaska gets almost $300. Give me a freaking break. Spare me your BS indignation.
Shorter Jaye Tea:
I only remember gaffes by Democrats. McCcain’s lies are honest mistakes at worst, and really should be considered just mulligans. Never mind the fact they are repeated the next day.
Here’s an innocent explanation: the aide remembered Palin had traveled to visit Alaskan troops deployed in the Middle East, and had talked about visiting those wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. They put two and two together and came up with five — that Palin had actually gone into Iraq, instead of right next door in Kuwait.
Where did you get this “explanation?” There is no evidence to support it, and no one has made any such claim. Oh, that’s right, YOU MADE IT UP! It is complete fiction, posed as an “argument.” You are just throwing it out there to see who is dumb enough to fall for it.
So you are saying that the “aides” who handle this stuff are too dumb to do actual research, or to ask an actual question, and then they WRITE DOWN wrong stuff, that the candidate, who actually DID this so-called travel, doesn’t seem to notice?
And you are comparing this written and researched material to freudian slips made while in the middle of a lengthy speech, and you are saying that Palin’s and McCain’s staffs are incompetent, and that the candidate herself doesn’t even pay attention to claims being made about her?
Okay, you have made your case. Palin’s staff and Palin herself are not malicious, just stupid, because they actually printed and distributed erroneous material that can’t be explained by a slip of the tongue, like substituting Auschwitz for Buchenwald. (A great uncle is STILL an uncle.)
Where do the stupidity and incompetence you have identified rank on your list of attributes for a VP candidate?
“Palin Changed her mind”
So did John Kerry re: voting to authorize the POTUS to use force in Iraq. Remember what you called him, over and over, for doing that?
“Shorter Jaye Tea:
I only remember gaffes by Democrats. McCcain’s lies are honest mistakes at worst, and really should be considered just mulligans. Never mind the fact they are repeated the next day.”
Republicans love to think of themselves as intellectual He-men compared to namby-pamby flip-floppy Democrats. But really, they’re just hypocrites. Do as I say, not as I do, because it’s always IOKIYAR.
Jay: Please stop your flip-flopping. Why do you hate America and our freedoms so?
Where’d I get that explanation>? Simple. I looked at it and said “is there an innocent explanation available, one that removes the conspiracy elements?” And one came to mind. It’s easy, as long as you’re not obsessed with “exposing TEH LIES!!!!”
OK, I’m convinced. You’ve convinced me that Barack Obama is a filthy, dishonorable, scheming liar. I’d thought his earlier statements were just innocent slips of the tongue, but now I realize he was just pandering and trying to manipulate his audience and claim, vicariously, the glory and credit to which he is not due. His claim that his parents were inspired to marry by the Selma march was an attempt to hitch himself to the Civil Rights movement. His lie about his uncle at Auschwitz was a transparent move to shore up his support in the Jewish community. The fabrication of the Life Magazine article was to give him some credibility on racial issues and identity.
Good god, how can we possibly elect such a LIAR and FRAUD and MANUPULATOR to the presidency? The man should be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail!
Is that the standard you wanna play by, people? ‘Cuz that is the ultimate playing out of the “eye for an eye” game. Either you recognize that both sides are human and make mistakes, or you end up destroying every candidate the very first time they — or, as you are using now, their staffers — make a single human error.
J.
OH NOEZ! J NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA BIN LADEN NOW OH NOEZ!!!1!
Care to address my previous question instead of moving the goalposts again? Is Sarah Palin a flip-flopper or not? If she’s not, then what was John Kerry re: changing his mind on military force authorization? Why has the GOP nominated a serial flip-flopper to be vice president? Why should America vote for a flip-flopper?
Jay Tea, in the days of tar and feathers, only white people were tarred and feathered, and rode out of town on a rail. Blacks were lynched.
Just like a conservative to use the analogy, though.
Jaim, she revised her opinion as her perspective changed and her experiences developed her. That’s called “growth.” It’s called “learning.” Try it sometime.
Kerry, on the other hand, was trying to argue that he was right on both occasions. “I actually did vote for the 87 billion before I voted against it.” That’s not flip-flopping, that’s weaseling.
And I’m still curious why you’re so hysterical about a campaign staffer saying something wrong, and Obama’s habit of personally saying things that are demonstrably false are so unremarkable.
I’m inclined to give both the benefit of the doubt, as a general rule. I don’t need to get all hysterical and scream “LIAR LIAR LIAR!” when human beings occasionally act human.
Why do you get overwhelmed with that compunction?
J.
And I’m still curious why you have not answered Repack’s charge about the ANG general’s promotion.
Bruce, I didn’t comment on it because I didn’t see it. Now I do, and based purely on the evidence Repack provided, I suspect that it’s about as substantive as the “Sarah Palin wanted to ban the Harry Potter books” and “Sarah Palin cut the funding for pregnant teens” and “Sarah Palin slashed the spending for special needs students” bullshit that has dropped from that festering turd-hole that is the Daily Kos.
I don’t go chasing down every single stupid rumor that someone tosses out, but I remembered the Obama
misstatements EVIL STINKING VILE LYING LIES because those came straight from his own mouth, and there was video.But even so, it doesn’t address the core issue here — candidates (or their campaigns) saying stuff about their pasts that just ain’t so. You wanna jump and say that they’re all lies and deliberate attempts to deceive the public? Fine. I’m not gonna go that far, but I would expect you to be consistent in your applications of that.
J.
I don’t need to get all hysterical and scream “LIAR LIAR LIAR!” when human beings occasionally act human.
Unless they mistakenly refer to Buchenwald as Auchwitz, or refer to the total of Democratic state primaries caucuses (57) as 57 states, because that is obviously a despicable lie, and prima facie evidence that Harvard Summa Cum Laude and Law Review president Obama doesn’t know how many stars there are on the flag.
I can see Russia from here.
That’s supposed to be “primaries plus caucuses” but the plus sign vanished.
JT sez: No, Repack, I thought those aides were never named, just blamed in public.
A little closer reading of the Boston Globe article shows that even the “aides” refuse to go on the record about what they are telling us. Do you trust anyone who won’t sign their name to what they want the Amertican people to believe?
The aide, who demanded anonymity before answering the question, said Palin visited a “military outpost” on the Iraq side of the Kuwait/Iraq border.
Pretty sick of that tactic. Sourcing has gotten so weak that most reader’s eyes skip over it and they just swallow whatever was said, because, well, it was in the paper after all, right?
Repack, I’m a lifelong New Hampshirite. I’ve learned that in a significant percentage of cases, the resemblance between what the Boston Globe prints and reality is purely accidental.
J.
When you can’t disprove the charge, accuse the source of bias. J.T.
JT, are you seriously trying to explain the Bridge to Nowhere situation as “evidence of growth?” Are you kidding me?
I’ve got to try to remember to stop feeding the trolls. What an idiot.
. I’ve learned that in a significant percentage of cases, the resemblance between what the Boston Globe prints and reality is purely accidental.
The only fact at issue is whether the aide requested anonymity. After all, the false report that Palin had been to Iraq appeared a lot of places other than the Globe.
Since we have never heard that aide’s name, isn’t that pretty good evidence that the aide DID in fact request anonymity? Are you saying that the UNNAMED aide DIDN’T request anonymity? WHAT ARE YOU CLAIMING ISN’T TRUE?
JT, I love the smell of your desperation in the morning. Ahhhh, smells like…
Victory.
Obama talked about “my Muslim faith.”
When did that happen, Jay?
I’d thought his earlier statements were just innocent slips of the tongue, but now I realize he was just pandering and trying to manipulate his audience and claim, vicariously, the glory and credit to which he is not due.
I heard John McCain was a POW, but he doesn’t like to talk about it.