LITTWIN: Palin as phenom: It's a mystery
By Mike Littwin, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published September 16, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
I was going to be bold and make a prediction. But then I chickened out.
You can blame Sarah Palin. I know I do.
I was prepared to say that when the stock market drops 500 points and your 401(k) plan is disappearing faster than a San Diego Chargers' lead at Mile High and the only thing that's stopping a run on your bank is that people can't afford the gas to drive to get there, then no one will be talking about Palin anymore.
Or maybe this: That when John McCain, while admitting just how tough times are, still somehow says the "fundamentals" of the economy are "strong" even as your broker is going fundamentally weak at the knees, the conversation is bound to change.
But I had just gone to see Palin at the Jeffco lovefest. And when I watched hockey moms embracing soccer dads and Bear Stearns' clients high-fiving Lehman Brothers' clients, I'll admit to doubts. What did they see that I didn't?
All I know is that I've never seen anything quite like the Palin phenomenon. And it's not just me. I consulted my sources. I delved into the ancient texts. I even did the Google. It was unanimous.
If you've been around long enough, you know everything has happened before. But this hasn't. Vice-presidential nominees don't matter - but she somehow does. Late-breaking candidates don't challenge long-held narratives - but she has. Complete unknowns simply do not become known overnight, except in bad movies - but, yeah, you get the idea.
At the Jeffco Fairgrounds, 5,000 supporters were cheering her every word, including words they couldn't actually hear because they were cheering so loudly.
(Think about this: Colorado Republicans were cheering Palin for taking on - read: raising taxes on - oil companies in Alaska. Somewhere, Bill Ritter is smiling.)
If you don't believe in love at first sight, you must not have been there. The crowd was so smitten, it was almost like, I don't know, Obama - the former phenom - was in town. Actually, he was in Pueblo and Grand Junction on Monday, and he's in Golden today. Yes, this is what it's like to be a battleground state. You can check out the candidates yourselves.
When I watched Palin's interviews with Charlie Gibson on ABC, she seemed so much like an eager student - I imagined nervous tutors off camera - I almost felt sorry for her. I mean, it's not her fault if she's unqualified for the job. That's McCain's fault.
And then I remembered. She's turned into the Beatles. Did you ever feel sorry for Ringo?
If this is your first political campaign, you're forgiven for thinking the impossible is somehow routine. What else could you think after watching the first African-American nominee beat out the first former first lady candidate for the right to face the first 72-year-old non-incumbent candidate?
And then comes Palin and her lipstick line. It isn't just that she's a woman. Hillary Clinton more than prepared us for that. And it isn't just that she's from Alaska. Obama's roots are even more exotic. And it's not just that she encourages citizens to shoot wolves from airplanes, although, you have to admit, that is pretty unusual.
And it's not even that she's the first vice-presidential candidate in memory - or probably ever - who can outdraw her running mate, although maybe that is it.
Almost instantaneously, Palin - a name few people outside Alaska had ever heard spoken - changed everything. McCain, the gambler, saw the experience card was a loser and that he needed to become the maverick again. Imagine if he'd picked Tim Pawlenty. You can't do it, can you?
And so he went with Palin, even if his new co-maverick had earmark issues of her own. So what if she was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it? She's not John Kerry. Actually, Palin fans don't know who she is yet - but they seem to know when to cheer.
The next thing you know, Obama, fresh from his Mile-High embrace, is on Letterman joking that he used to be on magazine covers, but now the best offer he can get is from Popular Mechanics.
So, there are questions. Like, how did this happen? And why didn't Tina Fey think of it first?
I have theories, some of them possibly even valid:
* Palin is the candidate from the Republican wing of the Republican party. She is the first Republican to get the base excited this campaign season. She's from a small town, just like on the old magazine covers, except with more ice. She's the lifetime NRA, lifetime really, really pro-life candidate. And there's the whole moose angle. And if The New York Times goes to Alaska and finds she was vendetta-prone and has named a bunch of high school buddies to high office, well, it's always fun to see Republicans yelling sexism in a crowded room.
* This is the first real reality-TV-era campaign, in which we not only expect plot twists - move the speech to a stadium; find a candidate from Alaska - we demand them. And if we get them, just watch the ratings.
* It's class as much as gender. When you hear women say she's just like them, they're talking about someone who's gone through what they've gone through - and made it. They don't think Palin is average. They think she's talented - and talented enough to start where they did and make it to the top, even if she had to go to five colleges to get there.
The Palin supporters I talked to were already McCain supporters, but they're now more energized McCain supporters.
What does it mean? The polls are nearly even. The forecasters are all over the place. What do you predict - more hurricanes or more bankruptcies?
Predictions? I've only got one: There are the debates yet to come. And thanks to Nixon, everyone will wear makeup.
September 16, 2008
6:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
DakotaPlainsman writes:
Here's another mystery:
I find it amazing that the polls are as close as they are, considering the fact that the dominant, liberal, left wing media (including Littwin, a very unapologetic Obama supporter) has provided so much favor to Obama. And with the celebrity crowd in his corner, he should be leading by a wide margin. Lindsay Lohan is for Obama. Doesn’t that count for something? With Littwin and Lohan on his side, how can he lose?
September 16, 2008
7:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
BuffDriver writes:
Ya gotta feel for libs like Nitwit...they KNOW Gov. Palin is qualified to lead this country...Biden and Nobama have never even run a lemonade stand.
September 16, 2008
7:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
raysmom writes:
Oh Boy, Oh Boy- when Littwin is THIS snarky, I know his hide is chapped! What's wrong- don't like it that your Messiah has been eclipsed by a WOMAN, and one that you feel so SUPERIOR to? Your rhetoric about the financials (those guys are best buds with Joe Biden(D-MBNA Bank and his MBNA Lobbyist son) and gas prices (thank our do-nothing Congress for that, as well as dropping the ball on regulation of public entities) is so angry and ignorant- the coffee tastes GOOD this morning, Mike. A Palin Lovefest? You bet. Still better than an Obama ME-Fest, any day of the week.
September 16, 2008
7:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
quichelorraine writes:
Given what i've seen of the journalistic coverage of this presidential campaign so far, I predict that, after this election is over, there will be a lot more job openings for objective journalists.
September 16, 2008
7:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
crescen7 writes:
Mystery ? Here's some help . . .
Sarah Palin was not an unknown to activist Republicans. She and Bobby Jindal have been identified as strong young conservatives for the past two years. Both exemplify political success stories that have relied on a conservative message, rather than political connections to win their elections. Both have made significant improvements to the Governments in their respective States. Both are widely respected by their constiuents.
When McCain was considering VP's, the names Jindal and Palin were mere whispers. Conservatives didn't dare allow themselves to dream that McCain might pick a true governing conservative. Instead, Conservatives hoped he'd at least go for a modest conservative like Romney, or Pawlenty; while they feared he'd go for a dud like Ridge or completely abandon conservatives by naming Lieberman.
When McCain named Palin, conservatives were stunned. Conservatives don't see the air headed ex-beauty queen turned moose hunter that the media has portrayes; but the sincere, successful, and competent Governor of the America's largest and most resource rich state. A principled person who is not beholden to any political party, or machinery - but only to her own guiding philosophy.
A political philosohy of limited Government, individual liberties, and strong defense.
A philosophy that is largely shared by most of America.
Now, is that really such a mystery ?
September 16, 2008
8:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
soccermom writes:
So let's get this straight.
2001 umemployment was 4.2% and now it's 6.1%
We went from a 281 billion dollar surplus to a 357 billion dollar deficit.
National debt went from 5.7 trillion to 9.7 trillion
Gas went from 1.50 to 4.00+ per gallon
There is a Wall Street meltdown that Alan Greenspan calls a once in a lifetime event.
This has happened under Republican leadership.
And McCain says the fundamentals of our economy are strong.
He's out of touch and we need to stop this train wreck.
September 16, 2008
8:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
catdaddio42 writes:
This egalitarian writer Mr. Littwin seems to have forgotten the largely uninformed, off-the-cuff and, at times, stupid answers that Senator Obama made in the early Democratic primary debates. He's just had more time to polish up his answers after about 4 years of campaigning for the presidency. It should be clear to everyone that both BO and Governor Palin have abilities beyond their respective resumes. But SP is not running for the presidency. What we're all left with is to cut out the hyperbole and contrast the character. When confronted with evil, what did each do? McCain and Palin have records of saying "No" to the corrupt system, Obama and Biden have records of saying "Can you actually get away with that?" Check out the history and learn something about your new leaders.
September 16, 2008
8:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
redmike writes:
Complete unknowns simply do not become known overnight, except in bad movies - ("bad movies" signals the upcoming bias in the article) .. but just to help Mike Littwin who may have been around a long time but has not learned much about political history.
The early lives of Calvin Coolidge and Harry Truman, and the latter in particular are a clue.
If the writer reads about the above and then wipes the egg off of his face he may check out his next article more carefully before hitting the 'save' button.
Mike
September 16, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
bapple writes:
I think that you people above are out of your minds. This woman is clueless. 20 months ago she was Mayor of a VILLAGE, not a city, not a town, a VILLAGE with as many people as a single A minor league baseball team fits in their stands. She wants to go to war with Russia over the country of Georgia? She wants to fight "God's War?" C'mon people, do you really want to sacrifice your children for a renewed holy war? Let's examine the facts:
She lied about the bridge to nowhere, she lied about selling the jet on e-bay, she lied about firing her chef, she lied about "trooper gate", she lied when she said she's experienced. Wake up people, this "hackey maaam" could be a heartbeat away from being President. That is the scariest thing I have ever heard in my life !!! And the press? There is no such thing as a liberal press, all of the major press outlets are owned by conservative big corporations. Fox News is nothing more than a Republican talking points propaganda network.
The bottom line is that McCain is a liar, Palin is a liar and they won't have any problems continuing their lies if the sky falls and they somehow get elected.
Also, do you think John McCain is an advocate for the troops? Check out the Senate website and his votes on anything to do with veterans. He has voted NAY on almost anything to help vets and their families.
September 16, 2008
8:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
RobertL writes:
The MSM is a joke now. A parody of itself. Does anyone think Obama would be where he is today without a compliant media?
Let's defeat Obama. Let me recommend that everyone who wants to defeat The One (and by extension, the media) send something hilarious to thei confused friends, liberals, college students, or neighbors and support wounded warriors at the same time.
Go to http://www.obamaresearch.com. Watch the video, too. The "book" on Obama will make you laugh until you cry.
They are cheap, and I picked up many. I gave mine away and just orded more!
-- Rob
September 16, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
wendy027 writes:
This article is your typical liberal media hatchet job. To balance the scales lets review some Obama's ideals.
If your ideal is a guy who had his first political fundraiser at the home of self-acknowledged bomber Bill Ayers; who bought his home at a discount from a convict named Rezko and then lied about their relationship; who dedicates his book to his father who deserted him then disses his mother and grandmother as typical prejudiced white people after they stayed and raised him; who sat in church for 20 years listening to his mentor and spiritual guide Wright preach hate of America, hate of white people, promulgate black power and racism then claim he never heard the sermons and never protests the church giving a lifetime achievement award to anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan; who chose as his wife a woman who dislikes her country which is mean and nasty and was never proud of it until now; who belittles small town residents, for clinging to guns and religion, when he thinks they're out of earshot; who believes the morality of abortion is “above my pay grade”; who has been in the State and US senate but can't seem to make decisions on whether to vote yes or no; who has never in his life run anything; who says one thing then does another - campaign financing, NAFTA, voting for the troops, voting for the Bridge to Nowhere; who criticizes America while he is roaming the globe as the Citizen of the World; who advocates big government, big spending and expanded entitlement programs all paid for by huge tax increases. If that's your ideal, then you certainly should vote for Barack Obama.
September 16, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
indystacey writes:
All of you defending Palin are liars. You KNOW she is not qualified to run this country. She is smart and savvy and maybe one day she would be a great president. But not now! McCain did not pick the most qualified person. He didn't pick based on what was best for the country. He picked based on what was best for HIM. That is inexcusable. He put himself before country. He has lost all of the intergrity and honor that we used to admire in him.
September 16, 2008
8:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
kc02 writes:
If she's unqualified, Littwin, then so is Barack Obama. You can't poo-poo her experience without saying Obama doesn't have it either. While he was serving on committees, she ran a state. I'd put her experience against his any day.
September 16, 2008
8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
dakar writes:
Littwin and his ilk seem to think Obama is qualified to be President because he's spent the past couple years talking to the media on news talk shows. Their used to seeing Obama on TV, thus he must be qualified. That is their gauge. And these liberals who've been fawning over Obama this last year can't understand how so many moderates and conservatives would be so "smitten" by their candidate. Aren't only the Dems allowed to do that? For them, the media is supposed to determine who it's darlings are, not the people right? Palin has turned the media on its ear and they can't stand it.
September 16, 2008
8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Steph writes:
nachosleaze, you're comment is an insult to all pigs.
September 16, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
Fred1 writes:
The libs keep forgetting who has the majority in Congress and what the approval rating is there (what 16%?). Shame on them as they are really who has set up this mess!
September 16, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
suffernofools writes:
Soccermom: we (the USA) doesn't operate in a vacuum in the world. As I recall, some pretty major stuff has happened in the world since President Bush was elected president. You can't blame everything that's happened on the President or the GOP. E.g., I don't think he was the one that made all those subprime mortgage loans...
Bapple: so what "village" has Obama ever governed? Also, if the Democrats have to stoop to comparing Obama's credentials with the vice presidential nominee of the other party, that's pretty scary. I guess it's b/c they can't even begin to compare his qualifications with his presidential nominee counterpart.
As I've said here before, I don't think Obama could even get hired as the CEO of a major corporation with his 'credentials' and experience, yet he's 'more qualified' than either McCain or Palin to be president? Yeah, right.
September 16, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
ArvadaMiner writes:
I don't have a problem with people calling Palin "clueless" or unqualified as long as you say the same about Obama. He comes across to me as someone who does not understand what is going on except that he wants to be president.
If you want to call one a political hack, then you have to put them both in that category.
September 16, 2008
8:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
tedneb writes:
Love it.
The liberal posters here consistently, deliberately and grossly misstate important numbers like the unemployment rate, federal deficit and national debt.
They don't understand basic governmental concepts (like the fact that villages are larger and more governmentally intensive than towns).
They seriously maintain that there's no such thing as a left-leaning media in the US even though that can be objectively quantified.
They generate faux scandals (Sarah Palin actually fired her cook? Say it isn't so!).
And they conveniently ignore the obvious fact that most of the bad things that have happened to the economy under Bush's two terms didn't occur until the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.
And they call McCain and Palin liars? Now THAT's being out of touch.
September 16, 2008
8:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
bapple writes:
John McCain claims to be a big supporter of military personnel and their families.The information below tells another story.It is John McCain's voting record on legislation to help veterans and their families.All of this information can be verified simply by going to the U.S. Senate website. Obama / Biden voted FOR ALL BUT 1 of these bills.
MAY 2008:McCain was a no show for the vote on the GI Bill.The Republican race had already been decided but he said he was too busy campaigning.In the midst of the most competitive Democratic primary race in history, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton made it back to Washington to vote on this important bill that provides educational benefits for our military heroes.
SEPTEMBER 2007:McCain voted a gainst the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments.S.Amdt. 2012 to S.Amdt.2011toH.R. 1585
MAY 2006:McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.S.Amdt.3704 to H.R. 4939
APRIL 2006:McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R.4939.
MARCH 2006:McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes. S.Amdt.3007 to S.Con.Res. 83
NOVEMBER 2005:McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans coming home from Iraq with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse.(S.2020,S.Amdt. 2634,Vote 343, 11/17/05)
MARCH 2004:McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes.S.Amdt.2745 to S.Con.Res. 95
OCTOBER 2003:McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000. S.Amdt. 1817 to S. 1689/
APRIL 2003:McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets,tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests. S.Amdt. 452 to S. 762
AUGUST 2001:McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000. S.Amdt. 1218 to S.Amdt. 1214 to H.R. 2620
September 16, 2008
8:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
It seems like the Sainted One has been knocked off his perch and doesn't know what to do now. Maybe if he had been actually doing some work in the Senate he would have a record to fall back on to prop him up but all he has done since arriving there is run for President.That and hang with American terrorists, dem bag men, crazy preachers. Of course he had watched as gas has gone from about $1.50 since coming in to about $4 now. He did nothing about the banking issue or mortgages. His sole job since he has arrived was to try and undermine the war. Thank goodness he failed at surrender and it looks like we are winning and taking those tactics to Afghanistan now.
September 16, 2008
8:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
RufusTFirefly writes:
hey nachosleaze....wipe the cheese off of your lips. Wake up, we need McCain and Palin in the White House.
September 16, 2008
8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
cindy50ham writes:
I was one of the Palin supporters Littwin interviewed yesterday, I wonder why he bothered. He clearly had an agenda when he spoke with me. Once upon a time reporters gathered facts, all of them. Yesterday Littwin tried to persuade me that my thinking was faulty, I thought he wanted to know what I thought, well, not really, he is after all Littwin. Though he is very clever with words he is not a reporter.
September 16, 2008
8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
666 writes:
It's no mystery that Palin is regarded as some kind of demigod now...the Republicans are desperate for any distraction from the fact that their party has run the economy into the ground at top speed. The novelty of a female conservative dashing toward Cheney's VP bunker (or wherever he goes to hide from reality) has them all in a tizzy, so that they can forget that their chosen president and VP have done worse things to our economy than any "tax and spend Democrat".
September 16, 2008
8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
Palin forced raped victims to pay for their rape kits because emergency contraception is offered as part of the procedure.
She thinks if a woman or girl is raped, they should be raped again by her requirement that they carry the child of their rapist? Next she'll be telling women and girls that they should marry their rapist so the kid has a daddy.
She left her tiny town with 20 million in debt.
She hired lobbyists to beg congress for earmarks, making her state the biggest social welfare case in our nation.
She lies repeatedly about things big and small.
She is stonewalling an ethics investigation against her.
She's Bush in a dress--a dissaster waiting to happen.
No wonder pseudo-cons everywhere are cheering her on. Nothing gets them energized like a lying, cheating, incompetent loser
*********************
That all you got buddy? Just call her a liar and that would make someone want to vote for the liar Obama? Of course he has a been a real teller or truths. Now as far as earmarks go, the ones she got in Wasilla were for sewer and infrastructure repairs but don't let those facts hit ya in the noodle. Secondly, if the feds were not controlling much of the state Alaska would be able to use their own resources to build up the state and thereby fund everything themselves. The people that seem to be doing most of the lying are the ones posting on sites like this. You are taking the dem talking points that if you repeat something enough it becomes true even if it isn't. If she were bad there buddy then why is her approval ratings in Alaska around 80%?
September 16, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
ArvadaMiner writes:
What exactly is a "pseudo-con"? Are you talking about false conservatives, people that aren't really conservatives?
September 16, 2008
9:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
bapple writes:
After reading all of this it is clear to me that the characterization of people from Colorado in the Borat movie was pretty accurate. I hope your kids are ready to fight in the newest "Great Crusade." WE NEED TO KEEP RELIGION OUT OF GOVERNMENT !!!!
September 16, 2008
9:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Willy writes:
It's fair if Litwin wants to say she is unqualified, but if he doesn't understand her appeal, he is completely out of touch with the real world.
September 16, 2008
9:08 a.m.
bapple writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
September 16, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
He says "encourages people to shoot wolves out of airplanes" like it's a good thing.
It's only one of the many little things about her that disgust me. I've been writing letters, and fighting along side the Humane Society for years to stop inhumane practices against animals like that one. I'm all for hunting from talented hunters who know how to quickly kill their prey AND take it home and eat it. Hunting wolves and watching them bleed to death just for a picture of it? Disgusting.
And so is she. How can her supporters keep ignoring her lies? And how can they keep touting one-sided statistics? Keep it up folks, use only the data you want, while ignoring the other side of the story. Everyone here is showing their true colors.. and the true color is ignorance.
September 16, 2008
9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
KarlDaggerfield writes:
Not to be uncharitable, but after reading just a few lines of this editorial, I couldn't help but sense that old deja vu feeling coming over me again, to loosely quote Yogi Berra.
How many times does the same insipid and fundamentally false "story" have to be re-written by the media before it is shelved as been-there, done-that? And isn't it the job of a real reporter or writer to think of a novel angle or invigorating take on an issue?
Reporters, in a Liberal universe, are purported truth-bearers. Think of Prometheus, who stole fire for humanity & then was punished for his audacity. Contra, Mike Littwin proves to us that he really ought not be a reporter at all, since he is not "reporting" facts, but simply acting as a telegraph operator -- just passing the canned talking points notes down the line to the next stop.
Example: "All I know is that I've never seen anything quite like the Palin phenomenon. And it's not just me. I consulted my sources. I delved into the ancient texts. I even did the Google. It was unanimous."
Here, Mike engages not in audacious truth-telling, but in blubbering regurgitation of the liberal pap "storyline" that is now the cornerstone of this week's "Liberal Truth" -- that Sarah Palin is an unqualified Conservative bimbo whose appeal is to others just like her, the right-side rednecked rubes. In other words, she is a talentless shill for a party without virtues. Right, Mike?
Instead, it is Obama as a phenomenon the likes of which have never been seen, according to ancient history & the electronic deity google. Obama is the talentless actor, who appears as if on cue from some Hollywood casting agency, with no leadership experience except his vague, socialist connections. He appears not to understand history, economics, logic, war, fighting corruption or Washington, or even how to avoid seeming a pompous egomaniac. You know, the guy who promises to heal planets, and gather the peoples of the world under the mantle of his robe -- like some deranged wannabe super hero?!!
So, let's look at the REAL story here, Mikey: The top of the Democrat ticket gets almost NO scrutiny, despite connections with con artists, convicts, Marxists, anarchists and racists. But it is Sarah Palin, the reformer of accomplishments & plucky determination, whom needs to be sacrificed to the tin gods of Marxism, like Billy Budd, to return order to the contrived Manichean universe of Liberalism?
Give me a break, Mikey. If you can't do a better job than acting as a blind Liberal parrot, then PLEASE consider finding another profession that better suits your talents -- like selling insurance (please cite Arthur Miller for the details on that one...).
September 16, 2008
9:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
RufusTFirefly writes:
Dear Nacho,
The first year I had to pay taxes was under the Clinton Administration. I've been basically screwed ever since. No, I don't own 7 houses, and I don't care that McCain does, good for him and Cindy. But I tell you what I do have money and I earned every penny of that money. I invested some of it, got lucky and was able to invest more. I don't have anythng invested now. I have a personal savings account and a 401k. Thats it. I beleive that all democrats want something for nothing, blamming the other guy for their woes. Yes my children will have college paid for and so on. But you know something else Nacho for many years I took care of numerous WWII veterans and Vietnam veterans. Have you ever talked to those men and women?? I don't think so, because your attitude would be totally changed about WAR. I support the troops, I support President Bush. So don't tell me I am looking at the world through rose colored glasses don't blame me and my GOP because you can't make any money!!
September 16, 2008
9:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Randman writes:
The problem here isn't Palin because she has EXECUTIVE branch experience and has run a local and state government (much smaller version of the federal government).
The problem here is how someone who has absolutely NO executive branch experience, comes with a background that shows no real accomplishment except talk, strongly believes in the institution of socialism, is being funded by questionable off shore donations, railroaded many individuals to accomplish his objectives in his political life, is portrayed as some sort of messiah by the press and is being shoved down everyones throats as the best man for the job !
OBAMA is the problem !!
Just look at some of the lame decisions he's made already...it's just a sample of what lays ahead.
You want change? How does living in a socialist America sound to you???
September 16, 2008
9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
Well, thankfully we have "bapple" to explain all this to all of us dumb conservatives. I mean, without "bapple" I know I was blinded by the overwhelming sense of optimism, drive, and determination for change offered by the McCain/Palin ticket. But thankfully, "bapple" reeled us back in. Kind of reminds me of my ex-wife: "I said it therefore it IS, and you may NOT argue with it." Oh wait, that almost sounds like the LIBERAL media that would have us ALL annointing the false Messiah Osama bin Laden, err, ooops, I mean Obama/Biden. Yet, some of us "dumb conservatives" DON'T CARE what the media, Hollywood or "bapple" - read "bad apple" think.
September 16, 2008
9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
nachosleaze writes:
kabookey:
have you seen alaskans? they're just a bit smarter than the moose they hunt. an 80 percent approval rating isn't much of an accomplishment in a place where people think living in a place that goes months without the sun setting.
more importantly, why would you suggest removal for another poster posting the truth about mclipstick? i know all the things he posted are deplorable and offensive, but they're not his record/beliefs, they're the lying moose pig palin's.
****************
More of the typical left. They must all be so stupid to support a republican. The left has played that card for election after election and have lost time and again. I know that is the best you got so you stick with it and see who wins in November. Don't cry in your cheese there buddy. Keep up the insults buddy. I am sure they work well on your wife and kids. Heck maybe if you insult enough people here today we can spare your wife and kids the abuse later.
September 16, 2008
9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
coarizona writes:
I find myself listening to the people who support certain candidates. Littwin, you make a sorry case for Obama. Perhaps, you should hush up for a little while. You are not helping Obama.
September 16, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
JYP3500 writes:
Way to go Mike, every time you open your mouth and trash Palin, 10 thousand more people will vote for her!
No need for McCain to open anymore offices in Colorado, the goofy Denver newspapers are doing the campaigning for him.
You liberals just can't help yourselves.
September 16, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
primafacie writes:
"I was prepared to say that when the stock market drops 500 points and your 401(k) plan is disappearing faster than a San Diego Chargers' lead at Mile High ... "
Of course, 401(k) plans fluctuate. Every day. It depends on what funds it owns. And when the market recovers from Monday's dump, it'll be worth more than it was last week. The only value that matters is its value the day you withdraw the money.
Couldn't read past that little bit of inanity in this column from the typically inane Mike Littwin.
September 16, 2008
9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
As per "Charles_B" - No wonder pseudo-cons everywhere are cheering her on. Nothing gets them energized like a lying, cheating, incompetent loser.
Well, there you have it. An educated statement, of course NOT an opinion, but a FACT - as Mr. B would have you believe. Oh, and wait a second, I guess Mr. B is a devout Republican! I get it! The "lying, cheating, imcompetent loser" comment was about Obama! Thanks for your staunch support Mr. B! And next time, try not to make up so many of your own facts - it obviously confuses your mind, or what's left of it, after attending Osama's speech at Invesco Field.
September 16, 2008
9:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
bapple writes: "Also, do you think John McCain is an advocate for the troops? Check out the Senate website and his votes on anything to do with veterans. He has voted NAY on almost anything to help vets and their families."
McCain supports the troops by advocating what he feels will give them the best chance of fighting effectively and winning. Liberals' idea of 'supporting the troops' is to vote for a war, but then when the going gets too tough they claim they were deceived, change their minds and advocate withdrawal and defeat, and then salve their consciences by voting for more benefits.
Anyone can vote for more veteran's benefits, but what happened to the Democrats' famous "pay as you go" pledge of 2006? Out the window, just like any principle that becomes too inconvenient.
September 16, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
I don't know WHY you think Palin is pulling liberal women to vote republican. I don't know very many democratic women who want a PRO-LIFE, RELIGIOUS lunatic in the white house.
We already have an amendment up for a vote here in Colorado that not only will make abortions illegal again (sending women back to alleys with coat hangers instead of going to a medical facility) but it may also make many forms of birth control illegal.
I don't want her in my White House. She's going to pose all sorts of laws on MY BODY that only a doctor should be discussing with me. I don't want a pro-life, abstinence-only education person in my White House, bringing her "God" with her.
So I don't know how anyone can say she's "scaring" the democratic party because she is taking Hilary's votes with her. She will never have mine. She scares me more than Bush does. I see a Totalitarian Regime following right behind her.
September 16, 2008
9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
davies,
You make a great point!!!!
September 16, 2008
9:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
bolderdem08 writes:
i think mccain is going to have a stroke when he realizes that if he wins this election, Sarah Palin ACTUALLY has to be his VP....ouch.
September 16, 2008
9:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
libertygrace writes:
This is an opinion piece, for media consumers out there who have never been taught the difference between the op-ed pages and reported stories. Great job RMNews, staying on top of the issues for our swing state and providing us with local political commentators from multiple sides. Keep shining the light, toward the left and the right and everyone else too!
September 16, 2008
9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
cassidy22 writes:
He says "encourages people to shoot wolves out of airplanes" like it's a good thing.
It's only one of the many little things about her that disgust me. I've been writing letters, and fighting along side the Humane Society for years to stop inhumane practices against animals like that one. I'm all for hunting from talented hunters who know how to quickly kill their prey AND take it home and eat it. Hunting wolves and watching them bleed to death just for a picture of it? Disgusting.
And so is she. How can her supporters keep ignoring her lies? And how can they keep touting one-sided statistics? Keep it up folks, use only the data you want, while ignoring the other side of the story. Everyone here is showing their true colors.. and the true color is ignorance
*********
LOL, so you are for the wolves overrunning populated areas? Maybe we can post a sign up asking them to kindly leave the area. I bet you are out there fighting for the unborn like you are fighting for wolves or fighting for those babies that survive an abortion? Yea those same babies that a bill Saint O fought against. Save the double talk on that one because he voted against it whether there was another bill or he thought it unconstitutional or not is bs. Vote for the bill and let judges decide if it is or isn't. I guess Saint O thought he was as good as any judge as well.
September 16, 2008
9:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Without a doubt Palin has tapped into a sizeable demographic that longs to regard America as something this country hasn't been in a long time. Namely, a country of small towns with Main Streets, populated with smiling TV families. Or, frontier towns populated with rugged individualists.
The reality is, this country is increasingly made up of endless subdivisions, big box chain stores, parking lots, massive freeways, and over-scheduled families who really don't see all that much of each other. Few people make their own goods and food anymore, that's all taken care of by corporate conglomerates.
But, since that reality jars with how we'd prefer to view ourselves and our lives, many choose to cling (yes, I said it!) to a more idealistic vision.
And THAT is what Palin has tapped into.
A recent article in Time describes the phenomenon much more aptly than I just did. I highly recommend it, it's a very good read.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/art...
September 16, 2008
9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
It seems to me like voting for a President should be about picking the person you personally believe will be a better leader, who you believe represents your personal morals and beliefs. To watch all of the Liberal "attacks" on here is absolutely hilarious! It's almost like they think they are defending Osama personally! Like he's going to send them a thank you card or a personal pat on the back. If you are in love with Osama, then by all means, vote for him! But do not mislead your misguided minds into thinking that you are going to come on here and convince others that you are right and they (we) are wrong just because you say so. Very shallow. As far as the high chair comment kabookey? Wow. Did you beat your wife just prior to posting, or just after? Name calling? You lost your last 2 cents worth of intellectual credibility, pal. Again, sounds like a kindergarden kid lashing out. Any mental midget can do that.
September 16, 2008
9:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
great piece.
palin was nothing more than a dog whistle for the american taliban and a distraction to take attetion away from republican failures.
the question every voter should be asking themselves as they walk to the polls this fall is do they trust that the republicans' plans of more of the same will fix the mess they created.
considering that they've done as much damage to the country as the folks who hit us on 9/11...that's a tough sell.
maybe that's why we're talking about palin instead of policy.
September 16, 2008
9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
nachosleaze writes:
kabookey:
when you are at home crying on nov 4th, will you will use all your party's lies to dry your tears? although now you take comfort in what rove spoon feeds you, when you want to wake up and do some critical thinking, hop off the high chair and come sit at the big person table, but wipe the rove-dribble off your chin first.
***********
Cheesey, it sounds like you are the one doing the crying here buddy. Did the wife and kids stand up to you today? Keep hate alive buddy and keep posting.
September 16, 2008
9:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
mgsorens writes:
Sarah Palin is a phenom because she is everything Obama is not. Unlike Senator Obama, Governor Palin is distinguished by her accomplishments.
Governor Palin was a governor for longer than Obama was a senator when he began running for office. Obama cites living in Indonesia before high school as his most important foreign relations experience. I'm willing to grant that is more than Palin can cite. However, among the four major candidate, Palin has far more energy experience, far more regulatory experience, and far more executive experience. All that is impressive of course, but more impressive is what she accomplished in those roles.
Rather than comparing the candidate's time in office, shouldn't we compare their accomplishments? What better way is there to judge how they might perform in office than examining their past accomplishments?
September 16, 2008
9:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
kabookey: "LOL, so you are for the wolves overrunning populated areas?"
The footage I saw was of wolves running for their lives from a low-flying airplane through a barren landscape of snow and forest.
They are shooting down those wolves to artificially inflate the number of caribou and moose, period. And if they identify the killed wolf is a female, they look to see if she left any cubs anywhere. If they find them, they go into the dens and shoot them, too.
September 16, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
valwayne writes:
Why is the excitement & enthusiasm about the selection of a hard working, attractive, smart, talented, working mom, popular Governor, from a working class background, with a real chance to break the glass ceiling at the highest level a mystery??? I understand the contempt and incredulity of the NYT, Washington Post, LAT, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, but as a native of the state of Colorado I'm shocked that a writer for the Rocky Mountain News would write this article? Where the heck are you from? As a Hillary supporter I could barely contain my anger at the humiliation she had to endure from "The ONE". I don't agree with McCain or Gov Palin about everything, but the contempt for working people and sexism coming from Obama and his supporters have disqualifed him from every being President. As for the economy: Its the Harvard Ivy league educated Good Ol Boy sneer merchants that have ripped off middle class America and created this melt down. People like Obama and Biden who think the average American needs to be ruled by their Ivy League betters because we are just a bunch of dumb, bitter, gun toting, bible thumping, bigots! Well no more!......McCain/Palin 2008, Hillary 2012!
September 16, 2008
9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
RufusTFirefly writes:
Sweet young naive Nacho......Nice hit, thanks for letting me know that you lib's beleive President Bush is an idiot, and anyone who supports him is an idiot too. I guess all Democrats want is someone just to be "PRESENT" in the white house.
September 16, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
soccermom writes:
So let's get this straight.
2001 umemployment was 4.2% and now it's 6.1%
We went from a 281 billion dollar surplus to a 357 billion dollar deficit.
National debt went from 5.7 trillion to 9.7 trillion
Gas went from 1.50 to 4.00+ per gallon
There is a Wall Street meltdown that Alan Greenspan calls a once in a lifetime event.
This has happened under Republican leadership.
And McCain says the fundamentals of our economy are strong.
He's out of touch and we need to stop this train wreck.
***********************
Hey Mom, you pretty much describe what has happened to the country since the dems took over. Go back and change that 2001 to 2006 and you pretty much hit the nail on the head. What has congress done since the dems took over? Well they tried to cut off funding for the war, they have investigated firing of political appointees and that is about it. Good job dems, another 2 years and they can help us into a depression.
September 16, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
mytwosense - thank you for the link - it was a good read! And for posting something worthwhile! I think it's more the IDEA of Palin, as the article points out, that scares these proud, self-professed liberals. And the fact that they are scared that they really may lose this election, and don't know what to say, how to fight back, or even how to simply react, other than lashing out. A cornered, scared creature can be very bitter and angry. Name calling, mud-slinging, and personal attacks on people that DARE to have a different opinion than them are the very foundation of online anger and lashing out.
September 16, 2008
9:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
KarlHungus writes:
Those were the days. I remember that bad feeling in my gut. It was four years ago and I knew the Republican era had run its course. I was convinced that the next President would be Hillary and for the rest of my life would endure endless Democrats crowing about shattering the glass ceiling. Then that bad feeling turned to unbearable nausea as someone even worse won their nomination. That slow death march to a 4 point defeat followed by years of reeducation at the feet of The Barack Of O'bama had me in a funk. Then I fell in love. Her name was Sarah Palin. Some had said that Hillary's historic campaign had prepared the nation for a woman. Those people are obviously gay. To me, it's clear that on the Kelvin scale, HRC is liquid nitrogen. Sarah is the center of the sun. I smile everytime I remember that the dreaded B of O' regime ain't so certain anymore. The best part of all, however, is that the Democrats are the ones with the stomach problems now.
September 16, 2008
9:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
I've taken the liberty of putting a little more refined perspective on some of your data points soccermom:
Unemployment:
January 2001 = 4.2%
In January of 2007 when Democrats gained control of the Congress, unemployment was 4.6% (that's a .4 % increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, unemployment is 6.1%, that's a 1.5% rise in the two years since democrats took control of congress.
Average price of a gallon of gas:
January 2001 = $1.52
In January of 2006, the average price of a gallon of gas was $2.33 (that's a $.79 increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, the average price of a gallon of gas was $3.74 (that's a $1.41 increase in 2 years under Democrat control) and it is not $4.00+.
Banking industry:
1999 President Bill Clinton signed into law the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 which was the start of the downfall of the banking industry that we are seeing today.
It is easy to point a finger at one "side" or the other regarding the government, it just depends on one's perspective.
September 16, 2008
9:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
nachosleaze - thanks! Easiest point I have ever proven!
September 16, 2008
9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
mytwosense writes:
kabookey: "LOL, so you are for the wolves overrunning populated areas?"
The footage I saw was of wolves running for their lives from a low-flying airplane through a barren landscape of snow and forest.
They are shooting down those wolves to artificially inflate the number of caribou and moose, period. And if they identify the killed wolf is a female, they look to see if she left any cubs anywhere. If they find them, they go into the dens and shoot them, too
**************
I guess you would feel better with footage of someone fighting them off with their bare hands on the front porch. I guess you have no problem with Saint O voting against that born alive bill but you have real problems with hunting wolves. That is the priority of the left worry about the premature spotted owl and flush the aborted babies down the toilet. Keep up the good work.
September 16, 2008
9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
I'm not gonna tell you all who I support so half of you wont immediately disagree with me. Doesnt anyone else see a major problem with how much Dems hate Reps and how much Reps hate Dems? The hate towards the other party is so strong in this country it almost seems anti-american. How can you possibly agree with EVERYTHING that 1 side says and NOTHING that the other side says? This is mind boggling to me. Does anyone even listen to the candidates or do they just look for the R or the D and base their decision on that? Maybe Im naive...but I see a MAJOR flaw in the American political system and I think we need to get rid of the political parties so we can stop wasting millions of dollars bad mouthing eachother and put that money to better use.
September 16, 2008
9:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
fntsymtn @ 9:54,
I don't know why more people can't understand that.
September 16, 2008
9:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
And let me ask you 1 thing republicans? Are we better off in any way as a nation than we were before George Bush took over? No BS. Are we and in what area? Dems I already know you answers so dont bother...
September 16, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
"I see a MAJOR flaw in the American political system and I think we need to get rid of the political parties so we can stop wasting millions of dollars bad mouthing eachother and put that money to better use."
I totally agree!!!
September 16, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
bowlegs339 writes:
I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....
* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."
* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.
* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.
* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.
* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
* If your total resume is: beauty queen, local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.
* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible.
* If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, much clearer now.
September 16, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
Correction to my last post:
In January of 2007 when Democrats gained control of the Congress, unemployment was 4.6% (that's a .4 % increase in 5 years under Republican control).
Should read:
In January of 2006 when Democrats gained control of the Congress, unemployment was 4.6% (that's a .4 % increase in 5 years under Republican control).
September 16, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"I've taken the liberty of putting a little more refined perspective on some of your data points soccermom:
Unemployment:
January 2001 = 4.2%
In January of 2007 when Democrats gained control of the Congress, unemployment was 4.6% (that's a .4 % increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, unemployment is 6.1%, that's a 1.5% rise in the two years since democrats took control of congress.
Average price of a gallon of gas:
January 2001 = $1.52
In January of 2006, the average price of a gallon of gas was $2.33 (that's a $.79 increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, the average price of a gallon of gas was $3.74 (that's a $1.41 increase in 2 years under Democrat control) and it is not $4.00+.
Banking industry:
1999 President Bill Clinton signed into law the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 which was the start of the downfall of the banking industry that we are seeing today.
It is easy to point a finger at one "side" or the other regarding the government, it just depends on one's perspective."
YES YOU IDIOT. THE DEMOCRATS RUINED THE WHOLE COUNTRY IN 18 MONTHS. THE PREVIOUS 7 YEARS WHEN REPUBLICANS OWNED CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE SHOULD BE UTTERLY IGNORED. ITS IRRELEVANT!
September 16, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
dennish writes:
Wow. I luv to see the hate these people have for Palin. Means they are runnin' scared! Littwin has it and so do some of the comments above. The more they rip her, the more McCain-Palin gains. 20 electoral vote lead for McCain-Palin today in Realclearpolitics.com today!
September 16, 2008
10:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Spidey, thanks for reading it. I thought it was a very compelling read. I'm actually "one of those libs" though. Hope you won't hold it against me!:)
Anyway, after I read the article, it got me thinking about how many of us see our country changing in ways that are a bit unsettling. This creates different fears and worries, and this whole election is certainly tapping into that, as well. Conservatives see changes they don't like, liberals see changes they don't like. It's a discussion worth having if everyone could put their insults away, but of course, that is always hard to do when emotions are heated and it seems so much at stake.
September 16, 2008
10:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
kabookey writes:
JohnDimitri writes:
And let me ask you 1 thing republicans? Are we better off in any way as a nation than we were before George Bush took over? No BS. Are we and in what area? Dems I already know you answers so dont bother..
**************
We were till the dems took over in 2006 but hey don't let the facts get in your way.
September 16, 2008
10:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"
JohnDimitri writes:
"I've taken the liberty of putting a little more refined perspective on some of your data points soccermom:
Unemployment:
January 2001 = 4.2%
In January of 2007 when Democrats gained control of the Congress, unemployment was 4.6% (that's a .4 % increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, unemployment is 6.1%, that's a 1.5% rise in the two years since democrats took control of congress.
Average price of a gallon of gas:
January 2001 = $1.52
In January of 2006, the average price of a gallon of gas was $2.33 (that's a $.79 increase in 5 years under Republican control).
In August of 2008, the average price of a gallon of gas was $3.74 (that's a $1.41 increase in 2 years under Democrat control) and it is not $4.00+.
Banking industry:
1999 President Bill Clinton signed into law the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 which was the start of the downfall of the banking industry that we are seeing today.
It is easy to point a finger at one "side" or the other regarding the government, it just depends on one's perspective.""
THIS IS THE CRAP I TALK ABOUT. JUST BLAME IT ON THE OTHER PARTY. NO!!!! EVERYONE NEEDS TO TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY. IF THE REPUBLICANS WERE DOING THEIR JOB IN 2000-2007 THEN THE DEMS WOULDNT HAVE NEEDED TO TAKE OVER. WASHINGTON IS TO BLAME. NOT REPUBLICANS! NOT DEMOCRATS! ITS PISS POOR LEADERSHIP ACROSS THE BOARD THAT CAUSED THIS SITUATION WE ARE IN! TAKE OFF YOU BLIND FOLDS AND STOP POINTING THE GINGER AND 1 PARTY... THEY BOTH ARE TO BLAME!
September 16, 2008
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
JohnDimitri @ 9:58 am. "Maybe Im naive...but I see a MAJOR flaw in the American political system "
You are not alone.
September 16, 2008
10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"#
JohnDimitri writes:
And let me ask you 1 thing republicans? Are we better off in any way as a nation than we were before George Bush took over? No BS. Are we and in what area? Dems I already know you answers so dont bother..
**************
We were till the dems took over in 2006 but hey don't let the facts get in your way.
HOW??? YOU ARE TRULY LOST. GOOD LORD!
September 16, 2008
10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Don_Lopez writes:
“I mean, it's not her fault if she's unqualified for the job.”
Here’s what Mr. Littwin continues to try and sell: Having an unqualified vice-president is worse than having an unqualified president.
Fortunately, not many are buying.
Five times in the last 48 years American voters have felt a governor was qualified to sit in the oval office so it’s difficult to understand how Mr. Littwin would now believe a governor is unqualified to be vice-president.
Or maybe it’s not all governors just this one.
And the fact that Mr. Littwin doesn’t understand Governor Palin’s appeal is testament to how out of touch he is. I’ll bet none of his friends understands either.
September 16, 2008
10:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
kabooky writes: "That is the priority of the left worry about the premature spotted owl and flush the aborted babies down the toilet."
You know, I'd probably join the pro-lifers in their cause if they weren't some of the most singularly unpleasant people in this country today. Other than your noble cause, there is very little else I can identify with, sorry. At least us animal rights people have enough compassion to extend to animals as well as humans.
September 16, 2008
10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
JohnDimitri,
fntsymtn wrote at the end:
"It is easy to point a finger at one "side" or the other regarding the government, it just depends on one's perspective."
I think he was saying the same thing you are, but in a different way.
September 16, 2008
10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
take a civics class, bookey/fistingmn...the republicans have obstructed legislation and initiatives not only with the support of the majority of americans but which could have helped us to possibly avoid the financial meltdown we're seeing.
if you really believe the dems are to blame for the results of 5 years of republican rule before they took office, by all means point out which policy decisions and legislation you believe caused them to absorb the track record.
that's not rhetorical. back your rushian talking points up with fact.
you guys on the far right can try to shift the blame for republican policies to the dems all day long, but it's not gonna fly here.
you might as well stop trying.
i'm interested to hear if anyone can explain to me why voting for mccain and continuing the policies that have created this mess will fix said mess.
September 16, 2008
10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
For all those Palin defenders, take a look at her record as mayor and governor from someone other than one of her supporters: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/...
One choice quote (there are many to choose from):
'Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
Rick Steiner, a University of Alaska professor, sought the e-mail messages of state scientists who had examined the effect of global warming on polar bears. (Ms. Palin said the scientists had found no ill effects, and she has sued the federal government to block the listing of the bears as endangered.) An administration official told Mr. Steiner that his request would cost $468,784 to process.
When Mr. Steiner finally obtained the e-mail messages — through a federal records request — he discovered that state scientists had in fact agreed that the bears were in danger, records show.
“Their secrecy is off the charts,” Mr. Steiner said.'
Sound like an administration you've heard of? Bush Jr was a really popular governor too of a much, much larger state.
Or:
'Dan Fa_an, a prominent conservative radio host and longtime friend of Ms. Palin, urged his listeners to vote for her in 2006. But when he took her to task for raising taxes on oil companies, he said, he found himself branded a “hater.”
It is part of a pattern, Mr. Fa_an said, in which Ms. Palin characterizes critics as “bad people who are anti-Alaska.” '
As far as I can recall Republicans used to be against raising oil company taxes and when one actually stood up he was treated worse by Palin than he would have been by a Democrat. We absolutely don't need another person in the White House that has this really harsh view of reality of us vs. them and that the world is simple black and white, good and evil. You can have disagreements and still not be evil or an enemy.
Also, remember: She's the VP not the president! You're still voting for McCain, not Palin!
Note to RMN: I can't even submit the guy's name due to your stupid auto censoring script. It's spelled F.a.g.a.n.
September 16, 2008
10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"
Heidi writes:
JohnDimitri,
fntsymtn wrote at the end:
"It is easy to point a finger at one "side" or the other regarding the government, it just depends on one's perspective."
I think he was saying the same thing you are, but in a different way."
YOU ARE CORRECT!! SORRY!
September 16, 2008
10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
rjnova writes:
Why is it Littwin you say Sarah Palin is unqualified to be VP yet she has more executive experience and qualifications than Obama who is running for the presidency? You liberal media guys are in a panic because people see her as one of their own and like her.
In using Sarah Palin's small town mayoral years as lack of experience the media ignores she is a sitting governor of Alaska. Her additional and current 2 yrs as governor gives her more experience than Obama's 2 yrs. in the US Senate (and he is running for President of the United States, no less). And that time Obama has mostly spent campaigning for the Presidency, for which he is the least qualified candidate ever in the history of the United States. And if you are going to question earmarks why not be honest and report that Obama has taken time for some $900 Millions in ongoing requests in his busy 2 yrs. of campaigning.
The wheels are coming off the Obama campaign wagon Littwin and you have less than 50 days to repair Obama before the election. Fact is it is painfully apparent the man is not ready to be President of the US and after you have ignored this fact for 2 yrs, now that voters are giving the election some thought they do not want this imposter Obama.
September 16, 2008
10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
Actually, I wasn't intending to "blame" anything on anyone, JohnDimitri. I was merely stating that by putting perspective on the data one can "blame" anyone for anything. I've repeatedly stated that the "blame" lies within all government and if we continue to use the finger-pointing lens, we make no progress.
Sometimes, it is necessary to point out when people are skewing data to support their cause.
It is not necessary to yell in order to be read. Walls of capitalized text are a quick way to be discounted as a troll or irrational poster.
September 16, 2008
10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
Ahh, I see that the RMN village idoit has joined the fray. Welcome to the discussion, simpleton.
September 16, 2008
10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
dijeadios writes:
This is so funny because this morning I was reading how Sarah Palin does not even know the job of the VP which she is running for and how she said that her people would get back on that question!Hello you learn that in school and this is not some state that she is running for to become governor of or whatver but the VP of the US!If that makes her qualified,having a pregnant 17 year old daughter and a kid with down syndrome which she uses to get more supporters I feel sorry for the people.She believed in abstinence until her daughter got pregnant,then took that issue off which leaves many wondering why,she knows nothing related to foreign affairs eventhough Cindy McCain claims she does.McCain is the same as Bush in many ways meaning that if McCain wins we will have more war,more debt,less money invested in education,low taxes which will not help the bad economy and so forth.With Obama at least you have a different agenda while he increases taxes for the rich to balance out the gap between rich and rich which is widening.I really thought that Hillary was way more qualified than Palin in many areas from the way she addresses the people,how she behaves,having experience as well as socializing with people.The economy if blamed on not the Reps or Dems but on the whole Washington where failure in banks and such have resulted to chaos in economy.We need a strong President to do something and surely it is not McCain since he thinks that our economy is strong!He is delusional about many things the economy and well being of the people being one of them.
September 16, 2008
10:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
fntsymtn writes:
I'll take a page from your 3rd grade book, simpleton, and repost what I've posted before:
I see that you continue to run from your responsibilities, simpleton, regarding your statements about me. Since you refuse to retract your blatantly false accusations about me, you deserve no more education from me.
September 16, 2008
10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"Actually, I wasn't intending to "blame" anything on anyone, JohnDimitri. I was merely stating that by putting perspective on the data one can "blame" anyone for anything. I've repeatedly stated that the "blame" lies within all government and if we continue to use the finger-pointing lens, we make no progress.
Sometimes, it is necessary to point out when people are skewing data to support their cause.
It is not necessary to yell in order to be read. Walls of capitalized text are a quick way to be discounted as a troll or irrational poster."
DONT WORRY! I WONT BE BACK AFTER TODAY SO YOU WONT HAVE TO IGNORE ME. AND I DONT CONSIDER CAPS TO BE YELLING. SORRY TO HURT ANYONES EARS WHO DOES. I USED THE CAPS TO SHOW WHERE THE QUOTE ENDED AND MY OPINION BEGAN. AND I DID APOLOGIZE TO YOU ABOVE...
September 16, 2008
10:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spidey1 writes:
JohnDimitri makes an interesting point in that he thinks we need to "get rid of the political parties" etc. because of all the back biting and in-fighting. However, in his next comment, he sadly undermines his own good point, and seems to go right back to the "bring it on" standpoint that he started out against. Heck no, we are not really "better off." I know MANY registered republicans who say this. Now, I believe we must ask ourselves: Is that due SOLELY to Bush, or, is that due to some of the political policies introduced by BOTH parties over the last 16 years? That being said, I am a GOP'er, if you will, and I vote for the best PERSON, as I said in a prior message, that I think best represents my morals, values and standards, as well as who I think will do the best job, male or female. That means I'm not voting for O. (btw, that's an "oh" not a "zero") In MY humble opinion, if O gets into office, we can sit back and watch this whole thing, the economy, our way of life and our personal assets dissipate and go down the drain. It takes more than "we want change" and then waiting to see what your opponent says, and 'lashing out' at them. And quite frankly, there's been too much of that by BOTH parties.
September 16, 2008
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Redstate_Artist writes:
"JohnDimitri writes:
And let me ask you 1 thing republicans? Are we better off in any way as a nation than we were before George Bush took over? No BS. Are we and in what area? Dems I already know you answers so dont bother..."
I dont know about you, John, but Im much better off than I was during Bubba Clinton's regime.
1999-I was working a $5.00/hr job and renting a shack for $225/mo. I was living paycheck to paycheck with no savings.
2008-I own my own business, which is doing very well. I own my own home. I have an excellent retirement plan and a nice nest-egg.
Now, if NObama and his stormtroopers get into office, I will be taxed into oblivion. You see, they absolutely hate people who are smart, work hard, sacrifice to get ahead, and actually love this country...unlike the lib moonbats who think the UN should run things and worship the idea of a nanny state.
So, yes. I am much, much better of than I would have been under a fanatical leftist state.
September 16, 2008
10:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
tsilionis writes:
There are a couple things I think are important to bring out as they are not talked about.
1) Pennsylvania is a MUST STATE for Obama and not so important for McCain. Based on Obama making that statement "Clinging to Guns and Religion" a large door is present in PA for an upset. The fact that polls have PA tied right now is a concern for Obama beyond anything else. It does not matter if McCain is ahead or behind on the national polls as long as he can win PA. Colorado, Minnesota, Virginia, New Mexico, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin become irrelevant. McCain wins with 274 Electoral votes even if he loses all those States as long as he wins PA, FL and OH.
2) The youth movement for Obama has taken a big setback by Palin. If you look at the numbers the bigger youth movements have been in California, Massachusetts New York, Florida and the rest of the Northeast. Outside of FLORIDA none of those States matter regardless of margin. Since Palin though you have seen a large Youth movement on her part and how much of that is going to effect Obama's numbers?
More important the youth movement was large prior to summer break. Have we seen the youth get re-energized now that they are back to school?
3) When is McCain going to combat the 1982 ad? Rather then coming out with ridicules Sex Ed ads why does he not combat that 1982 ad with explaining that War Injuries prevent him from using a PC? Show people how much of a hypocrite Obama and his campaign really is.
Just ideas..
Tom Tsilionis
McCain Supporter
September 16, 2008
10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
JohnDimitri writes:
"#
September 16, 2008
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Redstate_Artist writes:
"JohnDimitri writes:
And let me ask you 1 thing republicans? Are we better off in any way as a nation than we were before George Bush took over? No BS. Are we and in what area? Dems I already know you answers so dont bother..."
I dont know about you, John, but Im much better off than I was during Bubba Clinton's regime.
1999-I was working a $5.00/hr job and renting a shack for $225/mo. I was living paycheck to paycheck with no savings.
2008-I own my own business, which is doing very well. I own my own home. I have an excellent retirement plan and a nice nest-egg.
Now, if NObama and his stormtroopers get into office, I will be taxed into oblivion. You see, they absolutely hate people who are smart, work hard, sacrifice to get ahead, and actually love