RSS Feed MenuPete Wehner was a former key aide to Karl Rove. Before that, he served as Bill Bennett’s chief researcher and right hand man. Now he is at the Ethics & Public Policy Center, where he is known for his patient willingness to rebut Dem assertions point by point in private memos circulated through conservative Washington. In other words: a conservative stalwart. Here is what he has to say about Sarah Palin in a New York Times round up today:
[E]ven those of us who were disposed to like her cannot deny that her public appearances have generally ranged from mediocre to awful. She’s had more than a handful of chances to show her stuff; what we’ve seen has not been reassuring, and at times alarming.
If Sarah Palin becomes the face and future of the G.O.P., it would take a huge step toward securing its position as a minority party for many years to come.
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Anniemargret, since you belive Palin attracts bigots and racists, what says you about Democrats attracting the like of Code Pink or full fledged socialists? Or that Obama sat in a Church to listen to his pastor’s anti-semitic and race-mongoring rants for nearly 20 yrs? Or that people who supported Obama like the HuffPo did go after Palin’s kids? Does that accurately characterize his constituency?
Yes, small town vs big town is somewhat silly if you’re going to argue one is better than the other, but who said that the former “clings to their guns and religion?” I suspect small town people are tired of being told they are backwards and racist just as big city folks are tired of being called elitist and condescending. But wise up–Palin didn’t invent these politics. And she apologized that she did not mean to say small towners were more patriotic than big city folks. But I guess since you can’t stand her, her apology means nothing does it? But when it comes to all of Obama’s much more concrete associations (Ayers, Dohrn, Wright, ACORN, etc), well you’ll just look the other way, won’t you?
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 2:13 pm
For you pro-choicers decrying the life extermists of wanting zero abortions, are you also going to condemn those who are for abortion in ANY and all cases, to include late term partial birth abortions, and killing a baby after its born if the abortion did not succeed? Wasn’t it Ginsburg who just said she assumed Roe vs Wade was to eliminate “the undesirables” in society? If that doesn’t bring up your eugenics antennae what does?
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Just as an aside, has anyone seen Liz Cheney say she might run for political office? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/13/liz-cheney-open-political-run/
I hope so; she is very articulate in interviews and pens columns for papers. She may be able to heal the culture wars a bit given her family background.
ottovbvs // Jul 13, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Chekote // Jul 13, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Otto
“That is why I said that this issue is over. Time to move on.”
………And that’s why it’s a poison pill……the pro lifers won’t as some of the comments here so clearly show
ottovbvs // Jul 13, 2009 at 3:05 pm
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 1:14 pm
“What we’re doing now with trying to indict former adminsitration officials for “mistreating” AQ of all people, is disgusting. Or the idea we should extend these idiots constitutional rights. It’s like we’re watching the beginnings of a banana republic.”
Torture and disappearance are not “mistreating”……..Actually we’re already behaving like a banana Republics because one of their standard characteristics is that people are tortured and go “missing.” Depending on whose numbers you believe there are up to a hundred missing people in the CIA’s secret detention programs……even the CIA admits to twelve……at the weekend came the info that we have been complicit in at the very least covering up mass murders of hundreds maybe thousand of prisoners in Afghanistan (and I’m going to take money it’s largely true)…..So don’t worry dragonlady the banana republic is already here and you’re applauding its achievements.
ktward // Jul 13, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Sheesh. Spend a summer getting one’s last offspring off to college and everything changes.
Including NM! Aside from a wholly annoying glitch in user migration & browser compatibility (?)– we’ll see if my comment finally posts–the revamped site is certainly a few aesthetic steps up from the previous platform. A few new faces, I see, but all in all it’s pretty much the same crowd. How cozy.
barker13 … I see you’re still leaning heavily on your drama-queen rhetorical style in attempts to bolster your arguments. How’s that headache? I’d suggest some Motrin, but I don’t think that’ll cure what ails ya. (*WINK*)
My two cents …
I’m not in the least worried about Palin, nor any alarmist punditry or speculation over her political ‘rise’. Make no mistake, I don’t fault her–nor anyone–for their ambition; every successful person enjoys a healthy dose of it.
No, the weighty albatross around Palin’s neck, insofar as her political future is concerned, is her pathological opportunism. Blindingly, singularly driven, patently devoid of the insights, ethics and reasoning faculties that typically inform and temper otherwise healthy ambition.
On the heels of Palin’s completely out-of-left-field announcement and imminent departure from her AK-Gov’s office, very few *credible* conservative voices remain to argue strongly, if at all, that she still has a viable Presidential/National-level pol bid in her future.
If she ever did. Despite the questionable adoration she basks in from the very reddest part of the Republican Base and the neocon puppet-masters, she was always a long shot for National office.
Newt had already, carefully, parsed his ’support’ for her:
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2009/02/gingrich_on_201.php
“If Sarah Palin seeks out a group of sophisticated policy advisers and spends time developing a series of fairly sophisticated positions,” Gingrich said during his 33rd visit to the Christian Science Monitor breakfast series, “she is very formidable.”
In effect, he’s admitting Sarah’s a faaabulous puppet if only she can find better string-pullers and will– for pete’s sake already!–read up. Real ringing endorsement, that.
Among other notable big-C pundits who have been critical of her, George Will has finally–and, I suspect, to his enjoyme…uh, relief– written off both Palin and her whining:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Politics/Story?id=8002421&page=4
“…the one that rings most hollow is she doesn’t want to put Alaska through the terror of being a lame duck governor. If she is just weary of it, one can understand that. Still, she made a contract with them to serve out her term. And she said, in her own words, she now is a quitter.
“The simple fact of the matter is if Sarah Palin thinks that she’s had it tougher than anybody else, that she’s been more harshly criticized, I have two words for her — Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton was savaged for eight years. There were even jokes about her daughter, Chelsea, who was much younger then than Bristol Palin is now.
“It’s not fair. It’s not a good part of the political process. But that is the stage that you take a lot of criticism and quite frankly, women take a lot of criticism.
“So, if she isn’t ready for that, then she doesn’t need to be playing on the national stage. And if she thinks it’s tough being governor of Alaska, it would be a whole lot tougher being president of the United States.”
Even Douthat reluctantly admits (amidst all his ‘Poor Sarah’ gag-me fawning) that she’s almost certainly burned her political bridges to anywhere:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/opinion/06ross.html?_r=2
“But last Friday’s bizarre, rambling resignation speech should take her off the political map for the duration of the Obama era…A Sarah Palin who resigned in the delusional belief that it would give her a better shot at the presidency in 2012 warrants no such kindness.”
All that said, the Republican Party–presumably with the aim of being an entity viable enough to promote the election of Republicans–*should* be worried about Palin’s repercussions for as long as the media chooses to spotlight her. There’s little ambivalence among voters of all stripes where Palin is concerned, and her appeal, like Limbaugh’s, is largely limited to a long-shrinking Base:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118528/gop-losses-span-nearly-demographic-groups.aspx
There is zero evidence that this Base will ever expand, but plenty evidence to strongly suggest it will continue to contract. Go figure.
Interestingly, as the recent Vanity Fair article points out, Palin’s pre-McCain ‘experience’ was not nearly as substantive nor applicable on a National level as we were led to believe during the height of ’08’s campaign propaganda. And of course there’s virtually nothing substantive post-McCain:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/08/sarah-palin200908
Bottom line: Palin is a shell. Full of platitudes and spin and ‘knowing’ winks, yes, but in the end, only a bright-smiled, shapely-gammed shell. I only ever needed to hear this silly nonsense spouted from Lowry for evidence of that:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDYzMGFiNjQ0MWRjNmI0ZTlkYjgwZTExMjA3MWNiZTk=
“I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, “Hey, I think she just winked at me.” And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.”
Back to my original contention: Palin’s motivations are now, and always have been, purely opportunistic.
She summed *herself* up–quite nicely!–with Greta:
http://outfoxingkarlrove.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/foxs-greta-sarah-palin-god-will-show-the-way-to-the-white-house-video/
“… putting my life in my creator’s hands – this is what I always do. I’m like, OK, God, if there is an open door for me somewhere, this is what I always pray, I’m like, don’t let me miss the open door. Show me where the open door is. Even if it’s cracked up a little bit, maybe I’ll plow right on through that and maybe prematurely plow through it, but don’t let me miss an open door.”
Sure, she dressed up all her little speeches with rhetorical adornments of ‘God’ and ‘Country’ and ‘Alassska’, but last Friday’s move tore all that fancy fluff away.
Palin’s in this, now, for the media moolah. (My thoughts as to why Palin said ‘yes’ to McCain to begin with are, by now, superfluous, so I’ll skip that.)
First and foremost, there’s her super-sweet Murdoch book-deal deadline looming:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908668,00.html
“One project that will receive a boost from Sarah Palin’s plan to step down as the governor of Alaska is her much-touted autobiography, for which it will provide a hotly anticipated chapter. In May, HarperCollins announced that it had signed Palin to write a tell-all memoir. Unusual for a high-powered celebrity autobiography, there was no auction or bidding on the book; Palin negotiated only with HarperCollins, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, the same media company as owns the Fox News channel that had strongly backed her run for Vice President last year.
“Though she will have a collaborator, Palin had said she would write the book herself — an opportunity to put to use her 1987 journalism degree from the University of Idaho.”
Let’s face it, ‘collaborative’ writing is way too time-consuming to also be burdened with running a State. I understand. Prioritize, pick your battles, only 24 hours in a day. She’s got to be careful on that book-writing, after all; speech-spin is *way* easier to sweep under the I-never-meant-it-that-way rug than book-spin.
Andrea Mitchell, after her visit to AK with Palin’s leave-me-alone-you-mean-media-but-join-me-on-my fishin’-trip invite, has a remarkably realistic take on Palin’s theater:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31765535#31767516
“… a fortune on the lecture circuit … book deals … talk show … why go through this agony … she can have a very good life.”
Of course! Despite any, ahem, criticism for her contract-breaking bail, why on earth should Sarah finish out an inarguably difficult tenure in the AK-Gov’s office when she can be making oodles of denero as the darling in the red limelight of willing audiences?
Sheer, unadulterated opportunism. It gets her press coverage, can’t argue that, but it won’t get her into national public office. Thing is, I don’t think she cares–only her supporters do.
ktward // Jul 13, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Holy cow. Spend a summer getting one’s last offspring off to college and everything changes.
Including NM! Aside from a wholly annoying glitch in user migration & browser compatibility (?)– we’ll see if my comment finally posts–the revamped site is certainly a few aesthetic steps up from the previous platform. A few new faces, I see, but all in all it’s pretty much the same crowd. How cozy.
barker13 … I see you’re still leaning heavily on your drama-queen rhetorical style in attempts to bolster your arguments. How’s that headache? I’d suggest some Motrin, but I don’t think that’ll cure what ails ya. (*WINK*)
My two cents …
I’m not in the least worried about Palin, nor any alarmist punditry or speculation over her political ‘rise’. Make no mistake, I don’t fault her–nor anyone–for their ambition; every successful person enjoys a healthy dose of it.
No, the weighty albatross around Palin’s neck, insofar as her political future is concerned, is her pathological opportunism. Blindingly, singularly driven, patently devoid of the insights, ethics and reasoning faculties that typically inform and temper otherwise healthy ambition.
On the heels of Palin’s completely out-of-left-field announcement and imminent departure from her AK-Gov’s office, very few *credible* conservative voices remain to argue strongly, if at all, that she still has a viable Presidential/National-level pol bid in her future.
If she ever did. Despite the questionable adoration she basks in from the very reddest part of the Republican Base and the neocon puppet-masters, she was always a long shot for National office.
Newt had already, carefully, parsed his ’support’ for her:
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2009/02/gingrich_on_201.php
“If Sarah Palin seeks out a group of sophisticated policy advisers and spends time developing a series of fairly sophisticated positions,” Gingrich said during his 33rd visit to the Christian Science Monitor breakfast series, “she is very formidable.”
In effect, he’s admitting Sarah’s a faaabulous puppet if only she can find better string-pullers and will– for pete’s sake already!–read up. Real ringing endorsement, that.
Among other notable big-C pundits who have been critical of her, George Will has finally–and, I suspect, to his enjoyme…uh, relief– written off both Palin and her whining:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Politics/Story?id=8002421&page=4
“…the one that rings most hollow is she doesn’t want to put Alaska through the terror of being a lame duck governor. If she is just weary of it, one can understand that. Still, she made a contract with them to serve out her term. And she said, in her own words, she now is a quitter.
“The simple fact of the matter is if Sarah Palin thinks that she’s had it tougher than anybody else, that she’s been more harshly criticized, I have two words for her — Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton was savaged for eight years. There were even jokes about her daughter, Chelsea, who was much younger then than Bristol Palin is now.
“It’s not fair. It’s not a good part of the political process. But that is the stage that you take a lot of criticism and quite frankly, women take a lot of criticism.
“So, if she isn’t ready for that, then she doesn’t need to be playing on the national stage. And if she thinks it’s tough being governor of Alaska, it would be a whole lot tougher being president of the United States.”
Even Douthat reluctantly admits (amidst all his ‘Poor Sarah’ gag-me fawning) that she’s almost certainly burned her political bridges to anywhere:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/06/opinion/06ross.html?_r=2
“But last Friday’s bizarre, rambling resignation speech should take her off the political map for the duration of the Obama era…A Sarah Palin who resigned in the delusional belief that it would give her a better shot at the presidency in 2012 warrants no such kindness.”
All that said, the Republican Party–presumably with the aim of being an entity viable enough to promote the election of Republicans–*should* be worried about Palin’s repercussions for as long as the media chooses to spotlight her. There’s little ambivalence among voters of all stripes where Palin is concerned, and her appeal, like Limbaugh’s, is largely limited to a long-shrinking Base:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118528/gop-losses-span-nearly-demographic-groups.aspx
There is zero evidence that this Base will ever expand, but plenty evidence to strongly suggest it will continue to contract. Go figure.
Interestingly, as the recent Vanity Fair article points out, Palin’s pre-McCain ‘experience’ was not nearly as substantive nor applicable on a National level as we were led to believe during the height of ’08’s campaign propaganda. And of course there’s virtually nothing substantive post-McCain:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/08/sarah-palin200908
Bottom line: Palin is a shell. Full of platitudes and spin and ‘knowing’ winks, yes, but in the end, only a bright-smiled, shapely-gammed shell. I only ever needed to hear this silly nonsense spouted from Lowry for evidence of that:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDYzMGFiNjQ0MWRjNmI0ZTlkYjgwZTExMjA3MWNiZTk=
“I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, “Hey, I think she just winked at me.” And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America.”
Back to my original contention: Palin’s motivations are now, and always have been, purely opportunistic.
She summed *herself* up–quite nicely!–with Greta:
http://outfoxingkarlrove.wordpress.com/2008/11/11/foxs-greta-sarah-palin-god-will-show-the-way-to-the-white-house-video/
“… putting my life in my creator’s hands – this is what I always do. I’m like, OK, God, if there is an open door for me somewhere, this is what I always pray, I’m like, don’t let me miss the open door. Show me where the open door is. Even if it’s cracked up a little bit, maybe I’ll plow right on through that and maybe prematurely plow through it, but don’t let me miss an open door.”
Sure, she dressed up all her little speeches with rhetorical adornments of ‘God’ and ‘Country’ and ‘Alassska’, but last Friday’s move tore all that fancy fluff away.
Palin’s in this, now, for the media moolah. (My thoughts as to why Palin said ‘yes’ to McCain to begin with are, by now, superfluous, so I’ll skip that.)
First and foremost, there’s her super-sweet Murdoch book-deal deadline looming:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908668,00.html
“One project that will receive a boost from Sarah Palin’s plan to step down as the governor of Alaska is her much-touted autobiography, for which it will provide a hotly anticipated chapter. In May, HarperCollins announced that it had signed Palin to write a tell-all memoir. Unusual for a high-powered celebrity autobiography, there was no auction or bidding on the book; Palin negotiated only with HarperCollins, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, the same media company as owns the Fox News channel that had strongly backed her run for Vice President last year.
“Though she will have a collaborator, Palin had said she would write the book herself — an opportunity to put to use her 1987 journalism degree from the University of Idaho.”
Let’s face it, ‘collaborative’ writing is way too time-consuming to also be burdened with running a State. I understand. Prioritize, pick your battles, only 24 hours in a day. She’s got to be careful on that book-writing, after all; speech-spin is *way* easier to sweep under the I-never-meant-it-that-way rug than book-spin.
Andrea Mitchell, after her visit to AK with Palin’s leave-me-alone-you-mean-media-but-join-me-on-my fishin’-trip invite, has a remarkably realistic take on Palin’s theater:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31765535#31767516
“… a fortune on the lecture circuit … book deals … talk show … why go through this agony … she can have a very good life.”
Of course! Despite any, ahem, criticism for her contract-breaking bail, why on earth should Sarah finish out an inarguably difficult tenure in the AK-Gov’s office when she can be making oodles of denero as the darling in the red limelight of willing audiences?
Sheer, unadulterated opportunism. It gets her press coverage, can’t argue that, but it won’t get her into national public office. Thing is, I don’t think she cares–only her supporters do.
Chekote // Jul 13, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Dragonlady,
About 90% of abortions happens within the first 12 weeks. I think about 60% within the first eight weeks. These happen because of unplanned pregnancies. No eugenics. No nervous system to detect pain. Are you saying that you are okay with abortion in the first trimester? I suspect not. You believe that a person is being killed. Others don’t. The current law accomodates both views. Why can’t the pro-lifers just leave it alone? As far as late term abortions. I would suggest that you read some of the Kansas stories that were published after Tiller’s death. These were horrific situations. Fetuses with no brain or catastrophic genetic problem which would result in death either during the pregnancy or shortly after giving birth. I am not going to tell families how to deal with such situations. I don’t want the government involved in such situations. If people are committing a sin against God, let Him deal with it. Society has not compelling interest that supercedes the right to privacy.
I also find it offensive when pro-lifers act like the “health” of the mother doesn’t matter. Or act like women – after five months of pregnancy – decide to terminate due to a headache. It is insulting to women and that is why we suffer a gender gaps. Finally, it took centuries for women to gain the right to control their reproductive life. We are NOT going to give those rights back without a fight.
Chekote // Jul 13, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Liz Cheney, I can get behind.
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 8:06 pm
ottovbvs, keep defending AQ. And keep up the rhetoric that abortion is no big deal.
anniemargret // Jul 13, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Sarah Palin: “Our opponent … is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.” …..”This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America.”
Dragonlady, are you really going to compare this direct quote from the lips of Sarah Palin to her adoring fans, with President Obama sitting through sermons while his minister railed? One is called a direct frontal attack on the integrity and character of a presidential candidate, the other is a sin of omission. No contest. Palin knew what she was doing, and so did McCain when he suggested Obama was an Arab, then assumed shock when his audience related Obama to Arab terrorists. At least McCain realized he had opened a Pandora’s box of hate and prejudice, and tried to stem the tide.
C’mon….they both knew they were baiting the extremists in your party. They did it for votes, and then pretended feigned ignorance . On the other hand, President Obama was, and is, a class act. He never made ad hominem attacks against the opposition. He stuck to the issues, not identity cultural warfare. Your party, as I said before, loves identity politics; they groove on it. To hell with the issues like healthcare, war, poverty, education, a failing infrastructure, energy independence, global warming, failing dollar, Russia and China as superpowers, fostering allies, etc….just find out if he’s/she’s a good enough Christian or not!
The latest is that Palin would beat Mitt Romney in a heartbeat if the election was run now. What does it say about a national party that gets behind the most strident, most divisive, and most inarticulate and sorry to say, the most woefully ignorant candidate on the issues? It says they are taking a swan dive into the abyss.
She was voted as a public servant and she decided mid way in to no longer serve that public – so she fill her personal coffers. Get the butter out. She’s toast.
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Chekote, let’s look at some other stats: 90% of Down Syndrom babies are aborted. Do these kids fall into the category you have above of babies being born without brains or severe genetic conditions? Absolutely not. Also, about 70% of late term abortions are done because women misjudge they are pregnant or think they aren’t that far long. It is not anti-woman to recognize that some women have abortions for less than convincing conditions–25% of women have had more than one abortion. In some western European countries and in Canada, we’re starting to see skewed demographics between males and females because some Muslim and Asian communities are terminating preganancies when they find out it’s a girl. Do you think abortion should be legal even in these cases?
I recognize you cannot completely separate that this is a woman’s body from the life issue. I believe the fetus is a potential human life, but it is not a full-fledged human being as you and I. But because it is a form of human life, pro-choice advocates shouldn’t be so glib on what we’re really doing–we are ending a potential human life. There’s nothing religious about that–it’s as straighforward as the science gets. As such, I see that women’s rights will often take precedence over the fetuses’ rights, but not in any and all circumstances. I would rather see abortion policy in this country be like it is in France. There, women can have an abortion up to 10 weeks in the pregnancy. After that, two physicians must certify that there is a GRAVE physical health threat to the mother, she is in jeapordy of death, or there is a severe condition of the baby. And no, I don’t think you should be able to kill a baby if it’s delivered outside of the mother, and it survives a botched abortion. Once it exits her body and is viable, it has a right to life in my mind. I don’t think my views are that far out of the mainstream.
dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Anniemargret, what Palin said was true about Obama. He does not believe America is an exceptional country–he is a multiculturalist. He saw nothing wrong with being friends with William Ayers. Obama has said himself that our Constitution is flawed in the way it enumerates rights for our citizens. He always highlights what he views as our shortcomings on all his overseas trips. It was an attack on his world view. Are you saying we can’t question the world view of our political opponents? Actually, if you can’t look at the Dems and see them in the thick of identity politics, you have on ideological blinders. I do credit Obama for not making it a black vs white issue when he campaigned but get real. Your portrayal of the GOP is laughable–McCain refused to emphasize Obama’s middle name, and Palin said strongly in an interview it was not okay at all to bar Muslims or any other faith from the GOP party. I’m fairly confident I know many more Republicans than you and the world view behind their thoughts. Your characterization of the GOP is full of hyperbole and borderline hysteria.
anniemargret // Jul 13, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Oh wait….and your hyperbole about Democrats is not? What does Huffpo have to do with President Obama? Haven’t seen any commentary from the President there lately. Does Redstate speak for McCain and Palin? Are they contributors? And I’m hyperbolic and in ‘borderline hysteria?” geez… Is this Ayers thing the only thing you guys got on Obama, when you got right wing talking heads fanning the flames of hate and prejudice and violence? That one has been rehashed and it’s old news. The American people are just not that stupid.
Look…this discussion on this thread has somehow devolved into the same old right wing talking points that we hear ad nauseum from Limbaugh, Hannity, and Coulter. The mainstream American public dissed them in November 2008. This is about Palin and her fitness to lead this nation. I really don’t care a whit whether you think our President is a multiculturalist, (and as Christian, somehow I think Jesus was), but stick to the main discussion point of this thread. David Frum started this blog as an effort to discuss the efficacy of a Palin presidency. It is not about whether Obama is fit to be President. He already proved he is. He won and he creamed McCain/Palin. The American people know what they want and they don’t want right wing Republicanism with the same old tired themes.
You all really should be debating the issues that affect American lives. Remember, the issues like healthcare, war, peace?
ktward // Jul 13, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Timeout:
Sheesh. I take a summer off to scoot my last off to college and everything changes, including NM. I’ve successfully migrated my user info (duh), but I’ve tried and tried to post a substantive comment on this particular thread with no results. No bad words or mean thoughts, mind you–not that kind of gal–but plenty of links. No NM FAQs page to refer to, and no response from the editor on my tech queries.
Is there [still] a character limit? Should I bifurcate my comment? Thoughts?
Sorry for the bother, truly, but I’d like to exhaust all avenues of aid before I resort t0 writing off NM in complete frustration.
anniemargret // Jul 13, 2009 at 11:26 pm
One more thing, Dragonlady…. we agree about something. I too am deeply concerned about abortion and I agree with you that it is a very big deal, and of deep concern. I want it to stay legal, but I also agree with those that remind us all that there are individuals out there of whom we know nothing, but who perhaps are facing far graver and more difficult circumstances than any of us will ever have to know…or understand. This country can do better. We can and should discuss this issue intelligently. Extremists on both sides are wrong. Birth control is the best answer; keep it legal and rare is extremely important lest we become too arrogant and too much wedded to belief systems. Humanity will always suffer.
On the Palin issue I stand firm. She is not presidential material in my opinion. I am not on the far left, nor the far right. I was a registered Independent for many years, but when this country decided to invade Iraq under Bush and Cheney, I agreed with the Democrats and still do and almost all the issues. I voted for Reagan many years ago, and grew up with Eisenhower parents, but my disillusionment with Republicans has been brewing for a long long time. It is about the issues that affect America and Americans. You can like Palin all you want, but in the end, the people with vote with their heads. Perhaps she is a nice woman, but I don’t want ‘regular’ people in the highest office of this land. I want much more than that. I don’t want to feel like I know more about international issues than a presidential candidate – I cannot respect that.
I wish her well on her celebrity tour, because basically that what it is. I wish her children well, they look like decent kids and I hope and pray that this country starts demanding their politicians make decisions for the good of Americans, and not just for their party.
I rest my case. Best wishes.
barker13 // Jul 14, 2009 at 12:35 am
Re: Dragonlady // Jul 13, 2009 at 1:14 pm –
“So we thought we went with the lesser of two evils.”
You thought wrong.
(*SHRUG*)
Seriously… Dragonlady…
YOU
THOUGHT
WRONG
(*SHRUG*)
All I’m asking for… hoping for… is that you and folks who “thought” like you have learned your lesson.
“As far as Powell goes, he has his flaws, but please do not call him traitorous…”
I called him “traitorous” not in the context of treason, of betraying one’s country, but in the specific context of being “traitorous” to Bush – of deliberately betraying the trust of both is boss (his President… his Commander In Chief) and betraying the Vice President and… OBVIOUSLY… betraying Scooter Libby and letting him take the fall for an action actually committed by Powell’s fair haired boy Richard Armitage.
Nope. Sorry. Would you prefer I use the phrase “betrayer?” How about “a man who betrayed his honor?”
Do you wish to mitigate the public relations beating that Bush, Cheney and thus the ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY took on account of Powell’s sleazy betrayal of President Bush’s trust…???
Dragonlady… don’t get me started. Powell’s uniform will always garner respect from me… but his character… no.
(Oh… and for future reference… NOTICE that not one word, thought, or concept has ANYTHING to do with Powell’s race. Even Dragonlady only seems concerned with the color GREEN as it applies to Powell.)
“…he tried to serve somewhat honorably.”
Jeez, Dragonlady… with “boosters” like you, Powell truly doesn’t need enemies like me! (*SNORT*) (*CHUCKLE*)
He “tried” to serve SOMEWHAT honorably…?!?! Is that what you wrote? You actually WROTE that…?!?!
(*HEADACHE*)
Oh, Lord… Specter… Powell… how low can standards sink? (And overall I just love and usually agree with Dragonlady’s posts!) (*SHAKING MY HEAD IN RUEFUL AMUSEMENT*)
“As far as Frum and the others, I think they are just misguided.”
(*SHRUG*) Hey… again… you have your standards and I have mine. We seem to be a few pages apart.
Anyway, Dragonlady… (*SIGH*)… I suppose we’ll just have to agree to disagree on certain specific “judgment calls.”
For what it’s worth, overall I’m very impressed with your writing and debating skills. Keep up the good fight!
BILL
Chekote // Jul 14, 2009 at 9:20 am
The latest is that Palin would beat Mitt Romney in a heartbeat if the election was run now. What does it say about a national party that gets behind the most strident, most divisive, and most inarticulate and sorry to say, the most woefully ignorant candidate on the issues?
It says that the party is very sick. It says that if it weren’t for her good looks, Palin would never have made it to the national stage. It says, that the GOP has no leadership right now. As far as Rev. Wright, how would you feel if John McCain had sat in a church where tirades against blacks, Jews were common place? It would be a disqualifier for me. I don’t hang around bigots.
Chekote // Jul 14, 2009 at 9:37 am
let’s look at some other stats: 90% of Down Syndrom babies are aborted. Do these kids fall into the category you have above of babies being born without brains or severe genetic conditions?
Can you please explain to me this obsession with Down Syndrone that pro-lifers seem to have? Most people believe that it should be the family to make the decision whether to go ahead with a Down Syndrome pregnancy. They are the ones who are going to have to deal with the consequences of their decision. Not me. Not you. No, when I referred to is situations where the fetus has no brain, no digestive system.
There, women can have an abortion up to 10 weeks in the pregnancy. After that, two physicians must certify that there is a GRAVE physical health threat to the mother, she is in jeapordy of death, or there is a severe condition of the baby.
I agree with that. However, that is not the pro-life agenda. Their agenda is to ban all abortions except for the life of the mother and some add rape and incest.
I do too.
Chekote // Jul 14, 2009 at 9:38 am
Ignore that last sentence.
dragonlady // Jul 14, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Chekote, Down Syndrome babies can have a normal quality of life unlike the other situations you referred to. They may not be as intelligent as you or I, or not be as pretty, but do you really believe b/c a person has Down’s that they are worthy of not living? Yes, the family has to deal with this situation, but I do not believe it is a situation where their lives should be put above someone else’s because the baby happens not to be perfect. Same thing if the fetus has a cleft lip or club foot. These can be fixed through surgery but should we also allow the woman’s reproductive rights always take precedence? It’s these in the middle classes lot the pro-choicers don’t want to acknowledge or discuss.
As for the pro-lifers, I do not agree with agenda, but I am sympathetic to their argument from an ethical standpoint. I’m fine with measures that try to inculcate a culture of life (offering women ultrasounds before they make a decision as long as they are not forced to do it). And while they cannot win the political debate, they are starting to turn around the cultural debate. Even Hollywood is getting in the act with movies like Juno and Knocked Up, showing women who chose to have a baby versus terminating the pregnancy. And my point with the French system above is we cannot get there or implement it because Roe v Wade already made the decision for us.
As for Sarah Palin, the last thing I will say is I have reservations about her political temperment, especially when she resigned. I do not know if I will vote for her if she runs in the primary. I’m not sure she can overcome the disgraceful carcitures the media conveyed to the general electorate. But I do not think she is a tart or ignoramus that many make her out to be. And I know quite a few Palin supporters and they are not stupid, either. So even if she’s not your candidate, I feel conservatives should be mad about how she was treated. No other politican has been subject to the type of attacks she and her family has: http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2009/07/politics_sarah_2.php
And that’s my last post on this thread. On to the next NM story.