The lefty media attacks Palin pick
Writing in yesterday’s New York Times, Elizabeth Bumiller attacked Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin by accusing her of being nominated only because John McCain did not really examine just how bad she is:
A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.
These disclosures, the ones which Bumiller has disqualifying Palin for the veep office, include her daughter being pregnant and the Palins’ defense of her sister against a wife beater. The idea is that no vice president should have a pregnant daughter or should defend her family against a pregnant daughter, and McCain must not have checked to make sure that Palin hadn’t violated these cardinal rules.
Insanity!
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Mark, I know you guy’s just want to win and somehow think this lady can help, to me she needs to stay home and help finish raising her family.
Defending her at this point seems like craziness.
How do you know what they are going to find if they didn’t even get vetted this far.
Huckabee could have won this thing for them, and there is still time.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Your first sentence reads: “Stay at home and cook my dinner, b**ch.”
Defending Governor Palin from what? Everything they’ve reported so far was discovered in the vetting and it is nothing which will hurt her.
Huckabee is a good guy, and I very much like him, but he would not have generated the excitement McCain needed AND he would have turned off a large segment of the base.
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Dittos, Mark.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:00 pm
That’s not what I said, Kids don’t raise themselves, and if hers are already having issues, I wouldn’t sacrifice my children for what ever she is trying to prove.
If this was so vetted why wasn’t it on Fox the first night, and you are in the news business, did you know about this from the vetting, or did you find out like the rest of us? You didn’t mention it before this?
Daryl’s comments mean nothing to me.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Don’t appreciate you assigning an inappropriate swear word to my comment, especially aimed at my wife.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Daniel… I did not mention your wife. I merely observed that your comment about Governor Palin was more or less one that indicated that a woman should “remain in her place.” She is trying to prove nothing more than Biden is trying to prove, or than he was trying to prove when he took his seat in the Senate when he had two young boys at home to raise.
It was vetted by the McCain camp, but the media wasn’t told because it is private to the Palin family.
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:56 am
.
Sorry Mark but you like everyone else on these sites rathergate included, made Gender Jokes at Hillary’s expense, and Katey too. Now your saying this Lady’s gender should stay out of it is a little hypocritical now.
“It was vetted by the McCain camp, but the media wasn’t told because it is private to the Palin family.” Totally no then, you can’t have private in the Internet age. It’s like young Disney girls posing nude for the boyfriend and when the picture turns up on the Internet they say, I didn’t think anyone would find out. Come on private, that’s a good one.
This is nothing more than a failed publicity stunt by the RNC, because after all the planning to win without the Christian vote or the conservative, they knew just McCain would come up short come election day.
.
September 3rd, 2008 at 7:22 am
You wrote, “Sorry Mark but you like everyone else on these sites rathergate included, made Gender Jokes at Hillary’s expense, and Katey too. Now your saying this Lady’s gender should stay out of it is a little hypocritical now.”
Wrong. I do not joke about Hillary’s gender or Katie’s gender, or anyone’s gender, disqualifying them from performing their job. I don’t make gender jokes. I don’t give a rat’s arse what anyone else does, but do not group me with them and don’t, please, call me a hypocrite based on something which just isn’t true.
You wrote, “Totally no then, you can’t have private in the Internet age. It’s like young Disney girls posing nude for the boyfriend and when the picture turns up on the Internet they say, I didn’t think anyone would find out. Come on private, that’s a good one.”
The internet has not altered the privacy to which we are entitled, both ethically and legally. The fact that some idiot discovers something and decides to put it on the internet does not make it something which should become the fodder of conversation. The McCain campaign vetted Palin.
You wrote, “This is nothing more than a failed publicity stunt by the RNC, because after all the planning to win without the Christian vote or the conservative, they knew just McCain would come up short come election day.”
You don’t understand the politics of the situation, why vice presidents are picked in modern American politics. And calling her selection a “failed publicity stunt by the RNC” proves it. The RNC did not select her, and vice president’s are not selected for publicity. Was Barack Obama’s selection a failed publicity stunt by Democrats? And nothing about her selection has failed. She’s enthused and motivated the base, which is something John McCain needed to do. And he never thought he could win without his base. That’s a silly accusation.
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:00 am
.
Still disagree on Vetting in the new Internet age.
Anything you try to hide from your vicious enemy is going to be front and center, and when it comes out like evidence in a courtroom that only you knew, if it’s bad, still feels like a betrayal to the people who are trying to support you, but you have some good points about the other stuff.
George Bush should be the model on vetting. I believed him because I have kids, and when they were teens, there is stuff about my past I don’t think they were old enough to handle, but I am not running for office, and it blew up in his face. No hiding stuff even for a good reason.
We will see what happens Mark, and the problem is if their plan doesn’t work…………… OBAMA.
.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:03 pm
“Daryl’s comments mean nothing to me.”
Awwww,come on. Nothing?…….. At all?…
I’m just so stunned.
September 4th, 2008 at 3:57 am
You ar WRONG! Womans should STAY hoem and cook diner. The man is the KING of the CASTEL! If your a man ACK like a man.
another grate idea from
James R Kotyk
September 4th, 2008 at 10:27 am
That’s wok like a man, my sun, with Trudi Valli and the four seasonings.
September 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Isn’t it ironical that the champions of liberalism and a woman’s right to choose now feel a woman’s place is in the home, while those so-called knuckle-dragging Conservatives are the ones who put forward a woman candidate despite her being a mother?