FOR McPLAMEALIN!!!!!!

Posted at October 7, 2008 12:48 PM in response to Polls: Pennsylvania Slipping Away For McCain?

The Charlie Rose green room stuff was boilerplate beauty pageant nonsense. Favorite author, advice from Dad, blah, blah, blah. No one has said she isn't comfortable talking about herself and Alaska.

Fortunately, the debate topics will lean more toward issue facing the country, not Wasilla. Expect Biden to push back if she repeats any of her disproven claims about: Alaska providing 20% of domestic energy (closer to 4%); earmark bashing/bridge to nowhere (had to drop that one from her stump speech)...

Biden simply crushes her on foreign policy and has his own folksy small town hokum to peddle. She held her own in that gubernatorial debate, but this is a much larger stage and she has had two disastrous interviews (she didn't display any more skill in Hannity's spoon feeding either).

Looking at that footage would shake the confidence of anyone... Then again, maybe she watched the interviews with the sound off.

Posted at September 29, 2008 6:15 PM in response to Expect Sarah Palin to Win The Debate. She Did Nightly TV News Live, So She Knows How To Look And Sound On Camera. Watch A Clip Of Her On Charlie Rose.

I like, "We agree...." It strikes the same conciliatory notes, but denies the opportunity for attack. Would even McCain issue an attack whose sound bite links the two together? "We agree" is short and pithy. It gets you to the "BUT" just that much faster...

I was thrilled at how Obama handled the debate. His demeanor during the financial crisis is even more Presidential. He projects confidence and hope for a better future and appears ready to tackle the challenge.

With encouraging economic news in short supply, his consistent inspirational message is a lot more comforting than McBlame's negative attacks.

Can't wait for Thursday's debate.

Posted at September 29, 2008 6:02 PM in response to Obama alternative to "John is right"?

I'm not stressing any Post-GOP polls until AFTER pitbull Palin faces the unvarnished press corps. Her ENTIRE narrative (except for Trig) is built on gross distortions and outright lies.

Troopergate... Bridge to Nowhere... More earmarks per capita than ANY OTHER STATE... eBay plane farce...

She can read a script... WHOOPDEE-EFFIN-DOO! Can I have some substance please? When she comes out of the cocoon and has to face REAL journalists asking real questions, then we'll see how long the Palin Fever lasts.

Posted at September 10, 2008 7:47 PM in response to Poll: McCain Takes Narrow Lead In New Mexico

Would there have been a plane to Gitmo fast enough if these asshats had admitted they were planning to assassinate the sitting President?

How can they possibly rule out a plot in less than 24 hours? This is disturbing and sends the wrong message.

Posted at August 26, 2008 3:47 PM in response to DOJ/FBI - WannaBe Obama Assasins 'Not Credible '- Just 'Knucleheads'

Given your avatar, I'm presuming snark; however, in the interest of clarity, I'll say this...

The context of the Hillary as martyr meme is that Obama denied Clinton "her time" as a viable female candidate. The knee jerk reaction OF SOME of her supporters is to run to McCain, the candidate of a party that has never offered a viable female candidate.

In regards to my bias against "white, older men" I can only point to Rumsfeld, Cheyney, Bush and Co. Surely, the tragedy they have visited on this nation merits a squidge of bias, n'est-ce pas?

Posted at June 5, 2008 2:59 AM in response to HIllary's Legacy

You mean without the coattails of a two-term president? Probably not, but I wouldn't expect a second term Senator from any state to nail it either.

I don't think her biggest problem was her sex. I think her biggest problem was the hubris that the Clinton brand entitled her to the nomination--overwhelming any and all other considerations. Despite her spin, the Clinton's drama hand delivered us into a two-term Dubya presidency and six years of unchecked GOP dominance.

Her prevarications on NAFTA, Tuzla didn't help. Neither did her expressed preference for the opposing candidate over her fellow Democrat.

Posted at June 3, 2008 1:24 PM in response to Thought experiment: What if Hillary were Hill (Bill's younger brother)?

I hadn't seen that. Thanks. It was Harriet Christian and G. Ferraro's comments that drove this idea for me.

Personally, I think it's hard to argue that the intensity of Hillary's female support far outweighs the advantages of Obama's Black base. After all, women make up more than 50% of the electorate and ALL Blacks are less than 15%.

You don't see Edwards, Dodd, Richardson and Biden supporters screaming that John McCain is their new choice, but there are scores of clips of white women expressing their anger at Obama (instead of the media) because he has earned the nomination.

Posted at June 3, 2008 1:15 PM in response to Thought experiment: What if Hillary were Hill (Bill's younger brother)?

Good point. For the sake of this first round of argument, let's presume that all of Team Clinton's assumptions, strategies and "mistakes" are intact (minus pantsuits of course).

Love the Breakfast Club avatar, BTW.

Posted at June 3, 2008 10:10 AM in response to Thought experiment: What if Hillary were Hill (Bill's younger brother)?

I didn't see anything in the rules or the memo that specifically equate "campaign" to "participate." There are explicit definitions of what campaigning includes, but "participate" is not so defined.

The words have very different meanings. It may be argued that campaigning is in and of itself participation in an election, even if one's name is not on the ballot. However, one can participate in an election without campaigning at all. To wit, Obama's name was submitted by persons other than himself. Had he note withdrawn, he would have been participating without campaigning.

With all due respect to Alexis Herman's clarification--four months later--at the meeting, precedent of candidate name removal carries a bit more force than your argument here.

Posted at June 1, 2008 9:54 PM in response to Bonoir was wrong advocate for Obama