Debate Wrap Up: ‘Jim, I’ve got a bracelet too’
Posted by Dirty Harry on Friday, September 26th, 2008
UPDATED: Check out the video. Obama can’t remember the name of the Sgt. without looking at it. Imagine if Palin did that!
By any standard McCain pretty well trounced Obama who was constantly on defense, forced to explain himself and thrown off his game. You’re losing when you explain yourself and that took up a lot of Obama’s time.
The current post-debate spin is that we have a tie. In other words, the liberal media knows McCain won and are now trying to grade on a curve to a tie.
Whatever.
The media says there were no killer sound-bytes, I disagree. There were two:
1. The shot McCain took at Obama’s little presidential seal.
2. McCain’s rebuttal to Obama about meeting with Ahmadinejad: “Let me get this straight, we sit down and after he says ‘I’ll wipe out Israel,’ we say, ‘No you won’t.’
I do agree this is no game changer but if it finally puts a stop to these awful two weeks that’s a plus.
Special kudos to Jim Lehrer. Good questions and he stayed out of it.
We won’t know who won for another couple of days. It’s the post-post debate spin that matters — where the campaign narrative goes from here will answer that.
Next debate is Thursday with Biden and Palin.
Nail biter.
Oh, yea… And McCain’s decision to never look at Obama was brilliant.
Filed in General |
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 8:53 pm 1THIS NEEDS TO GO VIRAL AT ALL COSTS:
What Caused Our Economic Crisis?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH–o
Watch it. If McCain stands any chance in November it will depend on this information getting out to as many people as possible. Send it to EVERYBODY you know.
Nicol Don 26 Sep 2008 at 8:54 pm 2Just watching CNN. They are claiming all of the major networks are putting Obama waaaaaay ahead.
Not saying it is true…just what they are saying. They are spinning it like McCain got his clock cleaned.
Ginaon 26 Sep 2008 at 8:56 pm 3I think Sarah can do it. We know she’s smart and strong. And she’s up against Joe “Gaffe-a-Minute” Biden, don’t forget.
Plissken79on 26 Sep 2008 at 8:58 pm 4Of course, but what else would CNN do? A very good night for McCain, let’s hope his next two debates go this well. I am sure Palin will do a solid job against Biden, although I agree that will be a nail-biter.
McCain was playing the cards fairly close to his chest with regards to the economy, but hopefully he will soon broker a deal which with incorporate enough of the House Republican plan to weaken some of the worst aspects of the Paulson bailout (ACORN assistance in particular). Let’s hope a deal is done by Sunday and the credit market stabilizes next week
Mr Stay Pufton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:01 pm 5I was hoping McCain would slam him at the end when Obama once again states how the rest of the world no longer looks at America with the same respect it once did. I’m sick of that crap.
Stephanieon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:01 pm 6I hope your right. But he has to hit Obama on Acorn…like he did with the Ahmadinijad comment. He has to.
And Nicol who cares what CNN says. Lets see what the ratings are tomorrow. I predict FOX kills them all.
Now after working on my own little website I am pooped. Night all. Mac rocked the house. Kicked ass. WHOOWHOOOO..
wanketteon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:02 pm 7Harry’s second quote of the night…Stephen Green @ Vodkapundit said he wet himself over Mac’s response to the “preconditions gambit”…”like gay porn, only I enjoyed it.” BWAH!
The Fox News poll has Mac by over 80%. So much for “all major networks”.
Mr Stay Pufton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:02 pm 8About time Lehrer stayed out of it. He was awful in 2004.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:02 pm 9Sarah couldn’t debate a wet noodle in a warm bathtub. She is pathetic. And you don’t know how it pains me to say so.
abeon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:02 pm 10Why exactly was McCain’s decision not look at Obama brilliant? It made McCain look fearful and tense.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:03 pm 11ps., please, please PLEASE watch that vid I linked and help it go viral. It could change the momentum of the race if enough people get to see it.
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:04 pm 12My take away line? “I have a bracelet too.”
Suddenly I was transported onto QVC with Joan Rivers…
Dirty Harryon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:05 pm 13Abe: Not looking at Obama threw Obama. He wanted eye contact, McCain refused, and it really rattled the man. It diminished him.
Tactic — not strategy. You probably know the difference, even if your guy don’t.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:06 pm 14>>>“I have a bracelet too.”
Exactly. And he agrees with every other thing McCain believes in— just like he would do with Hilary during their debates. How conveeeeeenient.
Mr Stay Pufton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:07 pm 15Transcript of Obama’s closing:
Well, let me just make a closing point. You know, my father came from Kenya. That’s where I get my name.
And in the ’60s, he wrote letter after letter to come to college here in the United States because the notion was that there was no other country on Earth where you could make it if you tried. The ideals and the values of the United States inspired the entire world.
I don’t think any of us can say that our standing in the world now, the way children around the world look at the United States, is the same.
Disgraceful. America’s values and ideals are as amazing today as they were then. Maybe even better. I wish McCain had pounced on that.
Mr Stay Pufton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:07 pm 16Sorry, the “disgraceful” part was not part of the quote.
Katoon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:09 pm 173 points:
1) McCain’s inability (or refusal) to explain what David links to above, in this debate, was a huge liability.
2) I personally loved the mention of Obama’s little seal. Unfortunately, that probably flew over the heads of 95% of the debate’s audience. I’m surprised none of the candidates had any zingers prepped. Whatever ultimately happens, I predict no one will remember a single line from this debate a year from now.
3) Surprisingly, to me, Jim Lehrer was an awesome moderator. Mainly because he kept his mouth shut. And his constant coming back to “but, how will this $700 billion bailout affect all of your plans?” was brilliant. A total softball pitch to McCain, who could have hammered home the disconnnect between Obama’s pie in the sky promises and, oh, reality.
wanketteon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:10 pm 18Okay, I’m running over here like a puppy with tidbits fro other blogs:
abeon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:11 pm 19But that’s not how most people who noticed it are going to interpret it–what they saw was Obama not afraid to address his opponent while McCain kept shying away from him. If McCain is supposed to be such a “maverick” why couldn’t he even look at Obama? “Brilliant” and “tactical” indeed!
http://ursispaltenstein.ch/blog/images/uploads_img/geri_game.jpg
Johnny Ed's Babyon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:11 pm 20I remember after each Democrat debate this year the pundits always said either Clinton or Obama won because they were ahead going in and the other one didn’t knock them out.
Only after reflection did people see things differently and notice things like the ‘no precondition’ stance were important. So this will percolate for a while and we’ll have the VP debate.
But I just can’t believe anyone but a true Obama believer thought he did better.
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:12 pm 21I think that Obama held his own. If you’re an idiot…ah, undecided touchy-feely poll-swinging voter…and cast your vote on tone and presence rather than issues and competence, then Obama did just fine.
But I think we’re overstating the importance of debates–I voted for Bush twice (cheerfully) but watching him in a debate was stomach wrenching. Superficially speaking, he lost every debate he was in…
But remind me who our President is…?
leeseanon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:12 pm 22Are bracelets the new yellow ribbons or flag pins?
Show your patriotism with an “I HAVE A BRACELET” T-shirt. Buying stuff is patriotic too.
http://www.zazzle.com/i_have_a_bracelet_shirt-235498838677629076
Kiton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:13 pm 23All in all, great debate.
Just watching it wore me out.
Katoon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:15 pm 24Actually, the only part that made me clench my stomach was the first segment about the bailout. Once it got to foreign policy, I relaxed. Unfortunately, McCain had fallen behind at that point.
Shawn Streeton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:18 pm 25Keira, I agree with what you said about W’s debate skills. But if running against the right person it can help. For example, Gore, Kerry and Obama all have a way of coming across as snotty, ya know? Even during the Dem debates that was one thing that hurt Obama against Hillary. In W people saw someone they could relate to, a regular Joe if you will. I think the same thing happened for the Dems when Clinton ran against Dole and Bush the elder. Bill was the regular Joe. By his constant interruptions and smircks, Obama didn’t help himself in this regard. And that is one thing I think will help Palin next week too.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:24 pm 26>>>And that is one thing I think will help Palin next week too.
Palin needs all the help she can get. If she didn’t hesitate for even a split second when McCain asked her to be his running mate, she sure doesn’t show that level of sefl-assurance when she’s off script. What the hell. What happenned to the Sarah who didn’t have a split second’s worth of doubt? All I see is a small town mayor caught like the proverbial deer in the headlights. She needs to snap out of it pronto and GROW A PAIR already, dammit. We don’t have time for this shit.
Kiton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:28 pm 27Whiskey,
I am getting sick and tired of your mysogynistic diatribes.
It is clear that you hate women, for one reason or another. Yes, there are some stupid college girls. Well let me tell you something else, there are some stupid college boys TOO.
But there are also alot of women who look inside the person.
So SHOVE IT WITH YOUR MYSOGYNISTIC RANTS!
Pessimism is on the election is one thing, we are all allowed it, even I get pessimistic sometimes, but these sexist posts you are making are not only annoying, they are insulting.
Insulting not just to my female friends (who prove you wrong) but SARAH PALIN too. When you say women prefer Obamas to Todds then what do we say of Palin. Your logic dictates that the National Enquirer is probably right in that she is having an affair. After all, a woman wouldn’t settle for some snow-skiing, blue-collar guy, wouldn’t she…
She’d have to sleep with the Matthew McConaghey’s of the world (or however you spell his name).
So knock it off with your insults.
Dirty Harryon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:30 pm 28David — couldn’t agree more. I’m down on Palin now. Whatever the deal is — her or her letting her handlers over-handle her — she needs to get her act together.
I heard she’ll be doing SNL. Maybe a good showing there will loosen her up.
She kicked ass when announced and at the convention. The kind of poise and confidence that normally carries anyone throu anything.
WTF happened?
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:32 pm 29I agree that she is over-managed—she not only has to bone up on national issues that she hasn’t had to deal with much but also on her all running mate’s positions, record and policies (She hasn’t made the “no clean coal” gaffe that Biden has but will get a lot less slack when she does).
I re-watched the Alaska Gubernatorial debate tonight and I think she is much smoother when she’s treading comfortable ground. I think she’ll be fine (maybe not great) in the debate with Biden but either it won’t matter to the spin doctors or will serve to further the media meme that she’s the most wildly unprepared candidate in the history of the US EVER. (Never mind Edwards…)
She needs to slow her pacing and stop worrying about the repercussions of differing with McCain (ie. McCain and I don’t always see eye to eye. This is my take on the issue.) and I think her native instincts will serve her well.
Katoon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:36 pm 30The problem is, the McCain campaign has badly mismanaged Palin’s first two interviews. I would never had let her be interviewed by a female member of the MSM. They are just champing at the bit to prove their solidarity with their pro-choice, anti-religion feminist sisters. At least with a male interviewer (see Charlie Gibson), his negativity looks like sexism. They also should never assent to a taped long-form interview with MSM. Keep them live. Hell, I’d give ‘em a live press conference. Imagine how she’d do with 100 reporters baying idiotic questions at her. She’d come out an even bigger star than ever.
soulpileon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:36 pm 31Obama’s constant smirking and facial acrobatics really annoyed me throughout the whole debate. Oh, and the interrupting and calling McCain, “John.” (Which Biden did as well during discussion afterwards.)
Disrespectful, arrogant punks.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:36 pm 32>>>She needs to slow her pacing and stop worrying about the repercussions of differing with McCain (ie. McCain and I don’t always see eye to eye.
I thought exactly the same thing after watching the Couric interview. Slow down girl! There’s no hurry in getting the words out. She sounds like a college grad interviewing for her first job, as if she owes these PATHETIC journos a damn thing. I still believe in Sarah Palin, but the sad fact is Sarah doesn’t believe in herself.
Also she needs to GET OFF THE SCRIPT. So what if you aren’t 100% onboard with John McCain on every issue. Sarah’s a maveric, remember! Maverick’s don’t tow the party line, remember Sarah???
JBon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:38 pm 33“If you’re an idiot…ah, undecided touchy-feely poll-swinging voter…and cast your vote on tone and presence rather than issues and competence, then Obama did just fine.”
If you’re an idiot, you’re already voting for Obama.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:40 pm 34>>>WTF happened?
The pressure got to her. Too much, too soon. Frankly, I understand 100% and I don’t blame her. But we don’t need this shit right now. Stakes are too high.
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:41 pm 35So what do we call those “undecideds”? I loathe (with the heat of 1000 hot hot suns) the groups of “undecideds” that are corralled in a small conference room to discuss the post-debate wrap-up. They make the stupidest comments because they are the stupidest voters.
qrton 26 Sep 2008 at 9:42 pm 36Palin’s problem is that she has the same personality as George W. Bush- resolute overconfidence matched with stunning incuriousity.
x5on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:42 pm 37Oh, and the interrupting and calling McCain, “John.”
Yeah, that was really a bad moment for Obama. Obama may as well have said “Don’t you know i am The One, your Lord and Savior? How dare you not obey my command to stop speaking!” Just extremely arrogant.
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:46 pm 38I’m not ready to abandon Palin (my reasons go to policy–that TranCanada pipeline was freaking brilliant) and have seen great things from her on the stump. The interviews were…meh. But three interviews aren’t going to determine my support. I’d like to see more of her as she came off at the convention and I think the McCain campaign created this silliness wherein every interview was like Moses addressing God at Sinai.
But I’ve followed Palin for more than a year and she’s a really good get.
The G Manon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:47 pm 39I gotta say it looked like a draw for me. I hate to say it, but I think Obama is right on the “bomb pakistan if necessary” point. Mccain says “dont say that out loud”, but shouldnt he, of all people, be cool with taking the bomb to the source? And saying it out loud even?
Maybe Im an idealist.
Also, shouldnt have Mcain have answered the “likelihood of another 911″ question with something like “Iraq drew their fire, and we are fighting them there instead of here….Obama’s approach would have the lines drawn at our borders instead of the other side of the world. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? You add the cost of another attack-related $1trillion economic downturn to our current unrelated finance problem and decide for yourselvs.”
Katoon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:49 pm 40Keira - I agree, the McCain campaign has totally mishandled Palin’s interviews. They should have her do a live press conference that can’t be edited. The sight of 100 reporters baying for her hide will make the public fall in love with her all over again. And I think she’d do better in a live setting like that, instead of these lugubrious one-on-one summits.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 9:50 pm 411) McCain’s inability (or refusal) to explain what David links to above, in this debate, was a huge liability.
I agree. I kept wishing for McCain to start naming names about this housing bubble-created mess, which can be laid squarely at the feet of the Democrat party. But no, that would have been rude.
I can’t stress enough how important it is that video go viral. It’s UNDENIABLE proof this mess is Democrat-created. It’s been viewed over a quarter million times, and it’s up on Drudge now too, so it’s getting huge publicity already. But help spread the word. It could make a few polling points of difference. Even the Dummicrats are getting nervous about it based on their comments.
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:52 pm 42I agree Kato. I think she knows naturally how to work a crowd and the perception of evasiveness hurts her much more now than a blizzard of press access and a few mistakes…
Keiraon 26 Sep 2008 at 9:53 pm 43David—my husband emailed me that video from work today. It’s clear and succinct. I’m posting it on my blog—who’s with me?
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 10:05 pm 44>>>I’m posting it on my blog—who’s with me?
DH, you gonna blog it? Please watch it. It’ll blow you away. Guaranteed.
JBon 26 Sep 2008 at 10:36 pm 45“Palin’s problem is that she has the same personality as George W. Bush- resolute overconfidence matched with stunning incuriousity.”
Obama’s problem is that he has the same personality as all other malignant narcissists: criticism enrages him, he uses glibness/superficial charm to manipulate the public, has a grandious sense of self-worth when measured against real-world accomplishments and he never ever take responsibility for his errors, always blaming “his staff.”
Even if you were right about Palin (which you aren’t) I’d say she comes out ahead of Obama in the personality inventory.
JohnLockeon 26 Sep 2008 at 10:38 pm 46David, the only problem with that video is that, frankly, people have short attention spans. They’re not going to sit through ten minutes of slideshow. This information needs to be condensed down to the essentials and put into a 1- or 2-minute ad. Short, sweet, and to the point. That’s what people listen to.
David123456on 26 Sep 2008 at 10:51 pm 47JohnLocke,
agreed, it doesn’t make a great ad. But there are a lot of people who would like to know what this financial mess is all about without having to get a Phd in economics, if only to sound semi-informed around the office water fountain. That’s who’s going to watch this video.
whiskeyon 26 Sep 2008 at 11:16 pm 48I’m emailing to everyone I know David. That is just what I asked for. Agreed on failure to go after Obama/ACORN etc.
Scuffleon 26 Sep 2008 at 11:38 pm 49Remember this:
McCain’s rebuttal to Obama about meeting with Ahmadinejad: “Let me get this straight, we sit down and after he says ‘I’ll wipe out Israel,’ we say, ‘No you won’t.’
Followed by a smattering of cynical laughter. Remember this, as it lost the election for McCain. The debates are for floating voters, and he’ll have lost them right there. Not only is he stupid enough to still think that Ahmadinejad said that he wants Israel wiped off the map - and really, he’s had long enough to check that one out - but he’s stated that he isn’t interested in diplomacy at any level. He wants war, he wants conflict, and I’m beginning to think he might actually be stupid enough to get overly aggressive towards Iran. And I’m beginning to think that some of his supporters believe that the situation would involve rolling in, sticking a US flag in the middle of Tehran, and WINNING!
Seriously, the team drones who would vote Republican no matter how many skeletons tumbled out of the closet should sit down and think about how much you value empty posturing over sense. This fact is self-evident: a president who refuses to talk to other leaders is impotent and dangerous. Those of you who can vote in November really should consider whether you want to put your personal interests above those of America.
JBon 26 Sep 2008 at 11:41 pm 50Scuffle: get back on your meds.
Katoon 26 Sep 2008 at 11:50 pm 51Scuffle wrote (presumably, with a crayon): “[McCain] isn’t interested in diplomacy at any level. He wants war, he wants conflict.”
Apparently, that’s why McCain has said a number of times that he hates war. That’s why he’s said we should put the diplomatic screws on Iran.
It’s all because he wants — no, he thirsts for — war.
Yes, McCain is some kind of Dr. Strangelove. He wants war at any cost. War, war, war! He wants to to taste veins in his teeth.
Ooh, Scuffle, I wish you’d stayed off of this site. If it weren’t for your keen investigative work, McCain’s zombie-like supporters wouldn’t have known about this hunger for war. You blew the lid off of his secret desire. I hope you’re happy with yourself.
promon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:04 am 52A lot depends on Sarah now. She has to decisively win the debate. If she even appears to tank, the MSM will pounce on her and the polls will sink.
godzirraon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:24 am 53Conversely, Obama’s tactic of never calling McCain “Senator” except on topics they supposedly agreed on was asinine.
The number of times Obama called Senator McCain “John” versus “Senator McCain” was at least 4 to 1.
I don’t think McCain even once referred to Barack by his first name - it was always Senator Obama.
There’s respect, and then there’s petulance. One makes you look like a statesman, the other makes you look like a spoiled child.
FWIW, if there are any Hugh Hewitt listeners, I think The One easily obliterated Hugh’s generous 35 over/under stammer count. he had to be approaching the hundreds…
Snarfblatton 27 Sep 2008 at 1:07 am 54I thought McCain kicked some butt in the foreign policy section. He just seems more serious and experienced, whereas Obama needs to go through fifty positions on anything to settle on one. And the Ahmahdinejad line was stellar. A nice humorous jab, which pointed out the truth with sarcasm: Obama (and liberals in general) are too naive to be handling foreign policy in a dangerous world. Obama’s triangulation on “without preconditions” was just a joke. Yeah, right, sure that’s what you meant. I also thought he did an excellent job pointing out the differences between what Obama says, and what he has done.
I do think McCain needs to work on his ability to discuss economic issues though. He traces EVERYTHING back to earmarks. Earmarks are bad, and should be done away with, but there’s a lot more to the economy that he could be talking about. It comes across like he doesn’t know enough about anything else to discuss it, and I think conservatives have problems with economic issues (electorally) to begin with since too many voters are already swayed by promises of goody giveaways, courtesy of their fellow taxpayers. Also, I wish he wouldn’t cede so much ground to Democrats. Sadaam was a horrible, sadistic, terrorist-funding, wood-chipper-throwing monster, and the world is better off without him running a country. The problem with Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac lies squarely at the feet of the Dems, yet McCain continues to let them blame Bush. It’s a debate, he should be pointing these things out, rather than letting Obama spew this bs unquestioned.
And yes, the Dems grate with this “John” and “George Bush” nonsense. It’s blatantly disrespectful, and you don’t hear McCain referring to “Barack” and “Joe.” BTW, love the site DH.
Jillon 27 Sep 2008 at 1:09 am 55So far this is my favorite article about the debate.
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/sep/27/mccain-in-a-walk/
My favorite line: On foreign policy, McCain is Encyclopedia Brittanica, and Obama is Reader’s Digest.
Love it!
Andunedhelon 27 Sep 2008 at 2:46 am 56Morning.
I woke up this (European) morning to find that apparently I was wrong… I said yesterday the media would had call it a tie because McCain was better but lacked a critical hit, and I see they are actually labelling it an Obama victory.. what the? And the polls out giving Obama a better rating by an average 15% (I’d like to see the weighting, tho)???
I’m more than a bit confused…
Johnny Ed's Babyon 27 Sep 2008 at 4:08 am 57Obama may not have had a teleprompter but he did have to look down to read the name on his wristband.
He needs all his props on stage.
David Marcoeon 27 Sep 2008 at 4:49 am 58I said yesterday the media would had call it a tie because McCain was better but lacked a critical hit, and I see they are actually labelling it an Obama victory.. what the? And the polls out giving Obama a better rating by an average 15% (I’d like to see the weighting, tho)???
I’m more than a bit confused…
Simple: They’re in the tank for Obama and they’re very clever at shaping the narrative. In most cases, short of lying outright, they will do everything they can to make the public perceive things a certain way, masking the evidence and obfuscating the facts.
With polls, all they have to do is weight them with an overly large sample from a particular group. As a rule, I trust results more from independent polling services than I do from news agencies. Also, polls conducted right after events, before you can accurately measure perception and invariably with smaller sample sizes, are probably not going to be terribly accurate anyway.
So, media bias in especially evident this election and it’s only going to be more so in Europe.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:12 am 59I see that the hospital let Scuffle near a computer with net access again? Sighhhhhhhhhhh….
Just ignore the little fascist. People like him LOVE THEIR NATIONAL SOCIALISTS! JB is right Scuffs you should go back to whatever Nazi echochamber you crawled out of and take your meds you ass. Your opinions mean diddly poo to us and your sort of like a case of the clap or a bad rash that won’t go away. Your ideas are evil. Get it? You support evil ideas.
Anyway I watched debate highlights this morning..Mac ate Obama alive. I am so pumped over this. Truly! He should have gone after Zeus on ACORN but he may well do it later.
And the MSM will of course spin a tie. They cannot allow themselves to admit Zeus lost this round. But who cares. Mac did awesomely well. He looked good. He never lost his composure. He even laughed at Obama a few times while Zeus imploded inside. Yes Zeus is a malignant Narcissist. A well called statement that. He is the vessel by which other malignant narcissists pour themselves into. He reflects every shallow, dangerous, ignorant, evil thing that the narcissistic left is about. When you see Obama and all of his despicableness you see the entire hard left of the Democrat party. Frightening isn’t it?
StevefromMKEon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:15 am 60I think the bigger issue is that after “suspending” his campaign just days ago and going back to Washington, McCain supposedly wasn’t going to be ready for the debate. Obama from what I’ve read has been preparing for weeks now and it was McCain who just made Barack look like a little pensive schoolboy mumbling through his first debate squad practice trying to remember what he wrote on his notecards.
David Marcoeon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:35 am 61It’s like I’ve said before: Obama pretends to be the man who McCain actually is.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:41 am 62Well I don’t think his I agree stuff and me tooism works. He just followed along with whatever McCain was saying and everytime he (Zeus) tried to attack Mac merely deflected him, The line about Iran was great. GREAT!
Andunedhelon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:48 am 63I liked how McCain looked.. except who ever gave us that tie (the one around the neck) should be fired together with the one who came up twice with the greenish background, last time at the convention… if it is not the same guy.
David, that was understood, but I’m surprised because I would had expected a spin towards a tie, but victory in that debate? And as for polls, that’s why I said I’d like to see the weighting, but even so, unless they totally made them up, it’s a pretty large difference.
Oh well, let’s see what the day brings.
Andunedhelon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:49 am 64Argh… Paul Newman died
If that is how it starts….
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:02 am 65Oh and from the Atlantic Blog………check out the story about the fight during the White House meeting over the “Bail Out.”
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/mccain_kept_head_down_in_meeti.php
Now I know why the Dems want to have 100 Republicans go with them to vote on this shitty bill but still, I am glad Boehner with Mac by side knew what those f’rs were up to. 3 days to debate a bill this big, an issue so huge and the GOP has no chance to even say anything or interject an opinion? When we find out that the fing DemonRATS never even asked Boehner or the GOP leadership to be part of the initial work…bullshit! Black Nan and Dingy Harry are fing bullys. BULLYS!
Ginaon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:19 am 66Andunedhel — he did? Where’d you hear that? I can’t find anything about it.
David Marcoeon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:25 am 67David, that was understood, but I’m surprised because I would had expected a spin towards a tie, but victory in that debate?
They’re desperate for an Obama victory, especially after two successive elections and a third that was supposed to be a “sure win.” They don;t feel the need to be particularly subtle anymore and they’re only following Goebbels advice, “Tell a lie long enough and loud enough and it becomes truth.”
And as for polls, that’s why I said I’d like to see the weighting, but even so, unless they totally made them up, it’s a pretty large difference.
A Newsweek poll a month or so back had Obama up by fifteen. A recent NBC poll had McCain down by eight. Padding a little here and there can add up to some fairly large figures.
Andunedhelon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:33 am 68They gave the news here in Italy, a family friend and president of the Dinamo Camp foundation here. Could be a mistake tho.
It’s actually the headline news of the online edition of both teh most important italian newspapers
http://www.corriere.it/
http://www.repubblica.it
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:41 am 69Look guys remember my advice…Rasmussen, Battleground and the RCP average….don’t believe any others. And don’t look at Daily Tracking Polls…..they change to much day to day…
Ronsonicon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:58 am 70McCain will completely destroy the conventional wisdom on the next debate. Obama only does well on the economy because Democrats are allowed to spout any sort of pie-in-the-sky they like. Now there are real economic concerns that limit the available lines of BS possible.
McCain will nail the deadbeat borrowers and reckless lenders to Obama and Acorn and Barney and Fannie and all of Barry’s other friends. He’ll be able to do that by then. He can also start connecting corporate tax rates to out-sourcing and oversea production. Mostly because it is true.
That’s my prediction. Oh, okay, it’s sorta a hope, but really it will be effective and easy enough. McCain has the kung-fu to drag a debate onto his ground. Those points should do the job.
NeoConJedion 27 Sep 2008 at 7:00 am 71I thought McCain’s depth, knowledge, and experience — and B. Hussein Obama’s lack of these things — really floated to the surface.
About the housing items with which McCain could’ve nailed Obam, I believe he was simply holding that stuff — he had to have been.
The reason I say this is that it seems nothing — not domestic-terrorists ties, demented radical Marxist preacher mentors, slimy landlord-dealings, or anything really stick to this fraud because the media will either ignore it, or apologize for it.
I expect McCain will hit him hard on these issues in the next debates.
Overall, I’m very happy with McCain’s performance. But I am a little disappointed that he allowed this jerk to say all that crap about having to restore our place in the world.
Bush never let John Kerry get away with that, and I hope McCain puts a stop to it.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:01 am 72Of course your best fight is done on ground of your choosing. An ass like Barry wouldn’t know that because an ass like Barry never studied any military tactics or strategy…Remember John Buford at Gettysburg…this is good ground. Thats all Mac has to do…make Barry fight on ground of Mac’s choosing.
ShawnSon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:04 am 73I still can’t believe that McCain did not aggressively attack Obama and his party for their decisive role in creating the financial mess we’re in. Then again, I’m astonished that Republicans on the Hill haven’t called a press conference demanding Barney Frank’s head on a platter.
Here we have a heaven-sent opportunity to discredit some of the Left’s core economic beliefs, and we sit back and let the Democrats drive the narrative–that this is Bush and the Republicans’ fault, a damning indictment of “unfettered free market capitalism.” Why no mention last night of Bush and McCain’s attempts to right this ship-attempts that were strenuously opposed by the Democrats?
For years, I’ve watched the Left in the government and out slander and smear Republicans and, with the exception of Reagan, Republicans sit back and take it. Can someone explain why? Is it that they think talk radio and Fox news will do the heavy lifting for them, even though these media outlets are by and large preaching to the choir? Look at Palin–since her convention speech, we’ve let the Left define her as a far-right extremist rube. When given the chance to defend herself on camera, she sits back and smiles and takes it. Compare this to, say, Clinton with Chris Wallace. On the other side of the aisle, we have the most radical left candidate to seek the Presidency since Henry Wallace, a man with a copious amount of evidence illustrating his extreme leftism, and the best Republicans can do to discredit him is to draw attention to his lack of experience?
I’m furious with the passivity the Republicans have shown over the last three weeks or so. Unless McCain is willing to take the gloves off and start FIGHTING this leftist spew, then I’m afraid we’re going to talking about President-elect Obama in a few weeks.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:04 am 74I am thinking jsut letting people hear Barry say it…blue collar Americans who are patriots and work hard for their cash hearing Barry say they suck and letting it sink in is OK. Yeah this is the DNC’s answer to your prayers…they think you suck…..I don’t know if that sits well with the average blue collar guy and gal.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:07 am 75Shawn you have no idea what your talking about. Again must someone explain to the foolish crepe hangers about NOT SHOOTING YOUR WAD ALL AT ONCE?
Mac did fine! what part of he had assjack on defense all night did you not get? Of course if you like dwelling in misery like a few I know fine…but please don’t share it. It has no place in a war and thats what we are in…a war. COWBOY UP!
Kiton 27 Sep 2008 at 7:07 am 76ShawnS,
McCain did take credit for issuing a warning.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:09 am 77Yes he did. Sighhhhhhhhhhh that speech was posted here to. I posted it on my own blog and sent it out to one of my sisters who foolishly sent me a video of the mugging of Sara by Katie Couric.
NeoConJedion 27 Sep 2008 at 7:09 am 78… oh, and McCain not looking at this jackass did disarm and frustrate the empty suit.
However, I think McCain chose this approach to keep himself calm, to fight the urge to jump across the stage and smack this idiot.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:11 am 79Mac has a temper but he did the fighter pilot cool calm thing and Barry was doing his Demonic impression. Everytime he looked down I swear his face morphed into the face of Beezelbub. SHUDDER! The guy is creepy. Scary fing creepy.
David123456on 27 Sep 2008 at 7:40 am 80>>>But that’s not how most people who noticed it are going to interpret it–what they saw was Obama not afraid to address his opponent while McCain kept shying away from him. If McCain is supposed to be such a “maverick” why couldn’t he even look at Obama? “Brilliant” and “tactical” indeed!
There you tards go again. John McCain “afraid”? Plenty of folks have their disagreements with John McCain. Many even dislike him. But nobody, and I mean NOBODY who isn’t a brainwashed Obamaton believes John McCain is afraid of anybody or anything, let alone Erkel the skinny Kenyan. America KNOWS John McCain, unlike his dumbo-eared opponent who is a complete cypher.
What they saw is a proven statesman who holds his opponent in comtempt, and isn’t worried about letting it show. He doesn’t like Obambi. And? That’s a bad thing? That’s another thing America knows about John McCain– he’s honest, he’s genuine, and he’s REAL. So very different than the blank slate running against him. Even if many people disagree with John McCain, America KNOWS his his primary concern is the safety and wellbeing of this country. Can the same be said about the Kenyan? Of course not.
GMKon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:44 am 81I remember in 2004 when I watched the Cheney/Edwards debate. I watched Dick Cheney (despite outrageously biased questions that made false statements of fact as part of the question like “considering the fact that the war was a mistake, do you think the war was a mistake?”… I’m exaggerating but not by much) clean the floor with Edwards. He clubbed him like a baby seal, it was freaking brutal. I was also on a message board I’ve been frequenting for almost ten years now that have a lot of East Coast liberals on it and I remember one of them (a programmer, so more logical than most of them I guess) agonizing about how bad Edwards was getting beaten down. It was the most one-sided thing I’ve ever seen, it was like David and Goliath only David left his sling under his bed at home.
And then the commentators came on right after it ended and declared Edwards the clear winner. It was beyond belief, it was like watching a 12 round match where one guy didn’t even land a punch while getting beaten half to death, win by unanimous decision. It was so brazen. How low does your IQ have to be to fail to see it? I think the answer is “exceedingly low” in 2004 and is down to “mentally handicapped” now. You truly would have to either be an unmedicated nutcase or a total retard at this point not to see that the media is in the tank.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 7:50 am 82Exactly David. When Mac did look at Zeus it was with a WTF are you talking about look and tone. It was over the Iran thing. You mean to tell me you would…and Mac let him have it. Mac has no problem letting people know exactly what he thinks….not one problem. If the bimbos who adore Zeus are feeling bad because Mac was so aggressive…GET USED TO IT SKANK…this is a debate. Mac is moving forwards always was forwards.
Chris E.on 27 Sep 2008 at 7:53 am 83Does anyone else get the gut wrenching inkling from some of these post debate polls (skewed though they might be) and such, that it might be possible, however inconceivable, that we live in a country that could elect a man like Barack Obama president?
I thought we were past this Carter bullshit.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:16 am 84Chris E. Plain english please. OK?
If your asking are some polls skewed yes. Are we going to elect asshole scumbag commie jerk? Dunno, probably not. OK? What do you want me to do? Go and call the people I know and have them tell me the fing sky is falling when they know its not? What do you want me or anyone else who has people in the know to tell you Chris? WHAT?
I can tell you this: Stop looking at the MSM polls. You know they are skewed you said so yourself. So what to do? Stop going to CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS. Why let them rule your thoughts? We all know what they are saying. All you have to do is go to Drudge look at his headlines to get an idea. Do these people who run these organizations deserve to be allowed to take up any space in your life? Make you worry? Get you convinced that Obama is inevitable? No. Why because its just one lie after another. Propaganda. If you do go there you need to remind yourself a kernal of truth per story. Thats it. Just enough for these jerks to hide behind. Let their lies slide off of you like water off a ducks back. Me, I never even waste my lap top space. I have no time for Teen Wolf Blitzer, the femmy Anderson Cooper, the vulgar Katie Couric, that brown shirt ass Olberman and that loudmouthed loser Chris Matthews. I have no time for Andrea Mitchell or Charlie Gibson. Arrogant asses all.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:20 am 85OK why isn’t my last post showing?
wfon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:25 am 86Chris E, I sometimes hear comments from supposed independents or moderate Republicans along the lines of “our country can survive four years of Obama” (as if that is a reason to vote for him). I guess that´s the media-instilled herd mentality making a vote for BHO the default position for the weak-minded.
All I say to them is that his judges, his nationalized health care monster (regulated by the same people who just ran our financial system into the ground) and the consequences of his foreign and defense policy will be with us for the rest of our lives. And who can want that?
They say that in a democracy people get what they deserve and they get it good and hard.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:30 am 87Chris E
The ABC DC Post Poll showed that the polls can be skewed. Do you get that tehse people are trying to take you out of the game? Get into your head. Make you believe their lies? These people are making Joseph Goebbels look positively honest. Stop going to ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC etc unless you remember this: A kernel of truth per story. Just enough for them to hide behind. Remember most people now believe the news is skewed to help Obama. You need to just do what I do: Go to Drudge look at his headlines. It will give you an idea of what these fascists are saying then go on your merry way. I honestly don’t get why anyone gives creedence to these people at all. Just Cowboy up there dude..
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:32 am 88Um and about MODERATES WF….which “moderates” would you be referring to. No Republican, conservative or even independent I know or have conversed with since Palin was named as VEEP nominee is going to vote for Obama. And if there are its a very small number. Again stop for Christs sake STOP going to CNN. PLEASE! THey are trying to skull f you all and it looks to me they are doing a good job.
Growltigeron 27 Sep 2008 at 8:34 am 89I know a little about national health care.
In Canada, those who can afford to pay out of pocket travel to the US for operations and treatment that if they waited en queue in the Canadian system, they might die. I believe it got so bad that the Canadian Gov. was paying for some to have chemotherapy in the USA.
Australia: I have a friend whose brother had an MI in Perth. He lives in Brisbane. The Australian Health system paid to fly him privately back to the Gold Coast, evaluated him and then put him on a 3 month waiting list. He was rich enough, however, to pay out of pocket and got the operation.
Austria: I have a friend whose mother utilizes the Austrian Health Care system. In her eighties, she had to board a train, ride for hours to her assigned doctor, see the doctor, then board the train and ride home again. (She lived in a small town). When she went into the hospital, my friend had to fly to Austria to be with her. She claimed if she hadn’t been there to feed her mother, she’d have starved as the nurses just plop the tray down.
England has “Harley Street Physicians” to take care of the privileged so they don’t have to be on the National Health Service. I know of one case where a patient on NHS suffered a ruptured aneurysm — a flaming emergency in the USA. The doctor said they’d do him “directly after lunch”. Don’t know if
the patient was still around “directly after lunch”.
If this is what you want for yourself and your family, by all means vote for Obama. You can bet you won’t run into him or his family in the waiting room.
We need health care fixed, but socializing it is not the answer.
Shawn Streeton 27 Sep 2008 at 8:37 am 90“our country can survive four years of Obama”
And to those people I say it is also possible to survive being run over by a tractor trailer but why take the chance?
Marton 27 Sep 2008 at 8:41 am 91It seems to me that this debate was just an appetizer for the remaining debates, what with the fact that there’s a current financial crisis “situation” to deal with that has yet to be resolved. It also seems to me that while Obama was on his “A game” and didn’t flub his rehearsed lines, McCain was on his “B” or “C” game, and was probably not as calm, relaxed and prepared as ideally he should be due to all the creative and diplomatic energy he exerted in going back to Washington, making all the phone-calls, doing all the confrontational meetings and all the rest of the politicking, as opposed to Obama who just followed him back to the Capitol and had nothing to say about the matter other than rote talking points. I think McCain won by a decent margin on some subconscious, osmosis level. Obama is difficult to listen to for any length of time. He really is his own worst enemy on that score. He really only wins the “voice-over” voice contest with his deep voice and delivery.
I hope McCain’s writers are going to come up with an array of zingers for the remaining debates as there weren’t enough in this first debate. He should have slaughtered Obama, not just won by a small margin.
ShawnSon 27 Sep 2008 at 8:41 am 92Stephanie,
This isn’t about not shooting your wad…this is a more endemic problem I’ve seen for at least the last ten or fifteen years or so. Republicans simply don’t fight fire with fire. They remain passive and silent in the face of the most vicious smears and lies. I hope you’re right, and we see a raft of Rezko/Wright/Ayers/ACORN ads come October.
KitS,
Taking credit for a warning is all well and good, but why you would not take that a step further and name the names of those who prevented McCain from taking action–one of whom was standing next to him–was simply a bad decision. Surely, if the tables were turned, Obama would have rode it for the entire debate. That’s the source of my frustration and part of the larger point that I’m trying to make.
Chris E.on 27 Sep 2008 at 8:43 am 93Oh, don’t get me wrong, I know the validity of polls and partisanship. I have a degree in political science, so I went through 4+ years of this with wall to wall lefty professors spouting off all the evidence they could ever wish actually existed.
But the fact of the matter is that there is a very real chance that Obama could be president, putting aside whatever Bradley effect there may be (or that I’m crossing my fingers for). I still think Mccain is doing better than the polls than many of the pundits (including ours) say he is. But anything less than a Mondale level thrashing on Nov. 4th is a sad commentary on society.
If Obama wins… well, that’s just downright depressing. Our country can survive him because we can survive anything. We had 4 terms of FDR, and we’re still going strong, so 4 years of Obama isn’t going to kill us. It’ll just mean there’ll be a perplexing spike in alcohol sales in my immediate vicinity.
Plissken79on 27 Sep 2008 at 8:47 am 94Given the fact McCain should be losing by a wide margin due to the variety of factors (the economy, when the population always blames the party in power, Bush’s popularity, etc) which should be extremely greatful McCain is almost in the margin of error. The election is still more than a month away and there is a great deal of campaigning to do (and 527 ads to run).
McCain won this debate, not an annihilation but a clear victory. Do not pay attention to to immediate post-debate focus groups or polls, they are nearly always unreliable. Let’s wait and see the fallout over the next week
Chris E.on 27 Sep 2008 at 8:54 am 95This is one of my problems with the punditry claiming the debate as a tie, or even Obama win. Pundits are supposed to know better. This was an extraordinarily inside baseball type of debate, and Mccain clearly had control of the facts. Most every pundit scoring it as a tie is trying to intuit just what the people who don’t know what the two men were talking about at any given time were thinking. Do we really pay pundits to try and think other people’s thoughts? I don’t want Peter Gammons telling me if he thinks that Joe Independent thinks the Dodgers can win. I want to know if he thinks they can win (or, in this analogy, won).
In other words, judge it on the merits. Not what the ignorant vote might have thought the merits may have been.
wfon 27 Sep 2008 at 9:00 am 96Stephanie, these were opinions on the web and yes, those are cheap. I was just wondering about the thought processes of some people! Don´t worry, I don´t watch CNN if I can avoid it. I don´t watch much tv at all. If there´s a good show, I buy or rent it.
Re: your mentioning Buford at Gettysburg: The Killer Angels is one fine novel. I had the audiobook in my car until the tape fell apart.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 9:01 am 97Listen very carefull of what I am about to say when I went to DC I was in the middle of the Bush 2000 election debacle. I never had a doubt then. I had no doubts in 2004 and I don’t know. I am far more confident with this than I was then. Not one person I have contacts with feels insecure or afraid. They haven’t divulged more than a hey no worries. And these people are not going to bs me.
As far as shooting your wad too soon, that rule SHAWN is iron. Its called strategery…..you plot things out carefully. Its a battle plan. Get Obie on the Defensive and keep him there. Now Sara will go in and debate Biden. She should do well.
Don’t go to the MSM anymore. And if you do remember a thimble of truth per story so they can cover their asses. Its all just a Ratherized version of the truth. If you know that then you are OK. Now Cowboy Up! We are GOING TO WIN THIS THING!
David123456on 27 Sep 2008 at 9:39 am 98>>>Now Sara will go in and debate Biden. She should do well.
Sarah do well? You’ve got to be kidding me. She’s CRINGE INDUCING when she’s off script. I’ve never seen a more PATHETIC performance, EVER, than watching Palin off script. I, me, a nobody, could answer questions better than Palin does. This ticket is already doomed as far as I’m concerned, and it’s because of Palin at the next debate. I am crossing my fingers, PRAYING, America isn’t watching on that day, or we’re SCREWED.
rrpjron 27 Sep 2008 at 9:53 am 99David123456, Kato and ShaunS –dead on.
I saw Rudy Guiliani yesterday. He skewered Obama more effectively in three minutes than McCain did in 90, or ever will. Guiliani and Gingrich remain the last politicians alive who deeply understand leftism and can form a response to it. Bush is hopeless on the subject and his mush-mouthed Panglossian ineffectuality has put us where we are.
The puzzled refrain and deathess hope always heard about McCain — “why didn’t he say this or that when he had the chance, the perfect opportunity? But next time he’ll get it!” I wonder. McCain is the best and worst candidate possible for conservatives right now, and we’ll just have to suffer the paradox. He combines a matchless record and survivor’s toughness with a weird Marquis of Queensbury resistance to the groin kick so desperately needed against the sniveling, crypto-Marxist parvenu that is Barack Obama.
Obama doesn’t belong on the same stage with John McCain. He certainly shouldn’t leave it standing. But somehow he does. History has its reasons, I guess.
Ginaon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:18 am 100Oh, give it a rest with all the “Palin is awful!” crap. She’s the same person she always was, and she’s going to do just fine in the debate. You watch.
My gosh, a couple of average interviews and all of a sudden everyone’s whining that the sky is falling. Palin’s not the one who needs to grow a pair around here. (Actually, it’s pretty funny when you consider that Steph and I are the ones standing up for her against all the cowering men. So much for whiskey’s misogynistic little theories.)
How come Biden doesn’t get all this bilge every time he accuses an innocent man of drunk driving, or makes up stories about being shot at, or any of the other NINE BILLION gaffes he’s made? Because he’s a Washington insider? As our candidate would say, “Oh, PLEASE.”
Now go toughen up, or it’s going to be a pain in the neck to watch the debate with you guys, and we women will have to go elsewhere.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:19 am 101RR were you drinking the leftist koolaid? WHat the feck were you watching. You have no clue about what you saw. Mac ripped Obama up and down. But apparently dunno what? What the hell do you want? Like I said RR Reagan is dead. Get it? He cannot come down and possess our candidate to make him be everything YOU or any of the other wild eyed black doom and gloomers want him to be. Mac did just fine. Now please this shitty attitude stops. Get it? Understand? What part of your full of it do you not understand? WHAT?
Bush could have skewered Gore several times…there were things that Reagan didn’t do…but I guess certain “conservatives” can’t seem to remember their Presidential debate historys.
I honestly think some these so called black doom and gloomers are not what they say they are. I really do. Why? Because I haven’t heard anotehr conservative talk this way.
Kiton 27 Sep 2008 at 10:20 am 102I loved McCain’s smirk.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:24 am 103David look if you don’t like her fine….she doesn’t owe a fing thing. She is fine. Get it? A average interview and she is cringe inducing? David sweetheart your faith or huge lack there of is cringe inducing. Your making me wonder about you now to. In fact teh words cringe inducing and you are basically the perfect match. Cowboy the feck up. Get it? Live it. Learn it.
wfon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:39 am 104Let´s not forget: Everyone agrees Bush is a particularly bad speaker, but he is in the White House and Gore and Kerry are not. His basic decency shines through. It may not sound plausible, but most people are not thinking about the issues all day long. What impresses most people may not be what impresses you or me or the average pundit.
I love Giuliani and Gingrich, they are great at debate and substantial intellectuals, but does that mean the electorate can relate to them? I´m not so sure. Joe Biden, for all his “experience” has rarely been right about anything and cuts a pitiful figure - no two ways about it. Only a senator with a safe seat could get away with it.
Every debate in every election has been pure torture for me because I always want to join in. “Make this point! Why don´t you say that? Attack here!” I always get the feeling that I could make a better argument than the guy talking. I get it with Palin, too. But here´s the deal:
McCain chose Palin for her character and what she had done in Alaska, not for her ability to regurgitate jargon (which can be acquired by anybody over time). Yes, she is not yet sufficiently briefed on all the talking points and she has a lot to learn. Yes, she could crash - but the odds are she will not. Unless you believe that only political “lifers” should play a role in Washington, some risk was always part of the deal.
David123456on 27 Sep 2008 at 10:48 am 105>>>Let´s not forget: Everyone agrees Bush is a particularly bad speaker
But that’s the problem, you see. Even though Bush was a bad speaker, HE HAD THE IDEAS, THE BASIC KNOWLEDGE, which bubble their way to the surface despite his marble mouth.
Sarah Palin is the EXACT OPPOSITE. While she is arguably a GREAT SPEAKER, she is nevertheless so lacking in substance that even her verbal eloquence can’t save her. Feel me?
This isn’t a “speaking problem” as with Bush, it’s a KNOWLEDGE PROBLEM. Capish?
Plissken79on 27 Sep 2008 at 10:50 am 106Frankly, I think that is one of Palin’s best strengths as a non-traditional political leader, the fact she is not a Washington insider. We have FAR too many career politicians on both sides of the aisle, and too many beltway conservative pundits who have a problem accepting someone who is not a career insider.
I think Sarah Palin will do fine in the debate. The interview in Couric was average, but there will be many more to come. As K-Lo on National Review online said, just let Sarah be Sarah!
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:51 am 107I hope someone gets a good screen capture of Zeus’ first glar at Mac. God it would be priceless to have. And I also want to know if he had someone coaching him in the audience because he kept waving and looking out at someone. That seems pretty much bullshit to me.
Plissken79on 27 Sep 2008 at 10:53 am 108David, enough with the “Palin is stupid” arguments. You are basing this one-two interviews at most, not her very successful political career. Just like our enemies on the left, “conservatives” who do not like a particular Republican politician who resort to the “they are stupid” remarks are only demonstrating their own intellectual inadequacy
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 10:57 am 109No David because you sound like fing David Axelrod. Get me? Capish? VERSTEHEN SIE MEIN HERR? Take your carping, whining and moaning and stick it. Lack of knowlegde. Tell me oh knowitall of everything WTF do you want? If Mac had chosen anyone you bloody well know dearheart he wouldn’t be in this race. GET IT? VERSTEHEN SIE MEIN HERR? Let Sara be who she is because your starting to sound a real leftwing shill DAVID!
Sara Palin could gut you before you would even notice in a debate. Who the hell says you or any of the MEN here who are now crying like girls could even keep up with her in a debate over a hockey game? Not one of you fearless warriors of bs could come close to her. I have no doubts she will run Biden ragged. Biden will say something so stupid. Come off longwinded and silly and she will be well coached.
Go cry on someone elses shoulder cry baby.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:01 am 110And a reminder of certain FACTS! Giuliani couldn’t get elected right now. Gingrich for all of his knowledge would be burned at the stake. PEOPLE LIKE SARA! Thats what gets people elected, ultimately. THEY LIKE HER! They liked W and they LOVED Reagan. Mac is likeable to. Obama comes off as a cold arrogant snob and Biden comes off as a total tool. A special boy in dire need of a leash and a crash helmet.
rrpjron 27 Sep 2008 at 11:02 am 111Points well taken, wf.
I admit, after eight years of George Bush my tolerance for masochism is shot. I long for the avenger.
Still, it is not a facility with jargon or talking points I care about with Palin. Rather, it is that she can find that balance of optimism and edginess that defines not only leadership but dignity in the face of character assassination. So far she’s all smile and no bite. That just won’t do.
David123456on 27 Sep 2008 at 11:05 am 112LOL. God love you, Stephanie. You have no idea how much I want you to be right.
wfon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:12 am 113Yes, get it. Bush had ideas and knowledge, but you wouldn´t know it from many of his performances. He still beat Gore the uber-wonk. My point is, we may have no idea why the electorate relates to Palin, but she is very relatable. Especially compared to Joe Biden. Personally, I´d vote for her no matter how she does in the debates. You might say that I´m in the tank. She has the right instincts and the details can be filled in later. It´s not how I would ideally like things to be, but there it is.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:17 am 114Another thing is: No one except for some pointy headed leftwing ass wants their president to have a 180 IQ…..we want them to do three things: Understand the problem, bring people in they TRUST to fix the problem (administrative ability is KEY), and to be a leader. To have a vision for where they want the country to go and then tell us in our speak where they want to take us. Palin does these things. Mac does these things……
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:20 am 115And I still never saw Obama once answer Lehrer’s question about what he would change from his “programs” since we have the cash from the bailout to consider. What I loved was Mac not giving up lowering taxes. LOVED THAT! He stuck to his GUNS!
Glennon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:20 am 116I agree with Shawn, and Chris got it right too - McCain is running his campaign as if he was leading by a solid margin (strategy: “do no harm”) and that is not the case. He has to shake things up to win. The next debates, he needs to pretend he is Gingrich or Guilianni.
Someone on this blog said earlier that undecided voters are undecided because they do not understand the issues, and Obama exploits this by confusing the issues and preventing the undecideds from choosing Obama. As I’ve been saying, most undecideds are “nonpolitical” (my way of saying that they do not want to take the time and trouble to learn about the issues in depth and take positions). Obama’s how-to-win theory is that if he can only prevent these people from understanding the issues before Nov 4, most of them will vote Dem on simplistic grounds such as, “it’s time for a change, the Republicans have had the White House too long, we’re headed in the wrong direction.”
I fear they are correct.
Why bother to say this, since it will only enrage Steph, Jack and a? Part of the problem is that we Republicans have been hiding our heads in the sand, listening only to people we agree with, telling others only what they want to hear. This is starting to feel like October 2006. Remember that? Republicans were saying,
“This country is basically conservative. The Dems always say that everyone agrees with them, but the truth is Americans hate liberals. Therefore, there is no possible way they can win a majority on congress. No way, forgetaboutit. Anyone who says otherwise is a defeatist and they will be proven wrong again.”
After election day 2006, when the dust settled and the Dems stopped giggling, all we could say was, “WHAT??? How could this POSSIBLY have happened . . . ? Well, it doesn’t matter. Everyone still agrees with us, so THERE!”
But it does matter. The nonpolitical undecideds who elected a Democrat majority to congress two years ago did not vote on the grounds that they are liberals. They voted on the same feeling that Obama hopes to exploit this year: “I don’t understand the details, but I want to say one thing: throw the bastards out.”
Shawn Streeton 27 Sep 2008 at 11:43 am 117I think the main reason the GOP got trounced in 2006 was because they stopped being Republicans and tried to look like Dems. The voters aren’t stupid. Why get a fake Dem when you can get real ones at the same price? A lot of conservatives stayed home in 06. They were fed up with the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). Many of us saw the landslide coming months before it happened.
While I honestly think McCain’s history of going against the establishment in the party will help him. Even though I don’t agree with him on a lot of issues, this is attractive to me. Same with Palin. I want a leader who is not afraid to step on toes.
And speaking of Palin, good grief I’ve never seen such a swift change in attitude. She was Reagan in a miniskirt a few weeks ago and now she’s an anchor weighing McCain down. This attitude reminds of a football game in which the underdog is going against the defending champs. The underdogs start moving the ball and the crowd goes nuts but the first incomplete pass we start yelling “get the bum out of the game.” Good lord people, man up, get back to the line of scrimage and shove the ball back down their throats again! She’ll be fine.
Those of you thinking McCain did poorly in the debate because he didn’t say this and that and the other thing, how many of you have been in a real political debate? Well I have and let me say it is very easy to play Monday morning quarterback. I actually made the person I was debating cry and I still wish I had said other things that would’ve made it better. (I am proud that I made the liberal cry though)
Bottom line for me and I think for many Americans is this: If the Dems don’t like McCain and many Republicans don’t like him that means he’s probably the best man for the job.
GMKon 27 Sep 2008 at 11:51 am 118What if the political masochism of past years had a point? I always have thought it had a point. I figured the point was October, 2008, when they could unload on the Democrats like it’s Judgement Day.
I’ll put it another way: if they DON’T do that in October, as in exploit the enormous larder of possibilities available to them to attack the Democrats, then I’ll lose all respect for them. If they don’t put ads of Pelosi and Reid braying about the un-winability of the Iraq war, declaring “no drilling,” if they don’t run ads that tell people the Dems caused the bubble by forcing fannie to write bad loans (nobody will have any trouble believing that)… man, where to start? They’ve gone so completely insane since late 2003 that one could just go on and on. And I’ve always thought that giving them enough rope to hang themselves was what this was about all along. I’ll find out if I’m right in October. I can’t imagine I’m wrong, because it’s a pretty obvious opportunity and a lot is on the line.
Audietooon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:05 pm 119I am not up to reading all these posts right now but I would like to put out a thought for consideration re: Sarah. I think one thing that is happening to her right now is she is appalled and incredulous at the unbridled intensity of the hatred that is being leveled at her by MSM, (Globe and the National Enquirer have had sleazy depictions of her sex life and her children in the last two weeks) and the Democratic politicians who she probably thought would treat her with a minimum of common decency. She has nothing in her background to prepare her for this kind of onslaught. The same thing, I believe, happened to W, and we stay at home in our comfy envronments never stop to consider what this hatred would do on a personal level to someone who had never before experienced it or done anything to deserve it. We, most of us, are not required to deal with hateful hostility everyday and everywhere we go. Why,DH and the rest of you can’t you apend your bile on the people who are beating her to death (to use Eric Sayets example) and give her more encouragement and even, if you can some sympathy.
Scotton 27 Sep 2008 at 12:06 pm 120David, you’re talking out of your arse. What is holding Palin back in addition to being rightfully paranoid that the media is out to get her is the fact that she has no experience in being an advocate for another politician’s positions. Even a seasoned person on this stage would struggle with having to fight the misperceptions about herself fostered by the media and at the same time have to sell herself based on positions which are not her own necessarily. If she had the free reign to be a buffoon as Biden is and mix and match his own beliefs with those of the Obama campaign she would be more compelling. But her task is much more complex than that. And prior to the debate it is rather stupid to think you have enough evidence for your assertions.
Mighty Skipon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:06 pm 121I think McCain did very well. No knockout punch but it is only in fantasy anyone can really believe Obama is so stupid he’d leave himself open for one. I’m actually feeling pretty good on McCain’s chances; I did bet a dollar on it.
Landside though? No way.
As for the economic mess and why didn’t McCain leap onto Obama about it, that was because it would take him an hour to adequately explain and untangle the web of the situation. Fannie, Freddie, Goldman, Lehman and so forth and so on are so huge, you cannot throw a rock without hitting someone involved in those companies. He’d have to have a lot of time to counter the inevitable tactic to switch blame on him (and Republicans) which debates just do not allow for. If I were him, I’d have a town-hall on economics where he could just take some time to explain it all, leading up to the economic debate so he’d have a lot of the groundwork laid out.
As for the larger question of why McCain doesn’t attack Obama without mercy, like it or not I think that is just the campaign strategy he has chosen. It seems McCain feels that if he plays nice, is seen as a moderate, someone who can get things done as opposed to the insipid promises of change and hope, it will resonate with the “nonpolitical” (good term Glenn). Not sure if I agree with it, but that is what we are stuck with.
a. acaciaon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:19 pm 122Obama has definitely improved his debate skills. Compared to his wishy-washy, stuttering performance against Alan Keyes four years ago - when Keyes basically tore him a new one (Keyes eventually lost the IL senate race only because he was an “outsider”) - this was night and day. Obama stayed on point: relentlessly portraying McCain as a Bush cronie, hammering him on his Iraq policy, and emphasizing the need for “change.” Obama’s style is suited for this format, where he can stand there and lecture the crowd/audience as if he’s in a college symposium. And that’s one of the problems I have with him - looks and sounds very slick and polished and aloof. I don’t know how this comes across for other viewers, maybe they appreciate it. To me it was all style and little substance. Others might be easily mesmerized by the smoke and mirrors; lets hope these people don’t show up at the polls.
I couldn’t wait for McCain to counter Obama’s meme that all the current market turmoil is the result of “this adminsitration’s policies of the last eight years.” I was on the edge of my seat waiting for McCain to counter this garbage with how the Democrats deregulation of lending :coughBarnyFrank: started the ball rolling. But McCain left his cards on the table here. I was stunned. Missed opportunity that allowed the libs to once again float their “narrative” and paint the GOP as villains.
McCain bolstered his control of Nat’l Security with the Iraq/Iran issues, where Obama seems totally at sea. Weak and naive, to say the least. McCain can barely contain his disgust at Obama’s plan to hold hands and sing Kumbaye with the Iranian thug. Being emotionally engaged WORKS! It shows McCain takes this issue seriously, and knows what’s at stake. Same goes for Eastern Europe - McCain didn’t just *name-drop* but convinced that Yushchenko and Saakashvili were part of his inner circle. I get the sense that McCain can deal with the problem the second he steps into the Oval Office, whereas Obama will need on-the-job training.
Still, this wasn’t a knockout. If I had to make a call, I’d say McCain won by narrow decision.
Supramom2000on 27 Sep 2008 at 12:32 pm 123I think what people on this blog (who are conservatives) are looking for is a leader of a movement. Like Reagan. Steph, I understand that we need to ignore polls, CNN, etc. I think we all do except where it pops up on our homepages, etc. But every single caller into Rush’s show on Friday, obviously before the debates, was INFURIATED! And they were all women. They wanted to know why Boehner and the House Repubs and McCain were not calling a press conference to set the record straight on that meeting at the White House yesterday and why Pelosi and Reid and Obama were being allowed to FLAT OUT lie about what happened.
In my opinion, that part is what caused McCain to not even look at Obama during the debate. Someone said earlier that he would have to come across the podium and beat the sh*t out of him if he looked at him. I totally agree. The contained anger, rage and resentment were patently obvious. McCain wants to throttle Obama because he is a spineless, clueless, cowardly LIAR.
Anyway, as someone else pointed out, it is the cumulative effect of 8 years of Bush/Repub bashing that is affecting our morale. We need to feel that there have been a few victories, a few knockouts to have some validation. Just like my husband took on some a$$hat at a football game who talked trash to me, we want our leader, our chosen commander-in-chief to take on the injustices and complete moral abyss that the Dems have become. We want a leader!!
And this in no way changes our vote for McCain/Palin or even changes our allegiance. It is simply a fact that people want to feel validated and our party has lacked a leader for far too long.
Just my 2 cents.
a. acaciaon 27 Sep 2008 at 12:43 pm 124Ah yes, it seems that Stephanie’s testosterone levels are spiking sky high again. There she is, whipping herself into a frenzy as she tries to prod EVERYONE along the party line. No doubt all the lib trolls are giddy with delight as they watch a so-called “conservative” make a complete and utter fool of herself…again.
Supramom2000on 27 Sep 2008 at 1:00 pm 125Well, I wrote a long post - it disappeared!! Into the ether.
Anyway, I think the biggest problem for all of us conservatives, is that we are looking for a bit of validation. Everyone needs that in a relationship. And we look at our party representing us in DC as a relationship. We elect them and expect them to epitomize and personify our belief system.
No one is saying that the debate will change their party identity or who they vote for. They are saying that for 8 years, we have not had a leader and we want one.
Every single caller into Rush’s show yesterday was SCREAMING mad that neither Boehner or McCain or anyone else from the House Repubs called a press conference and exposed Pelosi’s, Reid’s and Obama’s lies. They were allowed to BLATANTLY lie to the American people unchallenged - again!!!
The complete disaster of that White House meeting and the blame game of Obama surrogates is, in my opinion, what made McCain not able to look at Obama. As someone earlier stated, he did want to come across that podium and beat the sh*t out of him. And, like my husband recently did at a football game to a man who talked trash to me, we all wanted him to take him on directly.
Stephanie, I don’t think any of us watch CNN or read those polls (except when they flash across our homepages), we just simply want some validation. We want a leader. We will still vote for McCain because he inspires loyalty and trust. But he does not inspire a deeper emotion except when he talks about his days as a POW. I really think those days are what shaped how he does deal with the hatred, lies and animosity from the left. He learned to never let anything show, and to suppress any deep emotions. Fighting back got him nowhere except solitary.
Again, that is what all fed into us being so excited about Sarah Palin. She did the fighting back, She handed out the beatings. We simply want to see a “leader of a movement” (Rush’s words) validate us.
Just my two cents.
whiskeyon 27 Sep 2008 at 1:48 pm 126It will be interesting to see how the polls move after this debate.
Ginaon 27 Sep 2008 at 2:28 pm 127“Every single caller into Rush’s show yesterday was SCREAMING mad that neither Boehner or McCain or anyone else from the House Repubs called a press conference and exposed Pelosi’s, Reid’s and Obama’s lies. They were allowed to BLATANTLY lie to the American people unchallenged - again!!!”
You know why I think that is? Because every time the Republicans try to challenge the other side’s lies, we’re painted as whiny, hypocritical, and far worse liars than they are. That’s just a fact. Don’t you remember how the left was allowed to tell absolutely filthy lies about Palin and her family, but every time anyone on our side tried to respond, it was “Whine whine whine, poor widdle Sawah, she just can’t take the heat.”
Do you wonder why the Republicans don’t even want to bother any more? How can we win any such battle when they’ve got the mainstream press on their side enthusiastically helping them spin away?
a. acaciaon 27 Sep 2008 at 2:36 pm 128Hey Whiskey, since you’re a college football fan I just thought you’d wanna know, halftime of the Notre Dame Purdue game - 14:14.
Also a reminder for all the viewers that Sunday 10 PM on CBS marks the return of The Unit. Looking forward to it.
abeon 27 Sep 2008 at 3:12 pm 129lol @ post 124
Growltigeron 27 Sep 2008 at 3:32 pm 130When McCain got the nomination, I knew he could take a punch. What I wondered was whether he could throw one.
I’m not sure he can. He had multiple opportunities to skewer
Obama. He had a national audience without the media filter. He should have mentioned the “earmarks” for ACORN the Dems put in the bailout then reminded the public that many ACORN activists are under indictment for voter fraud and that the Obamessiah was once connected to them, as he is to Ayers and Reverend Wright.
My spouse and I didn’t think McCain did as well as the pundits. He saves his posterior at the end with his ending comment.
By the way, Obama, the illegals sneaking across our border by the millions probably don’t have the distaste for America you seem to have.
Second by the way, Obama — Stop posturing, squirming, wiggling, butting in, and, in general, behaving like the spoiled brat you are.
So far as Sarah Palin goes, she can’t win for losing. The Left are terrified of her for some reason, as evidenced by the trolls posting here. Get a grip, guys. McCain one-upped your Messiah who should have chosen Hillary. The reason he didn’t? Everyone says it was because he didn’t want Bill in the WH. I think it’s because he’s a glib, programmed empty suit - not stupid but no rocket scientist either. He didn’t want Hillary around because she’s smarter.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 3:44 pm 131Acacia is apparently threatened by women with an opinion which is the mark of a man with alot of insecurity. Hmmm…..interesting little issue you have their Acacia. What did I do to you personally that bothers you so much? Making a fool of myself? In what way?
As for Abe……get the hole in the blow up doll girl friend of yours fixed so we aren’t having to deal with your foul presence.
wanketteon 27 Sep 2008 at 4:32 pm 132All of youse, back off Stephanie.
The rest of you — check out Greg Gutfeld’s drunk blogging of the debate at www.dailygut.com . Brilliant and hilarious, as usual.
abeon 27 Sep 2008 at 4:44 pm 133Stephanie, I ask you again–why do you always hide behind the fact that you’re a woman every time someone here reciprocates your nastiness?
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 4:50 pm 134Oh Abe baby you make me weak with nausea….Just seeing your name makes me feel like someone gave me some bad shell fish. I mean only a braniac like you would have to be told that I am merely pointing out a problem that certain guys have that well, you also hav,e that conservative men don’t have. You know conservative men really wouldn’t want to be considered as low to the ground as a total loser like you…..
Now Abe your blow up doll Charlene is calling….please rush to her arms skid marks boy….
John Kelly Austin tx Personal Traineron 27 Sep 2008 at 5:10 pm 135Sarah will wipe the floor with Lunch Pail Joe. Thanks for posting the video.
Chris E.on 27 Sep 2008 at 5:34 pm 136Gina, I actually had that same thought. Republicans have developed something akin to a conditioned response… which, in this case, is the lack of one. If you’re just going to get beat every time you open your mouth, then the only course of action is to shut up.
I sometimes wonder if Mccain specifically has become too used to the press throwing his punches for him, as they’ve been more than willing to do in the past. Even when he acknowledges the press’s duplicity in getting Obama elected, as happened recently, they’re portrayed as whiners. Reagan could go straight to the people primarily because he built himself an audience. The press isn’t letting any Republican through that loop-hole again.
Stephanieon 27 Sep 2008 at 5:39 pm 137They let Sara Palin in. She looked right into that Camera and said it straight. Now people can whine about her interviews. They are lukewarm big friggen deal. I want my VEEP to be a hard ass not a fluffy conversationalist for Katie Couric.
abeon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:00 pm 138Stephanie–anytime any “man” here calls you out on your crap you hide behind your “womanhood,” as if finding you obnoxious and unpleasant is inseparable from misogyny. God help us if you were representative of all women. I really wonder what the other conservative men here think about your tendency to essentially label anyone who calls you out on your shit as a woman-hater. Their silence is like that of family who don’t want to criticize a retarded member.
Chris E.on 27 Sep 2008 at 6:00 pm 139About 30 million people watched the debate last night. The amount of true undecideds actually watching the debate, and who are going to vote based on something slightly deeper than whim (i.e. the only people you can truly target), is going to be marginal at best. The rest of these undecideds are perfectly willing to gather their news through a broken filtration system consisting of news media, bad punditry, and mock punditry like Colbert. So when ‘big media’ presents the debate as a tie, as it really wasn’t, it matters.
Long story short, you can’t talk directly to a people who don’t care enough to listen.
Avery Bullardon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:01 pm 140Stephanie, I ask you again–why do you always hide behind the fact that you’re a woman every time someone here reciprocates your nastiness?
Because the dumbing down of the GOP under George Bush has led to even Republicans arguing like they are left wingers. Dirty Harry does it all the time when he accuses the Left of homophobia, anti-Semitism, and/or misogyny. Stephanie utilizes the term ’sexist’ to shut up her more learned opponents because she, like most Republicans these days, is essentially a RINO cultural Marxist. Getting leftist Republicans like Jon McCain into office is an end in itself. Apparently ideas that run counter to the Marxist zeitgeist are for wimps only.
Supramom2000on 27 Sep 2008 at 6:11 pm 141Believe me, I get all that. That’s why I come here and listen to Rush and volunteer at the McCain/Palin Victory HQ and on 2 other campaigns. To know that there are others who feel as I do. But I still go back to the need for validation. At some point, you have to feel that you are listened to and understood.
Until the MSM took over to such a hugely controlling extent, it was not that important. Now, it seems that wherever you turn, even if you NEVER watch CNN, MSNBC, etc., it is hitting you in the face. Even Fox News in its news format or in any format other than Hannity & Colmes, does not seem to bring up who is tied to this financial mess and what started it. The closest I’ve seen is O’Reilly calling Obama on his socialism.
Growltigeron 27 Sep 2008 at 6:14 pm 142I don’t think there are many if any “undecideds”. They just aren’t telling nosy pollsters who they’re voting for. That’s their right. I wish EVERYONE, including George W. Bush would tell pollsters they’re “undecided”…sort of like the Danish king in WWII when the Nazis ordered all Danish Jews to wear yellow armbands, riding out on his morning ride wearing a yellow armband. We can stop the pollsters if every one of us becomes “undecided” except in the voting booth, then say “none of your business” to the exit pollsters as we leave.
a. acaciaon 27 Sep 2008 at 6:43 pm 143I really wonder what the other conservative men here think about your tendency to essentially label anyone who calls you out on your shit as a woman-hater.
It’s pretty obvious, isn’t it? She hides behind her sex, playing the poor, oppressed, downtrodden little “harrassment” victim, whenever it conveniently suits her. When necessary, she’s everything she hates and accuses others of being - whinny, pissy, cry-baby - and then in the space of two lines morphs right back into the familiar shrill little harpy bursting with personality disorders.
Anyway, what are you complaining about, abe? All you liberal trolls out there: isn’t Stephanie the gift that keeps on giving, the Standard Bearer for all your liberal phobias about how Conservatives are “intollerant” and “stupid”? I mean for God’s sake, what other way could you possibly validate your pet theories, abe, without Item #1: Stephanie?
wfon 28 Sep 2008 at 1:45 am 144isn´t it sad that acacia and Supramom and others here have a better grip on how to attack Democrats than many Republicans?
“couldn’t wait for McCain to counter Obama’s meme that all the current market turmoil is the result of “this adminsitration’s policies of the last eight years.” I was on the edge of my seat waiting for McCain to counter this garbage with how the Democrats deregulation of lending :coughBarneyFrank: started the ball rolling. But McCain left his cards on the table here. I was stunned. Missed opportunity that allowed the libs to once again float their “narrative” and paint the GOP as villains.”
That´s the story of the last couple of years.