Support NeoGAF

[Fatalah]

I took a walk around the block and spotted a deteriorating Hillary sticker on a parked bicycle. Man, does that feel long long ago.

 

[polyh3dron]

Palin's first big gaf (if the media takes notice)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/8/122630/5628/857/591047

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, as McClatchy reported, "aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization."

A Republican gaffe? No way the press will give it any attention and if they do they'll be sure to rationalize it some how.

 

[minus_273]

i shudder at the thought of the day freaks like this control national policy. the pseudo-religious screaming about loss is hilarious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEaHyzbqTA

 

[Hitokage]

i shudder at the thought of the day freaks like this control national policy. the pseudo-religious screaming about loss is hilarious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSEaHyzbqTA

Rip Van Winkle?

 

[minus_273]

Why would he do this?


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD931VT500

Doesnt this open up the opposition for saying that Obama is conceding that tax hikes for businesses and the rich actually hurts the economy?

at least he is beginning to admit he was wrong about raising taxes. I suspect in amonth or so he will have the same policy as mccain. Its just like it look obama 3 days to get it right about gerogia.

 

[DeathbyVolcano]

at least he is beginning to admit he was wrong about raising taxes. I suspect in amonth or so he will have the same policy as mccain. Its just like it look obama 3 days to get it right about gerogia.

You have to be a troll.

 

[gcubed]

You have to be a troll.

i'm still surprised people respond to him

 

[Fatalah]

fyi, Obama's newest book is being released tomorrow

it's not really a book in the sense of Audacity of Hope, but more of a policy centered book. Probably something like his website, except in book form.

'

I can see it now:

"While McCain's out there trying to change America, Obama's writes yet another book!"

 

[reilo]

'

I can see it now:

"While McCain's out there trying to change America, Obama's writes yet another book!"

It's a collection of essays and speeches...

 

[minus_273]

You have to be a troll.

obama said raising taxes was a bad idea, not me. Also like drilling, expect obama to change his position to support nuclear as well some time soon.

 

[Fatalah]

It's a collection of essays and speeches...

"Obama just can't put down the pen! How about lowering our taxes!"

 

[Steve Youngblood]

obama said raising taxes was a bad idea, not me. Also like drilling, expect obama to change his position to support nuclear as well some time soon.

I fully expect him to endorse John McCain by the end of the week.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Oh joy.

Kos has been commissioning polls from Research 2000 for a while now, which have been pretty good. He's ordered up a ton more - including a daily tracker. First results out on Thursday (for Monday-Wednesday polling). Unlike the others, he's going to make daily results and full cross-tabs available (as he has for the other polls).

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/8/12112/13528/224/590647

 

[Particle Physicist]

The idea of the Terminator as president bothers me. My first reaction was to laugh this off and move on, but I'm curious... Do you really want Arnold, and if so... why?

hell yeah!

 

[Fatalah]

Just for fun, here are the Top 10 Posters in this thread, according to post count:

AniHawk 167
CharlieDigital 128
speculawyer 118
GhaleonEB 102
Tamanon 94
polyh3dron 91
Stoney Mason 87
Zeliard 86
gkrykewy 83
devilhawk 71

 

[Hitokage]

Why would he do this?


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD931VT500

Doesnt this open up the opposition for saying that Obama is conceding that tax hikes for businesses and the rich actually hurts the economy?

Obama speaks like a reasonable person who isn't inflexible in his agenda or timetables, people jump on him for FLIP FLOPPING.

 

[gkryhewy]

Just for fun, here are the Top 10 Posters in this thread, according to post count:

AniHawk 167
CharlieDigital 128
speculawyer 118
GhaleonEB 102
Tamanon 94
polyh3dron 91
Stoney Mason 87
Zeliard 86
gkrykewy 83
devilhawk 71

Madre de dios.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

hell yeah!

Why did you post the cover for Demolition Man?

 

[reilo]

Obama speaks like reasonable person who isn't inflexible in his agenda or timetables, people jump on him for FLIP FLOPPING.

You don't stabilize the market by doing something drastic... it has to be a gradual shift in policies. Otherwise you risk of bottoming out before making things better.

 

[Zeliard]

my dad just e-mailed me this article. ::



holy crap.

What the fuck did I just read?

 

[Blackhead]

I posted this in the other thread but I just noticed it was created by Gaborn and read like all he wants to do was gloat. I think it'd be more relevant here.

I'm quoting only the parts that I think best responds to comments I've seen here but the whole piece is worth a read (and follow the link to see his sources as well...)

Glenn Greenwald on MSNBC decision to drop Olbermann and Matthews as News Anchors

Third, this episode demonstrates what Eric Alterman documented several years ago: that the greatest and most transparent myth in American politics is that the U.S. has a "liberal media." That is a myth that is maintained, first and foremost, by defining anyone who isn't Rush Limbaugh as a "liberal." Hence, people such as the wife of Bush official Dan Senor (Campbell Brown) is a "liberal," as is Alan Greenspan's wife (Andrea Mitchell), along with establishment-worshipers such as Rush-Limbaugh-admirer Brian Williams, right-wing-talking-points-spouting Charlie Gibson, and anyone who writes for the war-enabling New York Times and Washington Post.

Perhaps nothing demonstrates this absurd dynamic more than the painfully inane perception that Chris Matthews -- for years a prime target of liberal media critics -- is some sort of "liberal." That's the same "liberal" Chris Matthews who, over the years, has said things like this:

I like [George Bush]. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left . . . We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. . . . Why don't the damn Democrats give the president his day? He won today. He did well today. . . . Thank you very much. James Jeffrey, assistant to Condoleezza Rice. We're huge fans [of Rice] -- bring her back with you next time.​

Or see the "liberal" Matthews fawning over Fred Thompson's attractive manliness and Rudy Giuliani's powerful authority and the charming masculinity of Republicans versus the "geekier, nerdier" Democrats. That is who is deemed to be a "liberal" in our political culture because the reality, as Atrios frequently puts it, is that the only hard and fast rule is: "Your liberal media: no liberals allowed."

This has been going on for years. As I wrote in response to the uproar generated at places like The New Republic over the fact that MSNBC has now given an actual liberal, Rachel Maddow, her own show and is thereby jeopardizing non-partisan, objective, high-minded journalism:

Over the past seven years, the following people have hosted prime-time cable news shows: Joe Scarborough (MSNBC), Michael Savage (MSNBC), Glenn Beck (CNN), Tucker Carlson (MSNBC), Nancy Grace (CNN), Bill O'Reilly (Fox) and Sean Hannity (Fox). None of that seemed to bother the likes of [TNR's Sacha] Zimmerman. None of that was depicted as the downfall of objective journalism or the destruction of civil, elevated, high-minded discourse.

Several of those hosts had and continue to have atrocious ratings (Carlson, Beck, Scarborough), yet were kept for years.

Finally, and perhaps most notably of all, Olbermann's role as anchor somehow destroys the journalistic brand of both MSNBC and NBC, while Fox News continues to be deemed a legitimate news outlet by our political and media establishment. Fox does this despite (more accurately: due to) its employing Brit Hume as its main anchor -- someone who is every bit as partisan and ideological as Keith Olbermannn is (at least), who regularly spews the nastiest and most vicious right-wing talking points, yet because he's not a liberal, is deemed to be a legitimate news anchor.

The Washington Post's Howie Kurtz -- while repeatedly lamenting the ascent of Olbermann (and Maddow) as a threat to objective journalism -- proclaims that "Hume is no partisan brawler" while Charlie Gibson gushes: "He has a wonderful style which makes you want to hear what Brit has to say, in an age when so many people are in your face." The Associated Press recently declared that Fox News has never gone as far as MSNBC in producing partisan news coverage, asserting that "Olbermann's popularity and evolving image as an idealogue (sic) has led NBC News to stretch traditional notions of journalistic objectivity" and that "Fox has never done that, perhaps mindful of the immediate controversy that would result." Even the NYT article this morning echoed this view of Fox, noting:

While some critics argued that [Olbermann's] assignment was akin to having the Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly anchor on election night -- something that has never happened -- MSNBC insisted that Mr. Olbermann knew the difference between news and commentary.​

The proper analogy to Olbermann as anchor is not O'Reilly as anchor, but Brit Hume as anchor. Hume explicitly acknowledges his political conservatism. His entire show relentlessly promotes a right-wing narrative. Every night, he convenes panels composed of right-wing partisans such as Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Fred Barnes, and Mort Kondracke, and -- at most -- sometimes "balances" that with one of those allegedly neutral journalists such as Mara Liasson. Everything Brit Hume touches is designed to promote a right-wing perspective, yet he continues to be held out as some sort of legitimate news anchor -- he actually hosted a Democratic Party presidential debate in 2004 -- while MSNBC's promotion of Keith Olbermann is some unique threat to the profession of journalism.

UPDATE: There's one other point really worth making here. Throughout the primary season, Clinton supporters were furious at what they endlessly complained was MSBNC's biased coverage in favor of Obama and, more so, its intensely hostile coverage of Hillary Clinton. Whatever one's views on the primary war were, there is no question that Olbermann and Matthews in particular were extremely hostile to Clinton and supportive of Obama. But MSNBC executives ignored those complaints, even derided and mocked them, with MSNBC executive Phil belittling angry Clinton supporters in The New Yorker as nothing more than abused, disillusioned girlfriends with nowhere else to go:
...
Again, regardless of what one thought of the primary wars or even MSNBC's coverage of the Clinton/Obama race, the contrast between (a) MSNBC's dismissive reaction to complaints of bias from Clinton supporters and (b) its obedience to similar complaints from the Right is stark and revealing. The overriding attribute of the Liberal Media is a deep and abiding fear of angering the Right.

UPDATE II: To clarify something that shouldn't need clarification (but clearly does): whether you love watching Keith Olbermann and "Countdown" is your favorite show in all of TV history or you can't stand Olbermann and think he's a buffoon has absolutely nothing to do with any of the points I'm discussing here. The issue is the patent double standards that are applied to TV "journalists" and the reasons MSNBC did what they did. One's personal viewing preferences, affections and dislikes have nothing to do with any those points and don't remotely bear on them one way or the other. Going into the comments section and writing "I can't stand Olbermann and I'm happy to see him go!!!!" is a total nonsequitor to the discussion.

NB: His emphasis not mine. Hope this adds to the discussion.

 

[minus_273]

Obama speaks like a reasonable person who isn't inflexible in his agenda or timetables, people jump on him for FLIP FLOPPING.

good thing he's not running for office where mistakes like that cant be costly.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Why did you post the cover for Demolition Man?

demolition man predicts arnold becoming president.

 

[tanod]

I'd say that 64 wouldn't factor in to what is going on right now. Goldwater's Republican party was a totally different beast than what we see today. The GOP of '64 was pre-Religious Pandering GOP.

Not to mention that no Presidential candidate has ever announced their VP the day after the other party accepted their nomination and immediately held their convention the next week.

There are too many facts outside the purvue of "convention happened +5 bounce" that makes the historical comparisons almost completely irrelevant.

 

[gcubed]

obama said raising taxes was a bad idea, not me. Also like drilling, expect obama to change his position to support nuclear as well some time soon.

which position is that?

 

[Particle Physicist]

good thing he's not running for office where mistakes like that cant be costly.

mistakes like what? sticking to your guns no matter what is actually happening? yeah. thats worked out great so far! oh. and he didnt flip-flop about taxes at all. if you actually bothered to see the whole quote in context that is.

 

[Barrett2]

good thing he's not running for office where mistakes like that cant be costly.

Obama? More like Osama; amiright?

demolition man predicts arnold becoming president.

Demolitian Man also stars libertarian patriot Wesley Snipes.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

$15 Sarah Palin action figure is here!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...n-McCains-running-mates-popularity-soars.html

 

[Beer Monkey]

Jesus, Palin doesn't even know what Fannie/Freddie really are. That's scary.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Jesus, Palin doesn't even know what Fannie/Freddie really are. That's scary.

Her crash course is working like a charm!

 

[Zeliard]

$15 Sarah Palin action figure is here!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...n-McCains-running-mates-popularity-soars.html

:lol

Why does she look like a hooker from The Matrix trilogy?

 

[FitzOfRage]

good thing he's not running for office where mistakes like that cant be costly.

Again, I don't know if you guys saw the interview itself, but I honestly didn't get the takeaway that the AP had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUrLFmgwxjc

I mean honestly, he says NOT raising tax revenue with a half trillion dollar deficit is a bad idea right now, not what you're trying to paint it as.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Palin's first big gaf (if the media takes notice)

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/8/122630/5628/857/591047

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, as McClatchy reported, "aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization."

Wow @ Palin.

Also, wow at trying to read dailykos. Ugh.

 

[CharlieDigital]

Just for fun, here are the Top 10 Posters in this thread, according to post count:

AniHawk 167
CharlieDigital 128
speculawyer 118
GhaleonEB 102
Tamanon 94
polyh3dron 91
Stoney Mason 87
Zeliard 86
gkrykewy 83
devilhawk 71

Holy shit :lol don't let my boss see that

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I have a problem with one of Obama's positions. Obama wants a second stimulus check to be given to Americans. Wouldn't that cause a higher inflation and a more devalued dollar?

 

[Soybean]

God damn it Obama. Stand firm on taxes for the wealthy.

 

[tfur]

Obama campaign calls McCain ad a 'lie'

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/



McCain, Palin criticize Obama on earmarks

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94321828

 

[thefro]

I don't normally like to talk politics because any attempts at discussion seem to be viewed as having some sort of agenda by most people. IE: If I'm talking about politics, I must be trying to convince others to agree with my opinion of things.

That isn't what this post is about. I don't expect people to agree or disagree with me. I would just like to point out a couple of things.

The two parties: Democrats and Republicans seem to be identical.

Did you miss the last 8 years? Do you think President Gore would have behaved exactly like Bush has?

 

[Zeliard]

God damn it Obama. Stand firm on taxes for the wealthy.

The right is going to have some ammo with this and Obama stating that the surge exceeded anybody's expectations.

I like the fact that Obama is flexible (it's one of his best traits), but he could inadvertently end up hurting himself with things like this.

 

[artredis1980]

GAF WE HAVE A GAFFE!!!!

Gov. Sarah Palin made her first potentially major gaffe during her time on the national scene while discussing the developments of the perilous housing market this past weekend.

Speaking before voters in Colorado Springs, the Republican vice presidential nominee claimed that lending giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." The companies, as McClatchy reported, "aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization."

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO4k...09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html

Economists and analysts pounced on the misstatement, which came before the government had spent funds baling the two entities out, saying it demonstrated a lack of understanding about one of the key economic issues likely to face the next administration.

"You would like to think that someone who is going to be vice president and conceivable president would know what Fannie and Freddie do," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "These are huge institutions and they are absolutely central to our country's mortgage debt. To not have a clue what they do doesn't speak well for her, I'd say."

Added Andrew Jakabovics, an economic analysts for the progressive think tank, Center for American Progress: "It is somewhat nonsensical because up until yesterday there was sort of no public funding there. Even today they haven't drawn down any of the credit line they have given to Treasury. 'Gotten too big and too expensive' are two separate things. The too big has been a conservative mantra for a while and there is something to be said of that in that they hold about half of the mortgage guarantees that are out there. And in the last year they have been responsible for roughly 80 percent out there. The 'too expensive to tax payers,' I don't know where that comes from."

Even conservative analysts acknowledged that the statement simply did not hold true.

"Heretofore, if the treasury had a balance sheet there would have been a liability but there was never a taxpayer payment before [the bailout]," said Gerald P. O'Driscoll, an economist with the Cato Institute. "[Fannie and Freddie] were not taxpayer funded. They had taxpayer guarantee, which is worth something, especially in the stock market..."

The Palin misstatement comes as Fannie and Freddie are set to be placed under control of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, created by President Bush in late July to help regulate the two housing giants. Both presidential candidates have been critical of Fannie and Freddie but neither is opposed to the government's plans for the companies. The treasury is hoping that the government's role will help stabilize credit markets and incentive more mortgage lending.

"With the takeover they will be taxpayer funded," said O'Driscoll. "As I understand it they get to withdraw funds with permission going forward."

How politically significant a "gaffe" it is remains to be seen. The major concern about Palin's position on the ticket is that she lacks the economic and foreign policy wherewithal to serve as vice president. This certainly doesn't help on that front. At the same time, the remark went almost entirely unnoticed over the weekend and discussions on the developments of the housing market can be difficult to process for even the most attuned voter.

There are varying explanations that could be offered for Palin's defense. As O'Driscoll noted, both Fannie and Freddie "were hybrid institutions because they had private ownership but... an implicit government guarantee which people thought at the end of the day was explicit." Meanwhile, as Baker noted, as of July the two lenders were being offered low market interest rates by the fed again, theoretically, at the taxpayer's expense. But, he added, "I kind of doubt she had any sense of that."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html

 

[Zeliard]

GAF WE HAVE A GAFFE!!!!




Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO4k...09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html

Yes, but will the media actually jump on it? That's all that matters. If they don't, then it's unfortunately trivial, even though it is a huge and embarrassing gaffe that says quite a lot about her.

 

[PhoenixDark]

McCain getting a bigger bounce than Obama is definitely a surprise but it doesn't mean much at this point. That being said, it's definitely time for Obama to man up and start hitting back. No more of this "whatever that's the politics of the past" bullshit. Obama is doing a great job attacking in stump speeches but his ads are rather tame. 63% of Americans agree McCain's policies mirror Bush - they get it. I hope he starts going in a new, more personal direction of attack.

 

[artredis1980]

The Palin administration won't release hundreds of emails from her office, claiming they cover confidential policy matters. Then why do the subject lines refer to a political foe, a journalist, and non-policy topics?

In June, Andrée McLeod, a self-described independent government watchdog in Alaska, sent an open records act request to the office of Governor Sarah Palin. She requested copies of all the emails that had been sent and received by Ivy Frye and Frank Bailey, two top aides to Palin, from February through April of this year. McLeod, a 53-year-old registered Republican who has held various jobs in state government, suspected that Frye and Bailey had engaged in political activity during official business hours in that period by participating in a Palin-backed effort to oust the state chairman of the Alaska Republican party, Randy Ruedrich. (Bailey has been in the national news of late for refusing to cooperate with investigators probing whether Palin fired Alaska's public safety commission because he did not dismiss a state trooper who had gone through an ugly divorce with Palin's sister.)

In response to her request, McLeod received four large boxes of emails. This batch of documents did not contain any proof that Frye and Bailey had worked on government time to boot out Ruedrich. But there was other information she found troubling. Several of the emails suggested to her that Palin's office had used its influence to reward a Fairbanks surveyor who was a Palin fundraiser with a state job. In early August, McLeod filed a complaint with the state attorney general against Palin, Bailey, and other Palin aides, claiming they had violated ethics and hiring laws. Palin, now the Republican vice-presidential candidate, told the Alaska Daily News that "there were no favors done for anybody."

But more intriguing than any email correspondence contained in the four boxes was what was not released: about 1100 emails. Palin's office provided McLeod with a 78-page list (PDF) cataloging the emails it was withholding. Many of them had been written by Palin or sent to her. Palin's office claimed most of the undisclosed emails were exempt from release because they were covered by the "executive" or "deliberative process" privileges that protect communications between Palin and her aides about policy matters. But the subject lines of some of the withheld emails suggest they were not related to policy matters. Several refer to one of Palin's political foes, others to a well-known Alaskan journalist. Moreover, some of the withhold emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin, the governor's husband. Todd Palin—a.k.a. the First Dude—holds no official state position (though he has been a close and influential adviser for Governor Palin). The fact that Palin and her aides shared these emails with a citizen outside the government undercuts the claim that they must be protected under executive privilege. McLeod asks, "What is Sarah Palin hiding?"

The list of still-secret emails includes a series of messages that circulated on February 1, 2008, among Palin, Bailey, Frye, and Todd Palin "re Andrew Halcro." A former Republican, Halcro ran as an independent against Palin for governor in 2006, collecting only 9 percent of the vote. Since then he has been a blogger who often criticizes Palin. There is no telling what the emails said about Halcro. But in a July blog posting, Halcro asked, "why in the world is Todd Palin getting copied on emails [about me] that his wife's administration is classifying as confidential....These emails should be released to the public....after all Todd Palin has no standing to claim executive privilege. By including him in the email loop, the Palin administration has arguably breached any claim of executive privilege." And McLeod wonders, "What do emails about Andrew Halcro have to do with policy deliberations?"

The list of confidential emails includes a number of communications related to the Public Safety Employees Association, a union for the state's police officers and state troopers, and the headings refer to PSEA ads and a "PR campaign." Many of these PSEA-related emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin—and were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. (Recently, John Cyr, the PSEA executive director, told The Washington Post that Sarah Palin held a grudge against the state troopers and held down their salaries and other funding because her ex-brother-in-law-the-trooper had not been fired.) A separate email sent from Frye to Bailey and Todd Palin and headed "I may be in trouble here guys" was withheld because it involves a personnel matter. In April, a series of emails with the subject line "from Sheila Toomey" zipped between Sarah Palin, Bailey, Frye, other Palin aides, and Todd Palin. Toomey writes the "Alaska Ear" political gossip column for the Anchorage Daily News. These emails were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. And a string of emails titled "Racism on the Radio" that went back and forth between Governor Palin and her aides was blocked from release on the same grounds.

McLeod says she intends to file an appeal of the decision to withhold the emails on the 78-page list.

Palin has denounced McLeod's efforts. After McLeod filed the ethics complaint, Palin told the Anchorage Daily News, "This is the same Andrée McLeod that follows us around at public events and camps herself out in our waiting area and hounds us for a job, asking us if there's a way she can...not have to go through the system to get a job with this administration." Palin also called McLeod "the falafel lady," because McLeod once sold falafel. On his website, Halcro has posted excerpts of emails Palin sent McLeod between 2002 and 2005, in which she praised McLeod. In one of these messages, Palin wrote, "You're all about accountability." In another, Palin said, "Thanks for working to instill the public trust." Palin also wrote her, "I'm proud to know you." And in one email, Palin hailed McLeod: "Holy Moly you are powerful regarding getting the word out to the press about questionable activity."

"I've known Sarah for years, " says McLeod, who moved to Alaska from New York in 1978. "When the finger is pointed at somebody else, she's all for accountability. When it's pointing at her, it's different. Sarah Palin was elected on the basis of providing open and honest government. She has failed miserably."

The McCain-Palin campaign did not respond to phone and email requests for a comment.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/09/9620_sarah_palin_secret_email.html

 

[Barrett2]

The right is going to have some ammo with this and Obama stating that the surge exceeded anybody's expectations.

I like the fact that Obama is flexible (it's one of his best traits), but he could end inadvertently up hurting himself with things like this.

Yeah, so far Obama has done a fairly good job of delivering simple messages, but he is starting to worry me. Never underestimate the capacity of Americans to become angry and confused at nuance.

It reminds me of Bill Clinton's expression; voters would rather see you strong and wrong, rather than weak and right.

Obama needs to keep it simple, and quit giving Repubs attack openings.

 

[speculawyer]

obama said raising taxes was a bad idea, not me. Also like drilling, expect obama to change his position to support nuclear as well some time soon.

Well, except for the fact that he has never been explicitly against nuclear power. He's said that he's not big fan of it . . . but creating terrorist targets and radioactive waste that will be dangerous for thousands of years isn't something anyone rationally likes. But he's never been explicitly against nuclear power.


BTW, cutting taxes like crazy is part of reason why we are in such a current mess. The Bush policies FAILED. Big time. Massive deficits devalued the currency by some 40% causing oil and other commodities to go way up in price.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Yes, but will the media actually jump on it?

I'm not expecting them to, but they might. The media has been asking for interviews or off-script time with Palin since she got in the race, and have been shut out. So they might scrutinize stuff like this closely, since it's one of the first times she's gone off-script. And is hilariously wrong about a major story happing right now.

But I don't have my hopes up.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

GAF WE HAVE A GAFFE!!!!




Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO4k...09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/08/palin-makes-her-first-gaf_n_124792.html

well thats a suprise, McCain knows so much about the economy

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Well, except for the fact that he has never been explicitly against nuclear power. He's said that he's not big fan of it . . . but creating terrorist targets and radioactive waste that will be dangerous for thousands of years isn't something anyone rationally likes. But he's never been explicitly against nuclear power.


BTW, cutting taxes like crazy is part of reason why we are in such a current mess. The Bush policies FAILED. Big time. Massive deficits devalued the currency by some 40% causing oil and other commodities to go way up in price.

If oil prices hit a steep drop, does inflation lower?

EDIT-NM

 

[artredis1980]

ABC interview is a farce


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/214508.php

I spent most of the day today traveling and then giving a talk up at Union College a few hours north of New York City. So I was offline most of the day. And though I heard about Charlie Gibson bagging the first interview with Sarah Palin, I was eager to get home and read the details.

Well, now I've read them. And it's pretty clear this farce is going to be close to unwatchable. Set aside that this comes just on the heels of McCain campaign manager Rick Davis saying Palin would not sit for any interviews "until the point in time when she'll be treated with respect and deference." The tell comes high up in the AP story by David Bauder. The second graf reads ...

Palin will sit down for multiple interviews with Gibson in Alaska over two days, most likely Thursday and Friday, said McCain adviser Mark Salter.
Political interviews are never done like this. Because it makes the questioning entirely at the discretion of the person being interviewed and their handlers. The interviewer has to be on their best behavior, at least until the last of the 'multiple interviews' because otherwise the subsequent sittings just won't happen. For a political journalist to agree to such terms amounts to a form of self-gelding. The only interviews that are done this way are lifestyle and celebrity interviews. And it's pretty clear that that is what this will be.

Here's some more to inspire confidence ...

The interview is a coup for Gibson, who also had the only sit-down with McCain during the Republican National Convention. During that interview, he did not question McCain about Palin's family, a decision that he fretted about for hours, Gibson said in a Web log posted last week.
"Once you know about her daughter's pregnancy, once you know about her husband's political interest in the Alaska Independent Party, once you know about the special nature of their latest child, I think that's enough," Gibson wrote.

The relevant questions about Palin all related to her experience and policy positions as a mayor and governor of Alaska.

ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider said he did not believe Gibson's stated stance about family questions was key to securing the interview.


It will be unwatchable.

followed by: http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/flashback_during_dem_primary_d.php

Gibson is McCain's favourite TV anchor

Has ABC News' Charlie Gibson become the McCain campaign's favorite network anchor?

The question is a fair one in light of the news that Gibson has landed the first exclusive interview with Sarah Palin, as part of a rather odd-sounding arrangement under which he'll be asking her questions over the course of multiple interviews up in Alaska.

Recent history suggests that we shouldn't anticipate a terribly aggressive grilling of Palin from Gibson. There are good reasons for the McCain campaign to be able to count on this -- and to favor Gibson as a result.

The Palin interview was the second exclusive granted to Gibson by the McCain campaign in less than a week. He was the only anchor to interview McCain during the GOP convention.

While Gibson did confront McCain with a few tough questions, the opening of the interview was heavily freighted with questions like this one:

Senator, you're going to be accepting the nomination for president of the United States tomorrow night. You spent 5.5 years in a prison camp and you had a lot of time to think during that time. Did you ever, in your wildest imagination, think of such a thing?
...and this one:

Your image has always been sort of the outsider, the straight talker, the hell-bent, swashbuckling Navy pilot. Now that you're to be the nominee, is it in any way constraining?
More to the point, Gibson himself has revealed in advance what he thinks the parameters of the questioning of Palin should be.


In a post on an ABC blog on Thursday, in which he discussed the thought processes behind his questions for McCain, Gibson wrote:

It took some time in thinking about it, but I finally decided not to even bring up the issues with her family,for they are issues of family and should remain so. Once you know about her daughter's pregnancy, once you know about her husband's political interest in the Alaskan Independence Party, once you know about special nature of their latest child, I think that's enough.
The relevant questions about Governor Palin, the questions that go to her suitability to serve as vice president, all relate to her experience, or lack thereof, and her policy positions as a mayor and governor in Alaska. Once I decided to restrict the Palin questions to those areas, the interview kind of formed itself.


The interview was granted to Gibson the next day, according to the Associated Press. An ABC spokesperson (not surprisingly) told AP that he didn't think there was any connection. See more from John Aravosis on this.

One other side point: Remember that Gibson was an aggressive purveyor of right-wing talking points about Obama during the Dem debate he moderated with George Stephanopoulos in Philadelphia.

At the debate, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled extensively on Obama's "bitter" remarks and his controversial pastor, Reverend Wright. The performance was widely panned by mainstream critics; WaPo's Tom Shales, for instance, said that "ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama."

Gibson has been granted exclusives with McCain and his running-mate, which is unusual favoritism by any measure. There's something about Gibson that McCain advisers appear to like a great deal.

Gibson has a chance to prove them wrong.

 

[PhatSaqs]

:lol @ Palin.