Palin -- this is PATHETIC!

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/ 28/mccain-retracts-palins-pakistan-comments/? iref=werecommend

McCain is now retracting Palin's "gaffe" at a Philadelphia cheesesteak stand. I'm getting more and more worried. Let her off the leash, McCain. We might find out how much she actually doesn't agree with you!

I just think it's funny that we've got 4 pages of discussion about this issue when BOTH parties are guilty of it.

I'll racket down after Ignay has taken back the accusation about my "partisan blinder." I'm a republican that expresses disdain towards fellow republicans. It's impressive that ignay still can't withdraw his accuastion that was made in poor form. An accusation that shows they were wearing their own partisan shades.  Some people don't consider clearing false accusations hostility.

Peaches, I think someone else mentioned that on page 1 or 2.

Original Post by sun123:

Did anyone see yesterday's McCain/Palin interview with Couric?  Couric question Palin on her Pakistan comment and McCain answer for her and THEN allows Palin to reply. 

 

Yeah, it's like she was sitting in front of a school principal and she brought along her dad for help.

And what was with the "Is that a pizza place?" thing?  What kind of world does McCain live where "gotcha journalism" sounds like it could be the name of a pizza place?  I suppose it's located next to the "ambush interview" coffee shop?

am growing very tired of these pithy little expressions the republicans keep coming up with. 'gotcha journalism' is the newest.

and did you notice in the debates that McCain is also now co-opting 'he doesn't get it'?

Why can't he run a decent campaign and leave public office with his good name in tact?

probably Mooni.  My apologies.  I got tired of reading after a while 

Original Post by peaches0405:

I just think it's funny that we've got 4 pages of discussion about this issue when BOTH parties are guilty of it.

Well, the title of this thread is about Palin, and she's provided the most recent material.

But if you really want to get some bi-partisan laughs, Joe can tell you all about leadership during the depression.

Lol, Santonacci

I can't really blame Palin for the confusion. She was ordering a cheese-steak. In Philly that's a tricky thing to do.

Original Post by kathygator:

am growing very tired of these pithy little expressions the republicans keep coming up with. 'gotcha journalism' is the newest.

 

Nice convenient term, isn't it?    Specific question about national policy directed at your candidate that they can't/don't answer = gotcha journalism.  Specific question about national policy directed at the opposing candidate that they can't/don't answer = fair and balanced journalism.

Geez - since when was expecting a candidate to be consistent or informed  classified as "gotcha"?

Maybe Joe Biden meant radio? =-P A lot of old people confuse the words. Since radio was their version of tv. Maybe he meant someone else too and a different crisis because he was confused. The same people that confuse this, that, and actual people. Confuse events as well as who and what happened all the time. Old age trick.

The problem is the media fall for that stuff. We don't have the old guard of news broadcasters any more. Dan Rather would have really held Palin's feet to the fire. Katie didn't like to press.

Anything to intimidate, shock and awe.

Karl Rove is the debbil.

What has been most interesting to me about the Palin thing is McCain's reaction to her.  I heard somewhere that he thinks tactically rather than strategically.  I think the V.P. choice is an example of that.  He "springs" her into the arena where she is an unknown with no foreign relations experience.  Did McCain really think he could prep her for the deluge of attention and difficult questions that would come her way in such a short period of time, &  in such a rigid manner?  And then keep her from the press and/or monitor her interviews with them?  McCain's aides are trying to change what made her popular and effective in AK, and as a result, Palin IMHO has morphed into someone even she doesn't know/recognize.  As a result, she is now fighting to save not only her current career but her future political career as well.  

Akgal that is an interesting perspective. This brings me to the next couple of questions. Do you really want a president that thinks tactically and not strategically? I'd rather have a president that balances the two. It also brings up his decision making skills

Original Post by akgal:

McCain's aides are trying to change what made her popular and effective in AK, and as a result, Palin IMHO has morphed into someone even she doesn't know/recognize.  As a result, she is now fighting to save not only her current career but her future political career as well.  

 I have read a lot from Republicans about this same thing.  Some are getting really frustrated that the McCain campaign isn't "letting Sarah be Sarah."  I have a feeling that they just started drilling talking points into her head, and that's what she falls back on when her own words aren't enough.  It's entirely possible that, if left to her own style without all the image handlers, she would come off a lot better.

Or not - quips about lipstick, bridges, and "mavericks" will only get a person so far before they have to start demonstrating substance and knowledge of the issues.  The debate will be really interesting for sure.

Original Post by kathygator:

78: sorry. ok I take it back. He's not too old to be a grandpa and retire. Dunno about the pressures and stress of the presidency however. :/

Off Topic:

Iggy, I need your centrist input: is this bail-out any where close to a good idea?

Am still having trouble understanding what's really going on, and younts is too biased to be of any help...

Philosophically I'm opposed to a bailout, especially for what essentially was a product of unfettered greed exploiting the average schmuck's lack of understanding on a complex subject. I'm a "believer" in a mostly free market.

Pragmatically I think it's probably got to happen just to keep things from seizing up. I mean the majority of our economy is based on sales of financial products and real estate... leveraged buy out and spin off the assets... it's a destructive process, not a creative one. Ultimately, one day it will have to come to an end, because it's cannibalistic in it's nature. But I don't know if we're ready for that day...

I mean it would be good for my kids, if this economy bit the dust, because we'd be able to actually reindustrialize and *gasps* be more than a "service" economy, but it would be pretty damn hard on anyone that wants to retire in the next 10 to 15 years.

So the problem comes down to this, it's going to happen, so how do we as taxpayers ensure that this isn't just a straight transfer of wealth and what are the chances of success? The answer isn't a very good one, but taking equity in companies that take bailout money is one part, perhaps the insurance idea is another worthwhile addition. As to the chances of success... flip a coin? But make sure you put it back in your pocket after the toss. ;)

I wish I had a good answer for you, but there's an awful lot of doom being proffessed from pretty much all sides, of course many of these voices have their bread buttered by the short-sighted purveyor's of this whole mess, so who knows...

Original Post by santonacci:

Original Post by akgal:

McCain's aides are trying to change what made her popular and effective in AK, and as a result, Palin IMHO has morphed into someone even she doesn't know/recognize.  As a result, she is now fighting to save not only her current career but her future political career as well.  

 I have read a lot from Republicans about this same thing.  Some are getting really frustrated that the McCain campaign isn't "letting Sarah be Sarah."  I have a feeling that they just started drilling talking points into her head, and that's what she falls back on when her own words aren't enough.  It's entirely possible that, if left to her own style without all the image handlers, she would come off a lot better.

Or not - quips about lipstick, bridges, and "mavericks" will only get a person so far before they have to start demonstrating substance and knowledge of the issues.  The debate will be really interesting for sure.

I think her political career post veep looks pretty bleak. She "peaked" way too early and I think that it's going to be an anchor around her neck for a very long time.

93: that is a very good point, Ak.

To be honest I would really like to believe a woman like that could be a force for change, have something to say, and mean it.

It would give me a lot more confidence in the the opposition's ticket, something I think is way more important than politics. It would be nice to choose the better candidate rather than 'the lessor of two evils' for once.

The debates will tell, I think, if she has her own mind underneath the bullet points they are trying to teach her.

Original Post by santonacci:

Or not - quips about lipstick, bridges, and "mavericks" will only get a person so far before they have to start demonstrating substance and knowledge of the issues.  The debate will be really interesting for sure.

I almost thought you were talking about Obama there for a second... hmm. 

 

For the record, all canidates and running mates are equally inept 'this year'.

I have been watching the presidential candidates closely during the wall street crisis to see how they are reacting to it and to assess their leadership skills.  I guess the only silver lining in this economic crisis cloud is getting an opportunity to see the candidates in their respective crisis modes.  This is the subjective part(for me) of deciding who will make the better POTUS.