Sarah Palin, Republican Vice Presidential Candidate

[Olo401]

So much righteous ownage.. It's like Taj all over again - I don't know whether to applaud or shake my head.

[archibaldcrane]

This has to be shown - credit to Senoska for bringing it to BG:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...6360015vm0.jpg

[Beckwin]

"Is this sexist?"

my god, pathetic.

[Beckwin]

oh, and a follow-up on that "obama tried to keep troops in iraq" pseudo-scandal NYPost article:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...ining-mcc.html

Earlier this week, the campaign of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., seized upon a column in the New York Post that described Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as having urged Iraqi leaders in a private meeting to delay coming to an agreement with the Bush administration on the status of U.S. troops.
"Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence," Post columnist Amir Tehari wrote, quoting Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari who told the Post that Obama during his meeting with Iraqi leaders in July "asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington."
The charge -- that Obama asked the Iraqis to delay signing off on a "Status of Forces Agreement," thus delaying US troop withdrawal and interfering in U.S. foreign policy -- has been picked up on the internet, talk radio and by Republicans including the McCain campaign, which seized on the story as possible evidence of duplicity.
The Obama campaign said that the Post report consisted of "outright distortions."
Lending significant credence to Obama's response is the fact that -- though it's absent from the Post story and other retellings -- in addition to Obama and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, this July meeting was also attended by Bush administration officials such as U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and the Baghdad embassy's Legislative Affairs advisor Rich Haughton, as well as a Republican senator, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.
Attendees of the meeting back Obama's account, including not just Sen. Jack Reed, D-RI, but Hagel, Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers from both parties. Officials of the Bush administration who were briefed on the meeting by the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad also support Obama's account and dispute the Post story and McCain attack.
The Post story is "absolutely not true," Hagel spokesman Mike Buttry told ABC News.
"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations," said Obama campaign national security spokesperson Wendy Morigi, "nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades."
Buttry said that Hagel agrees with Obama's account of the meeting: Obama began the meeting with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki by asserting that the United States speaks with one foreign policy voice, and that voice belongs to the Bush administration.
A Bush administration official with knowledge of the meeting says that during the meeting Obama stressed to Maliki that he would not interfere with President Bush's negotiations concerning the US troop presence in Iraq, and that he supports the Bush administration's position on the need to negotiate as soon as possible the Status of Forces Agreement, which deals with among other matters US troops having immunity from local prosecution.
Obama did assert at the meeting with the Iraqis that he agrees with those – including Hagel and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- who advocate congressional review of the Strategic Framework Agreement being worked out between the Bush administration and the Iraqi government, including the Iraqi parliament.
The Strategic Framework Agreement is a document that generally describes what the relationship between the two countries should look like over time.
According one person present at the meeting, Obama told Maliki that the American people wouldn't understand why the Iraqi Parliament would get to have a say on the Strategic Framework Agreement but the U.S. Congress would not, especially since the President Bush is only months from leaving the White House, regardless of whether Obama or McCain succeeds him.
Morigi said in a statement that "Barack Obama has consistently called for any Strategic Framework Agreement to be submitted to the U.S. Congress so that the American people have the same opportunity for review as the Iraqi Parliament."
It’s possible, Obama advisers believe, that either Zebari or columnist Taheri confused the Strategic Framework Agreement, which Obama feels should be reviewed by Congress, with the Status of Forces Agreement, which Obama says the Bush administration should negotiate with the Iraqis as soon as possible.
Two officials of the Bush administration say that if Obama had done what the Post story asserted – which they believe to be untrue – U.S. Ambassador Crocker and embassy officials attending the meeting would have ensured that the Bush administration heard about it immediately. If such an incident occurred in front of officials of the Bush administration, it would have constituted a foreign policy breach and would have been front-page huge news; it would not have leaked out two months later in an op-ed column.
Nonetheless, based on nothing more than the Post report, McCain senior foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann issued a statement earlier this week expressing outrage.
“It should be concerning to all that (Obama) reportedly urged that the democratically-elected Iraqi government listen to him rather than the US administration in power,” Scheunemann said, apparently not having talked to anyone with knowledge about the meeting in Bush administration, the US Embassy in Baghdad, GOP Sen. Hagel, or any Republican staffers on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas,” Scheunemann continued. “Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq's Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. The charge that he sought to delay the withdrawal of Americans from Iraq raises serious questions about Senator Obama's judgment and it demands an explanation.”
What actually demands an explanation is why the McCain campaign was so willing to give credence to such a questionable story with such tremendous international implications without first talking to Republicans present at Obama’s meeting with Maliki, who back Obama’s version of the meeting and completely dismiss the Post column as untrue.

Even Bush administration officials are disagreeing with the Post article, as is Sen. Hagel (R).

[Kuya]

This has to be shown - credit to Senoska for bringing it to BG:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...6360015vm0.jpg

Is this serious, lol?

[Olo401]

It is.. and apparently /b/ responded by the previously mentioned alleged hacking O'Reilly's website and posting his subscriber list and their passwords in public view.

I'm trying to find some kind of confirmation on this still.. the link earlier that was posted earlier in this thread doesn't work anymore.

And fucking lol @ anon being a leftist hate group.. they're a bunch of stupid kids with no life and lots of cracking tools.

[Senoska]

It is.. and apparently /b/ responded by reportedly hacking O'Reilly's website earlier today and posting his subscriber list and their passwords in public view.

I'm trying to find some kind of confirmation on this still..

Meet:

Totally tangential: I've been tipped off that apparently Bill O'Reilly's admin pages are public, and you can the users' full passwords, addresses, names, etc. In-fucking-sane

Oh so O'Reilly
##URL CUT

Oreilly's admin page is TOTALLY PUBLIC. With all user names, passwords, emails, etc displayed.

[Kuya]

So umm, what's an extremist left?

Republicans should stop acting like the word liberal is a bad word. I get the feeling that the fact that most radio media is governed by highly conservative assholes who lean more towards the GOP than genuine American conservatism has a lot to do with the demonization of liberalism. Plus, that shit about the media being liberal has got to do stop, because that shit is almost as bad as the politicians constantly saying that we're a democracy. Seriously, who do they think they're kidding?

[Demosthenes11]

So umm, what's an extremist left?

Republicans should stop acting like the word liberal is a bad word. I get the feeling that the fact that most radio media is governed by highly conservative assholes who lean more towards the GOP than genuine American conservatism has a lot to do with the demonization of liberalism. Plus, that shit about the media being liberal has got to do stop, because that shit is almost as bad as the politicians constantly saying that we're a democracy. Seriously, who do they think they're kidding?

because crazy "conservative" people exist in the media the media as a whole can't be labeled as liberal?
I don't think it's an inaccurate label

[Maxxthepenguin]

because crazy "conservative" people exist in the media the media as a whole can't be labeled as liberal?
I don't think it's an inaccurate label

Continuing to accuse the media as being completely biased against all republicans is what is bullshit. Saying that criticism and real negatives are just "that damn elitist media" trying to be unfair is bullshit. This victimization that republicans perpetrate is fucking terrible.
Some media is liberal, some is conservative, a lot tries to be unbiased.

[Kuya]

Because it's a general term used for something, where the only thing i've seen approaching "liberal" is that channel that has Keith Olbermann, and that's just because it seems partisan. Quite frankly, this just seems like a little elaborate tactic of simultaneously adding negative connotations to the term liberal whilst painting the media as a whole as liberal so people who identify as conservative won't "listen to their lies". It seems like a good idea, because these same people won't pay any attention to the media scrutinizing blatant lying from the Republican side.

What notions they're using for painting the media as liberal, i surely do not know, especially considering how broad a term liberal is.

[Demosthenes11]

local media (at least any local channel i've seen) has leaned pretty far left as well, but as a whole I can agree with what you said!

[Kuya]

Any attempts to paint mainstream media as anything but in it for profit is delusional. They put some effort in it, sure, but at the end of it, their priority is with whatever gets them ratings.

[Maxxthepenguin]

local media (at least any local channel i've seen) has leaned pretty far left as well, but as a whole I can agree with what you said!

Sacramento/Merced/Berkeley CA

That's why. Local media generally reflects local politics.

[Demosthenes11]

Any attempts to paint mainstream media is anything but in it for profit is delusional. They put some effort in it, sure, but at the end of it, their priority is with whatever gets them ratings.

this is perhaps where the media is painted as liberal though. Anti-war is thought of as a "liberal" way of thinking, and is most popular atm. so when negative things are reported about it, liberal media I guess?

[Maxxthepenguin]

this is perhaps where the media is painted as liberal though. Anti-war is thought of as a "liberal" way of thinking, and so when negative things are reported about it, liberal media I guess?

"People died today in Iraq and it cost a lot of money" - Liberal media bias?

[Kuya]

Depends; they weren't anti war during the first few months after 9/11. Plus, being anti-war is highly situational for most people unless you're ideologically vested in it.

[Demosthenes11]

"People died today in Iraq and it cost a lot of money" - Liberal media bias?

to some yes

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

I think the accusation of bias comes from a bias of omission.

[Maxxthepenguin]

I think the accusation of bias comes from a bias of omission.

They didn't talk about the attempts of some US representatives to impeach Bush and Cheney.

They omit a lot of stuff.