Sarah Palin, Republican Vice Presidential Candidate

[Zosi]

I said you could make an argument for taxes. Income tax is a small part of the complete tax spectrum. There are taxes that Obama does want to raise, and that will indirectly affect those in rural Missouri.

Care to give examples? Keep in mind that given that it claims "taxes" in general, so you have to show that the people in question will pay a NET GAIN in taxes, not just that he's raising some while lowering many others.

So basically he's playing both sides of the fence? But his overall plan will open the way to more gay-marriages, which is what the billboard says.

No, he's not playing both sides of the fence, because the issue isn't a fence where you can categorize everyone as one of two positions. We don't have a nationwide ban, and he opposes a constitutional amendment to add one. You don't have to oppose or support gay marriage to believe that, you just have to believe that it's not the Federal government's business. I would think that that would be a welcome concept to you, but apparently the idea that the Federal government shouldn't meddle in state issues only applies when you disagree with the Federal position.

[eunhye]

Just one person's view:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...gocracy/print/

Personally, I sorta agree.

[Plow]

How about Bill's plea for Legalizing Weed. It was one of the best Cash Crops. And it could be again with the way the economy is now.

I didn't see, turned it on during the Oliver Stone thing and turned it off after the ridiculous terrorist question.

[Senoska]

Just one person's view:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...gocracy/print/

Personally, I sorta agree.

[Dimmauk]

Just one person's view:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...gocracy/print/

Personally, I sorta agree.

Obama admitted on SNL that Ayers was his Best friend. He said this cause it doesn't matter, he is still going to get elected President.

[Kuya]

I would be against fairness doctrine if it weren't for the fact that the effect of so much conservative talk show radio has been pure poison for any honest political argument.

When you have the word liberal suddenly having negative connotations, you know something is very very wrong.

[Zosi]

Just one person's view:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...gocracy/print/

Personally, I sorta agree.

Article loses any shred of credibility it had when it brings up the SNL non-scandal as proof of an evil liberal conspiracy to censor their own.

Edit: I'm against the Fairness Doctrine, mostly because I think that the market handles it fine. Conservatives are much more interested in talk radio, liberals find other means of expression and discussion. I don't really see that as a problem. Some people obviously like the nonsense that Limbaugh and Hannity spew every day, and while I can strongly disagree with them, I don't question their right to say it or insist that I (or anyone else) be allowed to respond.

Incidentally, the people whining about the Fairness Doctrine affecting talk radio are the same ones who whine and bitch and moan about the bias in the "mainstream media". You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Maxxthepenguin]

Just one person's view:

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008...gocracy/print/

Personally, I sorta agree.

These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can't abide having citizens hear contrary views.

..did he read what he wrote?


Anyways, the whole idea of it just being liberals is wrong, it's whoever is in power. The Bush admin has been legendary in its attempts to shut people up, remember the Valerie Plame stuff and the general tone of "Support or president or shut up" or it's only patriotic to give 100% support to the Iraq War. Frankly, it's mostly been the republicans who have squelched free speech historically. McCarthyism, which is virtually untouchable as the greatest threat to free speech ever in America, sure as hell wasn't upheld by the Democrats.

Also, the article misrepresents the whole Ayers thing, but hey, it's what is constantly being done.

[Maxxthepenguin]

I would be against fairness doctrine if it weren't for the fact that the effect of so much conservative talk show radio hasn't been pure poison for any honest political argument.

When you have the word liberal suddenly having negative connotations, you know something is very very wrong.

Frankly, a lot of the liberal hosts have misused their talk shows (on TV and likely radio.) Not as badly as the conservatives, mind you, but I think Olbermann has gotten too close to O'Reilly partisanness for comfort.

[Elvis]

The most inane thing is when people call you anti-American. As if there's one thing that defines the States (the government).

[Dimmauk]

Fire the Campaign

By WILLIAM KRISTOL
Published: October 12, 2008

It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign.

"McCain's problem isn't image, it's substance. His lack of leadership ability, his compete lack of backbone ..."

He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed.

He may be anyway. Bush is unpopular. The media is hostile. The financial meltdown has made things tougher. Maybe the situation is hopeless — and if it is, then nothing McCain or his campaign does matters.

But I’m not convinced by such claims of inevitability. McCain isn’t Bush. The media isn’t all-powerful. And the economic crisis still presents an opportunity to show leadership.

The 2008 campaign is now about something very big — both our future prosperity and our national security. Yet the McCain campaign has become smaller.

What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads — they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.

And let McCain go back to what he’s been good at in the past — running as a cheerful, open and accessible candidate. Palin should follow suit. The two of them are attractive and competent politicians. They’re happy warriors and good campaigners. Set them free.

Provide total media accessibility on their campaign planes and buses. Kick most of the aides off and send them out to swing states to work for the state coordinators on getting voters to the polls. Keep just a minimal staff to help organize the press conferences McCain and Palin should have at every stop and the TV interviews they should do at every location. Do town halls, do the Sunday TV shows, do talk radio — and invite Obama and Biden to join them in some of these venues, on the ground that more joint appearances might restore civility and substance to the contest.

The hope for McCain and Palin is that they still have pretty good favorable ratings from the voters. The American people have by no means turned decisively against them.

The bad news, of course, is that right now Obama’s approval/disapproval rating is better than McCain’s. Indeed, Obama’s is a bit higher than it was a month ago. That suggests the failure of the McCain campaign’s attacks on Obama.

So drop them.

Not because they’re illegitimate. I think many of them are reasonable. Obama’s relationship to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is, I believe, a legitimate issue. But McCain ruled it out of bounds, and he’s sticking to that. And for whatever reason — the public mood, campaign ineptness, McCain’s alternation between hesitancy and harshness, which reflects the fact that he’s uncomfortable in the attack role — the other attacks on Obama just aren’t working. There’s no reason to think they’re suddenly going to.

There are still enough doubts about Obama to allow McCain to win. But McCain needs to make his case, and do so as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader.

McCain should stop unveiling gimmicky proposals every couple of days that pretend to deal with the financial crisis. He should tell the truth — we’re in uncharted waters, no one is certain what to do, and no one knows what the situation will be on Jan. 20, 2009. But what we do know is that we could use someone as president who’s shown in his career the kind of sound judgment and strong leadership we’ll need to make it through the crisis.

McCain can make the substantive case for his broadly centrist conservatism. He can explain that our enemies won’t take a vacation because the markets are down, and that it’s not unimportant that he’s ready to be commander in chief. He can remind voters that even in a recession, the president appoints federal judges — and that his judges won’t legislate from the bench.

And he can point out that there’s going to be a Democratic Congress. He can suggest that surely we’d prefer a president who would check that Congress where necessary and work with it where possible, instead of having an inexperienced Democratic president joined at the hip with an all-too-experienced Democratic Congress, leading us, unfettered and unchecked, back to 1970s-style liberalism.

At Wednesday night’s debate at Hofstra, McCain might want to volunteer a mild mea culpa about the extent to which the presidential race has degenerated into a shouting match. And then he can pledge to the voters that the last three weeks will feature a contest worthy of this moment in our history.

He’d enjoy it. And he might even win it.

[Senoska]

Frankly, a lot of the liberal hosts have misused their talk shows (on TV and likely radio.) Not as badly as the conservatives, mind you, but I think Olbermann has gotten too close to O'Reilly partisanness for comfort.

Keith is awesome, though.

[Day]

Keith is awesome, though.

Gonna have to agree.

[Plow]

The media isn’t all-powerful.

And this is where his argument fails.

[Dimmauk]

Keith is awesome, though.

He has also had Obama on Worst persons list, and even flamed him for the FISA bill.

I wonder if BillO has done that to McCain. McCain ever been a Pinhead?

[Correction]

Fire the Campaign

By WILLIAM KRISTOL
Published: October 12, 2008

It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign.

again? :D

Edit: also

http://i38.tinypic.com/14jcndd.gif

[Dimmauk]

http://i38.tinypic.com/14jcndd.gif

Awesome!

I'll take:
Obama
Gore
Putin
Chavez and Arnold
Dean
Pelosi and Obama
Wind Bags

I wish the image was bigger so I could read all the nicknames. Mitt "the Shit" Romney is funny.

[majriti]

is it just me or does american elections take far far too long to go straight to a vote

canada called election less then 2 months ago, and vote tomorrow.
it shouldnt take this much time, effort and money in to convincing ppl to vote for you.

btw, i dont know a whole lot about politics but it seems like a whole lot of bullshit compared to the canadian elections

[ZarakiKujata]

He has also had Obama on Worst persons list, and even flamed him for the FISA bill.

I wonder if BillO has done that to McCain. McCain ever been a Pinhead?

He had him on Worst persons as a joke cause he forgot his anniversary and criticizing Obama for pandering to the center on FISA is legitimate

[Dimmauk]

Canada has elections? I wonder how many people in America knows anything about Canadian politics?