Log In | Register
445 Comments
PrintImages 
(showing 1 of 3 photos)
(showing 1 of 3 photos)advertisement
Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin said Friday she thinks Barack Obama regrets not making Hillary Rodham Clinton his running mate.
Palin praised Clinton's "determination, and grit and even grace" during the Democratic primaries, sounding an altogether different note than when she suggested earlier this year that the New York senator was whining about negative press coverage and campaigning in a way that was not advancing the cause of women in politics.
"I think he's regretting not picking her now," Palin told ABC News.
Her comment brought a sharp rejoinder from Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, on behalf of the Obama campaign: "Sarah Palin should spare us the phony sentiment and respect. Governor Palin accused Senator Clinton of whining."
Palin, in the second part of her first major interview since she joined the GOP ticket, also defended the nearly $200 million in federal pet projects she sought as Alaska governor this year even as John McCain told a television audience she had never requested them.
Palin was confronted in the interview with two claims that have been a staple of her reputation since joining McCain: that she was opposed to federal earmarks, even though her request for such special spending projects for 2009 was the highest per capita figure in the nation; and that she opposed the $398 million Bridge to Nowhere linking Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport.
Palin actually turned against the bridge project only after it became a national symbol of wasteful spending and Congress had pulled money for it.
Palin told ABC's Charles Gibson that since she took office, the state had "drastically" reduced its efforts to secure earmarks and would continue to do so while she was governor.
"What I've been telling Alaskans for these years that I've been in office, is, no more," Palin said.
When Gibson noted she had requested money to study the mating habits of crabs and harbor-seal genetic research — the kind of small-bore projects that draw McCain's ire — Palin said the specific requests had come through universities and other public entities and weren't worked out by lobbyists behind closed doors.
On the Bridge to Nowhere, Palin said she had supported a link from the mainland to the airport but not necessarily the costly bridge project.
"We killed the Bridge to Nowhere," Palin said flatly, despite evidence she had supported the project in its early stages.
On social issues, Palin reiterated her opposition to abortion rights — parting with McCain, who supports legal abortion in cases of rape or incest. Palin opposes those exceptions. Like McCain, she supports overturning the Roe vs. Wade guarantee of abortion rights.
However, she came down against a constitutional ban on abortion, which many social conservatives want. She said of abortion, "I think the states should be able to decide that issue," a position incompatible with a constitutional ban. In that respect, her position is the same as McCain's.
Palin refused to say whether she believed homosexuality was an orientation or a choice. "I'm not one to judge," Palin said.
Palin's comments came after McCain sat for a feisty grilling on ABC's "The View," where he claimed erroneously that his running mate hadn't sought money for federal pet projects.
"Not as governor she didn't," McCain said, ignoring the record.
Palin's entry in the race has drawn support from many white women, and the McCain campaign hopes in particular that she can pull Clinton's supporters away from Obama. It was in that spirit that she heaped praise on Obama's defeated rival in the face of her earlier criticisms.
"What determination, and grit, and even grace through some tough shots that were fired her way — she handled those well," Palin said.
In March, Palin was asked about coverage of Clinton at a Newsweek forum, and said: "Fair or unfair, I think she does herself a disservice to even mention it, really. I mean, you gotta plow through that. You have to know what you're getting into ... when I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism, or you know maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, 'That doesn't do us any good — women in politics."
Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, the man Obama picked for his ticket, defended Clinton this week when a voter told him it was best that he was chosen over the New York senator. Biden said Clinton "might've been a better pick than me."
In Alaska, meanwhile, the investigator looking into whether Palin abused her power as governor in trying to fire her former brother-in-law asked state lawmakers for the power to subpoena Palin's husband, Todd, a dozen others and the phone records of a top aide. The state House and Senate judiciary committees were expected to grant the request.
Palin told ABC she welcomed the investigation. "There's nothing to hide in this," she said.
Palin was in Alaska on Friday and scheduled to attend a campaign rally in Nevada on Saturday while McCain took the day off, a reflection of her growing status as the GOP ticket's celebrity draw.
On "The View," McCain said that Palin had "ignited a spark" among voters but acknowledged they parted ways on certain issues. The Arizona has said human behavior is largely responsible for climate change and opposes drilling for oil in a federally protected refuge, for example.
McCain appeared to back off a bit from his claim that Palin was the best vice presidential pick in U.S. history when he joked, "We politicians are never given to exaggeration or hyperbole."
The GOP hopeful also stood by two debunked campaign commercials — one which said Obama favored comprehensive sex education for kindergarten students and another that suggested Obama had called Palin a pig. Both are factually inaccurate.
Obama, as an Illinois state senator, voted for legislation that would teach age-appropriate sex education to kindergartners, including information on rejecting advances by sexual predators. And while Obama told a campaign rally this week that McCain's policies were like "putting lipstick on a pig," he never used the phrase in connection with Palin.
"Those ads aren't true. They're lies," said "View" co-host Joy Behar.
"They're not lies," McCain said, insisting that Obama "chooses his words very carefully" and should never had made the lipstick remark.
___
Associated Press writer Garance Burke in Wasilla, Alaska, contributed to this report.
© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
71 Votes- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
Published to:
- Beth Fouhy's Column, All of Newsvine
- Groups: none
- Regions: United States
 | Today on the presidential campaign trail | Associated Press | Thu Sep 11 | 8 |
| Hometown sees change with Palin's new role | Associated Press | Sat Sep 13 | 14 |
 | The Palin Interview | Matt Rock | Sat Sep 13 | 1 |
 | PALIN vs. FACT | ABC News | Thu Sep 11 | 167 |
| Palin Bubble Over: Where does McCain Stand? | Goodluck Diigbo | Sat Sep 13 | 0 |
- Public Discussion (445)
What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user
has on the current conversation.
The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd
row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera).
Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group
is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the
left, in their corresponding group.
Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the
number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative
one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their
relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
5.9
1.5
{"commentId":2916441,"authorDomain":"4dawnash"}
Nothing will matter until November anyway, and my feeling is that those are with Mccain will knew from the beginning they would be. Same goes for Obama. It depends on if you lean more right or left. I have figured I will vote for Ron Paul, but I am not wasting my vote. I am with McCain and Pallin, though she is a lot further right than me. It will be up to independent voters to decide this election. Liberals will go with Obama and conservatives will stick behind McCain. Same @!$%#, different day. But yeah, I am tempted to say he was dumb for not picking Hilary. Then again, two liberals, one black, the other a woman, may not sit will with hardcore racists and sexists from both the democrat and repub party. Just a fact.
{"commentId":2916441,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"4dawnash"}
- 2 votes
#76 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 4:35 PM EDT{"commentId":2916559,"authorDomain":"vickiwalch"}
Here are a few thoughts: Obama wisely chose a person of Biden's experience. He is a known quantity and is a respected leader. He didn't just pick a woman to appease the white women voters becasue, as he has said, "American's aren't stupid." At this juncture in time, Hillary was too controversial as a running mate for Obama. Biden's comment about Hillary was respectful and could easily be used for a future election quote. Hillary isn't out of the running forever. She wasn't my personal choice but she is a potential future candidate for the Democratic party. Palin's comment was condescending and she obviously didn't choose her words carefully.
Also, McCain is correct in saying Obama chooses his words carefully - something that McCain struggles with. This actually was a wonderful compliment that the Obama's campaign should jump on. Choosing one's words carefully is an important quality in a President. It shows a grasp of communication and it shows intellegence. Obama and Biden are both very eloquent, educated and quick-witted candidates that would represent the best side of America. There are plenty of Americans who lack the education that brings about those skills. Education is a focus aspect for the Obama/Biden campaign.
As for the lipstick comment - it is an idiom that has been used by both candidates. Anyone can twist words and the campaign directors look for those moments. I ignore those comments from both sides of the campaign because they are not worthy of my time. But then again, I like to think I am a smart American.
{"commentId":2916559,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"vickiwalch"}
- 1 vote
#77 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 4:51 PM EDT{"commentId":2917255,"authorDomain":"ladyapr"}
Even if Hillary came out to say that she never wanted to be VP, someone will say that she's lieing and of course she always wanted the job. She can't win. All she can do, now that Sarah Palin has had ONE actually interview, is takes the points of the interview and state how different she is from Palin.
{"commentId":2917255,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"ladyapr"}
- 2 votes
#78 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 6:03 PM EDT{"commentId":2918199,"authorDomain":"dbe928"}
We'll see in November. I suspect many Obama Kool-Aid drinkers will get a nasty little surprise when McCain-Palin win, especially if the GOP takes the House of Representatives too, which might happen
{"commentId":2918199,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"dbe928"}
- 1 vote
#79 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 7:47 PM EDT{"commentId":2920633,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
I suspect your own Kool-Aid might taste a little funky in November... :)
{"commentId":2920633,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2926714,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
Right on DBE928, the current congress has a low approval rating in the single digits!!! So many Dems are steaming mad that they gave them a chance to start some real change in '06 and they "pissed" it away.
{"commentId":2926714,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2927062,"authorDomain":"chasing"}
So many Dems are steaming mad that they gave them a chance to start some real change in '06 and they "pissed" it away.
A majority and a meaningful, working majority are two different things. Unfortunately that appears to be a nuance lost on most Americans.
{"commentId":2927062,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"chasing"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":2918641,"authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
Actually the more I think about it, it is the super-delagetes that should be regretting their decision. Obama is not ready or the country is not ready for him, I don't know which, but if it would have been Hillary/Obama the polls would not look like they do now. In 8 years from now Obama would make a great president.
{"commentId":2918641,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
#80 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 8:32 PM EDT{"commentId":2919685,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
Hillary would make a great CEO, or a great member of the President's cabinet, but I believe she would have been an ineffective President herself. Most Presidents have taken their case to Congress and tried to impose their will on them in basic hand-to-hand combat. The truly great presidents have been able to tell their stories, convey their visions, and gain the trust and support of the American people, at which point the Congress would just follow along like sheep. Reagan did it, as did Kennedy. President Clinton did it somewhat, but he crippled himself with his indiscretions and other poor choices. Teddy Roosevelt did it, as did Lincoln.
I believe Obama could do it. Hillary would have been too polarizing. McCain is clearly not his own man anymore, and would likely be mushier than even Carter.
{"commentId":2919685,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
{"commentId":2919773,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
One thing Palin should think about before she makes comments like this -- if Obama had picked Hillary as his running mate, McCain would not have picked Palin.
Having said that, it would have been SO much fun to watch Hillary debate Palin. Basicially, it would be a prime-time evisceration. I hope Biden has the intestinal fortitude to do the same.
Hillary has the experience and intelligence to sit in the Oval Office on her own merits. Palin is basically the affirmative-action candidate. The Republicans have dumbed-down the requirements of the office so that a woman (regardless of qualifications) can be on the ticket. Kind of ironic, considering how much the Republicans have fought against affirmative action over the years....
{"commentId":2919773,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
- 1 vote
#81 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 10:14 PM EDT{"commentId":2926770,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
Perhaps that's Palins' point; if Obama had picked Hillary as his running mate, Obama wouldn't have to be distracted from McCain and be dealing with her (Palin). Why does Obama spend so much energy and time and attention dealing with Palin? I thought that was Bidens' job.
{"commentId":2926770,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
{"commentId":2920398,"authorDomain":"racrowley"}
Whenever I hear something I consider the source. The source of this comment is Sarah Palin, who is demonstrating that she can lie with a straight face and a smile, i.e. "She was for the Bridge to Nowhere, before she was against." Therefore this is not a credible source. This is a woman whose belief system says she should hate Hilary Clinton because of the positions Senator Clinton takes on issues like abortion. It will be very difficult for me to hear anything from Sarah Palin that I will consider truth in the future.
{"commentId":2920398,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"racrowley"}
- 2 votes
#82 - Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:11 PM EDT{"commentId":2922343,"authorDomain":"bfam97"}
Where to start? There is so much misinformation flying around this thread it is hard to know where to start.
First, Obama is a skilled orator, a gifted talker who is able to construct an image of himself divorced from the reality of his corrupt connections (take your pick: Rezo; William Ayers, the domestic terrorist that we all want to claim as our friend and fellow traveler; the most "reverend" Jeremiah Wright, spewing anti-American and anti-white hatred, just like Jesus Christ did (oh yeah, that is NOT what Christ taught, that's right, my bad!) and instead present himself as the Chosen One. Well, I for one must say, Obama, you are NOT the change I have been waiting for.
Yes, our political system is broken, corrupted by money in both parties generally, but there is a world of difference between the unqualified, over-hyped and under-investigated Obama, and John McCain, a man of honor who has been tested under fire and can lead us through these dangerous times we live in.
Oh, and this is all I have time for tonight, let's get a few things straight about the economy: First, while some people are hurting in this country, there truly has been NO recession as it has ALWAYS been defined - two straight quarters of NEGATIVE growth in the GDP; Second, the problems caused by mortgage defaults have occured right under the sleepy eyes of the Democrat party, which has controlled BOTH houses of Congress for almost two years. Moreover, all the millions of individuals who agreed to mortgages they could not afford share a big portion of the blame with greedy mortgage lenders - ya think any of THEM are left-wing democrats??
One of the worst problems has been the high price of oil which makes almost everthing we buy more expensive. Your hero, Obama, is part of the no-drill crowd of anti-business, anti-growth enviromental extremists who have prevented us from developing the oil resources we already have! If we could have had even a small increase in supply when demand was just barely exceeding the global supply, oil prices never would have skyrocketed like they did. That is squarely on the shoulders of the liberals, who blindly stuck to a no-drill policy for decades after the rest of the world kept drilling offshore with accompanying improvements in the technology that reduces both the risk and effects of any potential spills. If you are all honest, you will have to admit that the Democrat party, and their Chosen One, are primarily the reason your gas prices are so high.
John McCain, and especially Sarah Palin understand these basic energy-market realities and Obama and his sidekick don't. Period. If you insist on supporting the Chosen One and his anti-drilling policies (has he caved yet, like the rest of his party as they realized they were finally being held accountable for this by most Americans that can think for themselves) then man up and admit you favor radically expensive oil and gas prices and convince yourselves to feel good about it because you mistakenly think you are "protecting" the environment.
No, that's right, it's only because of the big, bad, nasty oil companies, I forgot. Do any of you even know the profit margin of big oil companies? It is very reasonable; the total amount looks large just because these are huge companies, like big car manufacturers and other business giants.
That's all I have time for tonight - please try to present informed arguments next time, okay??
This civic lesson courtesy of The Doc
{"commentId":2922343,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"bfam97"}
- 1 vote
#83 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 2:11 AM EDT{"commentId":2926798,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
Very well put Doc! Great medicine...
{"commentId":2926798,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2928700,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
Apparently you've mistaken this for the Creative Fiction class. That class is down the hall. This is Civics.
Let's see...where to start...
John McCain does not have an energy policy that would make a damn bit of difference. He wants to increase offshore oil drilling, as well as open up ANWR for drilling. That approach may add 3% - 5% to the world oil supply in about a decade, at which time world oil demand would have grown 25% at minimum, courtesy of China, India and others. Oil is a fungible commodity and the companies that produce and refine it are multi-nationals, so additional offshore drilling in the US would benefit the world oil market that additional 3% - 5%; in other words, China and the US would benefit equally from that small increase in supply, on a per-capita basis. Put another way, since China currently has about 4 times the population of the US, 4/5 of the oil drilled in the Gulf or in Alaska would benefit China.
The US is addicted to oil, and our primary dealers will remain the Muslim world, Russia and Venezuela, none of whom is particularly friendly to the US.
After 8 years of McCain the oil companies will be richer, the sheiks will be richer, the Russians will be richer, and we will be poorer and even more addicted than ever. Further, the terrorists will be stronger and the Russians will be rebuilding their military with all our oil money. Oh, and by the way, the Chinese will still be buying American Treasury notes.
Two key facts to consider:
1) The Russians have already embargoed Western Europe gas supplies once before.
2) McCain has missed EIGHT votes this year in the Senate regarding laws to address US energy dependence.
Obama and the Democrats have made domestic energy a centerpiece of their platform. They will invest huge amounts of money in sustainable energy, the electricity and gas delivery systems, nuclear, etc. This is a man-on-the-moon sized project, and it's what's needed. If we solve our energy addiction, we will see dramatic change in both our national security and our national wealth.
This is all out there in the public record. Do your homework before you start ranting.
As far as so-called 'scandals' are concerned: every national politician can be attached somehow to sleazy characters. As far as Rizzo and Wright were concerned, as soon as they became known Obama threw them overboard. What else could be done? If John Gotti makes an unsolicited campaign contribution to John McCain, does that mean that McCain is a stooge for organized crime? Of course not., as long as McCain gives back the money and condemns Gotti.
Besides, since you want to go tit-for-tat, what about the Keating 5?
I could go on about the rest of the nonsense in your rant, but my kid needs some lunch...
{"commentId":2928700,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
{"commentId":2923848,"authorDomain":"ethelmea"}
the only reason that mcain picked palin was he thought that the women of america would be so impressed that they would run to his side he was hoping to take away all the 18 million voters for hillary what a slap in the face for him to think that she is even in the same league as hillary every woman in america sould be outraged it is all part of his strategy he is not fooling anyone.
{"commentId":2923848,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"ethelmea"}
- 1 vote
#84 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 8:57 AM EDT{"commentId":2924664,"authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
So where were you when Hillary was fighting your fight, oh that's right, you went to follow the leader...you sided with the Media's "chosen one". You bought into all that hollow "change" crap. Well, it is kinda of ironic that now you want Hillary's follower's to fall in line and vote for your guy. Well let me tell you, he is only out there for some of us, and we need someone who will be there for ALL of us, not for just some of the disenfranchised few....Get with the program.
Call me bitter, racist, or any name you want...but Obama is not what I want as POTUS at this time!
{"commentId":2924664,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
- 2 votes
{"commentId":2925277,"authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
the only reason that mcain picked palin was he thought that the women of america would be so impressed...
That, and he wanted to have some kids in his campaign to compete with Obama's kids.
Really, that was the main reason.
He didn't anticipate the rest at all...clearly.
{"commentId":2925277,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":2924167,"authorDomain":"ethelmea"}
dr. sage it seems as though your civic lesson is a little bias you must be a rep. but that is ok i agree with you on one thing that the fianacial institutes are greedy and that those people did buy house that they can not afford but that is all you will get from me the rep. are just as much to blame for high gas prices as anyone they didnot have a problem bending the american people over befor this election year they knew that it was going to be a problem so know they want to fix it.all of these problems that we have in this country did not happen over night they have been building up for the last 8 years if we were not fighting a war that we shouldnt be then 10 BILLIONN dollars would not be leaving this country every month are own government spies on us all to keep us safe (so they say) i am so sick of people trying to shove john mcain down my throat if you think that he is an hourable person then that is your right but just becuase he has been in congress for 30 years and was a prisoner of war does not make him the answer to the problem he is just like bush a war monger. the longer that we stay at war the more money that they make it is big oil that runs this country they are the only one that are not laying people off so dont you even try to defend the oil companies to me . you need to take off your rep. are great glasses and take a look around and if you are happy with what you see then you do not have a clue about what is really happening to this great country. and that is your civic lesson for the day
{"commentId":2924167,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"ethelmea"}
#85 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:30 AM EDT{"commentId":2924505,"authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
You all know that Obama is, even now, trying to see why he even thought that he was above it all..he squandered 18 million votes for his ego..so sad, too bad..
I am an Independent..and still have not made my choice..and no strong arm tactic by both sides will deflect me. I will make my decision on who is best for POTUS, on my good time!
{"commentId":2924505,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
- 1 vote
#86 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:03 AM EDT{"commentId":2925325,"authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
You all know that Obama is, even now, trying to see why he even thought that he was above it all..
Another racist who thinks he is being cleaver by rephrasing the term "uppity!" Disgusting tool!
{"commentId":2925325,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":2926856,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
angelica-295056,
If you haven't made up your mind yet, check out this book to get some perspective:
It's a real eyeopener!
{"commentId":2926856,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2927389,"authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
@Dan Hallo, aka, Zoilus: This is why I am against all you Obamabots...I voice my opinion, all you can say is: racist. Well all I can say is GFYS.
I have not made my mind as to who I should vote for, but your response shows me that you and your ilk are not deserving of my support. Take that as you wish!
{"commentId":2927389,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"angelica91577"}
{"commentId":2927452,"authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
...trying to see why he even thought that he was above it all ...
How dare he think that! uppity. Why blame me for seeing that you are a racist? You said it?
{"commentId":2927452,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"Zoilus"}
- 3 votes
{"commentId":2928198,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
I can just hear it...
When Obama looses the election, a lot of his followers will say that every one who voted for Mccain/Palin are racists. What is really racist is the fact that if Obama was not black (and he is not even all black), and given the same associations with the people he is associated with (Ayers, etc.), as well as all else being equal, he would not be the nominee.
If, as it has been said on this forum, that picking Palin (or Clinton for that matter) just because they are woman is sexist and "a slap in the face" (sorce #90), then voting for Obama just because he is black is racist and 'slapist' too.
{"commentId":2928198,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2928314,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
I think YOUR statements are racist. If anything, he's the nominee in SPITE of his race. There are still an awful lot of people out there who will not vote for a black for president.
Obama is the nominee because he won more delegates in primaries and caucuses than any of his opponents.
Picking anyone because of what they are instead of who they are is wrong, and most definitely not in the best interests of the US. Palin was hand-picked (not elected) because she is female and conservative, and conservative, much in the same way that Clarence Thomas was hand-picked (not elected) because he is black and conservative. Both are fairly useless. Thomas has demonstrated his ineptitude as a Supreme Court justice for 2 decades. Palin governs a state with a population smaller than Poughkeepsie, NY, and given the oil revenue and federal largess pouring into the state, she has a lot less to struggle with than the mayor of Poughkeepsie.
{"commentId":2928314,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
{"commentId":2927368,"authorDomain":"dbe928"}
I've heard about that book and it sounds interesting. I think the truth of what Palin said is pretty clear: Obama would have been better off with Hillary than with gaffe-prone Biden, and I suspect he regrets it now, especially when Palin has become "the story" for the media, not Obama. That said, I think the media is helping McCain tremendously through the transparent bias against his ticket and the condescension shown Palin, which is causing a fairly big anti-media and anti-Democrat backlash in some quarters.
{"commentId":2927368,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"dbe928"}
- 1 vote
#87 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 2:25 PM EDT{"commentId":2928413,"authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
DBE928,
I think your analyses is right-on; and the truth of what you state makes me somewhat of a 'sad panda' because I would rather win on the issues than on the backlash against the obvious media bias.
If you go to one of my previous posts (#1.24) there is a quote and a source link that explains how Obamas' campaign manager is a master manipulator of the media because he started his career as a political writer/jornalist and knows exactly what the media "needs to hear" and "how, why and when" they need to hear it. In fact, one of his areas of expertise (campaign manager Axelrod) is how to create the appearance of a grassroots movement so that a grassroots movement can be created by means of a kind of 'self-fulfilling prophecy.'
It is very interesting and very telling.
{"commentId":2928413,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"mtseeker"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2930879,"authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
...and this would be different from anything that the McCain, Bush2, Bush1, Reagan and Nixon campaigns have done in what way??????
(ref. Karl Rove, Lee Atwater, John Mitchell, etc.)
{"commentId":2930879,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"al-logiodice"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2941801,"authorDomain":"drjohnriolo"}
I find these discussions about who Obama should have picked for VP interesting. However it's like a poker player who asked the dealer for one card and then has second thoughts about whether they should have asked for three. In poker or politics you play the hand you have. Palin is simply doing what any good poker player would do. That is to unnerve the opponent.
If Obama named Hillary I suspect he would be seen as quite weak. It's one thing to choose your rival as a running mate but it quite another to have your rival forced down your throat as the Hilliary supporters tried to do.
However what ever happens this November I predict we will see Palin vs. Clinton in 2012 or 2016 at the latest. There may be many differences between them on the surface but they have a lot in common. It will be interesting.
{"commentId":2941801,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"drjohnriolo"}
- 1 vote
{"commentId":2927743,"authorDomain":"aremolanre"}
The Biden pick came as a surprise. Yes he (Biden) was a serious and focused candidate but I think Bill Richardson would have been better. I don't know if he was offered and he turned it down. At least he wasn't scandal prone like John Edwards. Biden would make a good Secretary of State. I hear a lot about Evan Bayh too (The Senator from Indiana) - don't know much about him. The Biden pick however shows again the Obama is a careful person and not an overt risk taker. I will trust his judgement more than McCains' who takes a risk with a relatively unknown politician; generating so much controversy and asking us to take it or leave it.
{"commentId":2927743,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"aremolanre"}
- 1 vote
#88 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:05 PM EDT{"commentId":2929271,"authorDomain":"dr58796"}
I'm sure Obama will use Hillary in the coming weeks. He does not need on the ticket to win but her help is key. Obama will unleash his new campaign stance next week and will go on the offensive against McCain and bring the election back to the inevitable issues. The distractions of the last few weeks will start to fade next week into the past and the story will go back to the economy. Obama still needs to seal the deal which he did not do in the primaries and still has not completely settled. He has questions hovering over him which McCain has been able to exploit through false campaign ads. Obama needs to show what he made of.
{"commentId":2929271,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"dr58796"}
#89 - Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:47 PM EDT{"commentId":2936933,"authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
jaguar I respectfully disagree with your opinion. Bill Richardson would have been far worse then Biden. One of the many reasons Obama choose Biden was because he was a staunch Hillary supporter. Bill is a traitor to Clintons and would not have helped unite the party at all. Biden, whom the Clintons love, is having a hard enough time getting this party together but with Richardson it would have been impossible.
{"commentId":2936933,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
- 1 vote
#90 - Mon Sep 15, 2008 12:19 PM EDT{"commentId":3050284,"authorDomain":"SuperSaiyan"}
Also, I just read a report on the AOL website that Bill Clinton stated that Hillary never wanted to be Obama's V.P.
Bill Clinton: Hillary Didn't Want to Be VP Anyway
News flash: Hillary Clinton never wanted to be Barack Obama's No. 2.
Many of us figured that out, knowing full well Hillary was in it to win it. But now even Bill is saying publicly that the New York senator never wanted to be Obama's running mate. He also has no idea if Obama opted not to pick Hillary because of any potential baggage called "Bill" she might bring into the White House with her.
"Not really, she didn't," Clinton said in response to a question from host Barbara Walters on ABC's "The View" as to whether Hillary wanted to be on the ticket.
Even though in June, soon after conceding the primary to Obama, Clinton told New York lawmakers she was "open to it" and would accept the veep spot if it was offered to her, the former president said she would have taken out of a sense of duty, despite not really wanting it. (I mean, how do you say 'no,' anyway?)
"Look, she loves being a senator from New York and she has more freedom" to work on issues in that capacity, he said.
Then Walters hit Clinton with the question: Did Obama steer away from picking Hillary because Bill would be part of the package? And would McCain have picked Sarah Palin as his running mate if Clinton was on the Democratic ticket?
"I think that he felt more comfortable with another choice and you have to respect that," Clinton said of Obama picking Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.
"I have no idea" if Obama was leery of Bill, Clinton added, but "if anybody thought that, they were just reading the political press and believing it because I wouldn't have been in this race if Hillary hadn't run."
Bill Clinton also said Biden was "the best politically," in terms of a running mate for the junior senator from Illinois.
"It's a very personal decision who should be vice president. I like Sen. Biden a lot. I think he was a good choice. [Hillary Clinton] would have been the best politically at least in the short run because of her enormous support in the country," he said.
Asked by co-host Joy Behar whether it's a valid argument that some Hillary supporters are throwing their vote to McCain because of Palin, Clinton essentially said 'don't knock people for their votes.'
"We all know this – voting is a complicated process," Clinton said, after stumbling a bit. "It's not an entirely rational process and it's different for everybody.
"You can't tell someone else that the ground on which they make their voting decision is irrational."
Behar: "Even if it's against their interests?"
Clinton: "Even if it's against their economic interests."
Clinton also agreed that sexism played a part in the defeat of his wife's presidential bid. "I think there's been some of it but a lot of it has been subconscious, which may make it more insidious," he said, adding that in West Virginia, exit polls actually asked voters if Obama's race and Hillary's gender had anything to do with they way they voted. The results were 15 percent and 20 percent, respectively, said 'yes.'
Clinton said although he believes Obama will win the election, he had praise for both men.
"I genuinely like both of them, I genuinely admire both of them ... I think we make a terrible mistake finding something wrong with the people we can't vote for."
The financial meltdown might help Obama, Clinton said, as will the fact that America is growing more diverse. "Demographically, the country is moving toward democratic voters, in general," and voter registration is up for Democrats in 20 of the most important states, he added.
But had it not been for McCain, the Republican senator from Arizona, Clinton said, the former president – a Vietnam War opponent – might never have been able to normalize relations with Vietnam.
"It was a lot easier for me when he said 'President Clinton was right,'" Clinton said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dns6oX4p98 (video of interview- admittedly condenced)
{"commentId":3050284,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"SuperSaiyan"}
#91 - Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:13 PM EDT{"commentId":3055981,"authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
Everything you said may be true but Hillary would have been a much stronger candidate that Biden and she would have accepted if Obama asked.
{"commentId":3055981,"threadId":"356492","contentId":"1860318","authorDomain":"tishamauro"}
{"canLink":false,"threadId":"356492","isPrivate":false}
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
Start Tracking
Stop TrackingCOMPANY STUFF:
LEGAL STUFF:
- © 2005-2009 Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
- Newsvine is a property of
