Word is McCain picked her at the last minute after his Lieberman choice was shot down. Seems he literally did no vetting on her before making the choice - hence the fall-out.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
I can't believe in a matter of two days we find out this chick has a ho for a daughter and is a secessionist bitch!
Dude, you made me laugh.
Seriously though: McCain did not vet.
Quote:
Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice. The campaign was still calling Republican operatives as late as Sunday night asking them to go to Alaska to deal with the unexpected candidacy of Ms. Palin.
It's another day and you know what that means! Another Palin scandal!
She's a book banner/burner, folks:
Quote:
[Former Wasilla mayor John Stein] says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor.
Another habit of hers? Abuse of power! You don't follow her or allow her to do what she wants? She fires you! Weeeeeee!!!!
Quote:
City librarian Mary Ellen Emmons [Baker] will stay, but Police Chief Irl Stambaugh is on his own, Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin announced Friday. The decision came one day after letters signed by Palin were dropped on Stambaugh's and Emmon's desks, telling them their jobs were over as of Feb. 13.
....
Wow.....sure sounds like this is the tip of the iceberg. Think the McCain camp is harboring any regret yet?
Saw this on another message board an thought it was funny:
"expectant GRANDMOTHER, mother of 5, governor, former mayor, PTA member, NRA member, fisherwoman, basketball player, Alaska separatist, book burner, beauty queen...MY FRIENDS, I introduce you to the next Vice President of US AMERICA!"
Always carry some vetting in your wallet, cause you just never know...
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Everyone: Let's remember we're talking about politicians here. There's no such thing as a decision, on either side, that doesn't involve calculations, polling, focus groups and, yes, pandering.
I've commented on pandering as it applies to Joe Biden already, and made mention elsewhere that if it were a Republican candidate had the connections to lobbyists that Biden has, there would be a certian amoung of howling from some members in our forum. I have to admit that I'm a bit surprised that the topic hasn't come up yet and I figured that this thread might be an appropriate place to bring it up (no need for a new thread, I think). So, I'll try to get things started.
Barack Obama's speech announcing his running mate Joe Biden singled out the Delaware senator's son who is headed for Iraq. Obama didn't mention the profession of Biden's other son, who lobbied for two drug companies and five universities. .....
Both Obama and Republican presidential rival John McCain have said lobbyists may not work on their campaigns. McCain recently called lobbyists ``birds of prey,'' and Obama has refused to accept their contributions. In his speech yesterday in Springfield, Illinois, Obama said he's running in part to repair ``a government that has fallen prey to special interests.'' Hunter Biden's work for Oldaker, Biden & Belair on behalf of biotech clients Achaogen, Inc., of South San Francisco and Pulmatrix, Inc., of Lexington, Massachusetts, illustrates the quandary posed when legislators have lobbyists within the family.
"When Joe Biden’s brother and son wanted to buy a hedge fund company two years ago, they turned for financing to a law firm that had lobbied the Delaware senator’s office on an important piece of business in Congress — and in fact had just benefited from his vote.
The firm promised James and Hunter Biden that it would invest $2 million, and it quickly delivered half of that sum.
That deal eventually fell through and the money was returned. But it highlighted the close ties that Joe Biden and his family have developed with SimmonsCooper, an Illinois law firm that specializes in asbestos litigation — a multimillion-dollar line of business that was under threat in Congress.
Sen. Barack Obama has portrayed himself as a Washington outsider and sworn off special interest money - but his new political sidekick, Sen. Joe Biden, has hauled in thousands from lobbyists, including maximum donations from a pair of Boston’s top powerbrokers.
I've tried to use some relatively mainstream sources in the hope that the basic facts I'm posting are correct.
If they are correct, do they represent a concern for supporters of the Obama/Biden supporters? Should it be a concern, or is it overblown?
It should be a concern -- I've seen lots of grumbling about it on liberal blogs -- but it won't be overblown because the issues are too complex to fit on a bumper sticker.
I think there needs to be a smoking gun before it's an all-out scandal. This, we can all agree, isn't it:
Quote:
That deal eventually fell through and the money was returned.
Even if the family's lobbying had directly benefited Joe Biden financially, how does John McCain call him out on it? He really doesn't want to make his membership in the Keating 5 an issue in this campaign.
Similarly, McCain really doesn't want to make an issue of connections to lobbyists. He can't win that one.
Russ: I think those things highlight yet one more irony in the VP choices this year. Both parties have contradicted quite a bit of their candidate's original arguments. (experience, drilling, lobbying, new blood, etc.)
Doesn't surprise me much, but I spent many years in that denomination. Consider it the white Evangelical rhetoric that sounds alarming only to those unfamiliar with it.
Guess we've found the foil/counterpart to Jeremiah Wright.
__________________ The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same. -- Carlos Castaneda
It's been almost a week now and Palin hasn't done a single press interview yet.
Is this unprecedented?
__________________
Working "hard," or the perception of working hard, doesn't really mean anything. Sweating, vomiting, and breathing hard could be a good workout or a tropical disease kicking in.-Dan John
Wow! You guys seem to quote a lot of questionable sources. Whatever happened to the idea of being careful what you believe on the internet. I almost feel the same way about other forms of media. Regardless of whether the issue involves democrats or republicans, most media wants a scandal and so the full story tends to come later if at all.
Personally, I like McCain/Palin over Obama/Biden. You won't find me saying anything mean-spirited about Obama. I think he and his wife have done well for themselves. I just think he is not experienced enough for president. Maybe in 4 years. I do not necessarily like the way Hillary and Bill go about doing things to get elected but I would prefer Hillary over Obama as president.
If McCain/Palin win, then 2012 will be interesting with a possible Palin versus Hillary...assuming McCain doesn't go for a second term.
Wow! You guys seem to quote a lot of questionable sources. Whatever happened to the idea of being careful what you believe on the internet.
Bloomberg News, Associated Press and Boston Herald are the three linked on this page. As far as other media, without them we might as well choose by the rock, paper, scissors method.
__________________
***
Today's mighty oak was once just some nut who held his ground!
You guys seem to quote a lot of questionable sources. Whatever happened to the idea of being careful what you believe on the internet. I almost feel the same way about other forms of media. Regardless of whether the issue involves democrats or republicans, most media wants a scandal and so the full story tends to come later if at all.
Speaking as a journalist, there's a reason we call spot news reporting "history's first draft." You can't possibly get the full story on day one. Good reporters, and good news organizations, take a shot in the dark with breaking news, and then fill in the blanks on subsequent reports.
The reason the Palin stuff is such a clusterfuck is because McCain didn't vet his candidate. He didn't see any of these story lines coming, and had no counter-narrative in place when all these stories began to break at once.
The National Enquirer, for fuck's sake, had some of this information before his campaign did. The big news organizations had stringers in Alaska chasing down these stories before McCain had operatives on the ground.
That's not the media's fault. McCain made an impulsive decision to name an unvetted candidate as his running mate without preparing himself or his staff for the blowback. This is what happens when a campaign seizes a news cycle without any thought for what happens five minutes after they seize it.
Lou,
Say what you will, but this media coverage in my mind has been awful. I think it is great to rip apart Palin's experience, education, ethics, her views on creationism and abortion, whether she really did take money for the bridge to nowhere before turning it down etc. I'd like to know the truth on all this stuff and any candidate should have this scrutiny.
However, Chelsea was pretty much left alone, as were the Gore girls, Biden's son, the Bush twins...etc. The smears on this 17 year old girl are abhorrent no matter how you slice it. Did the media report on the Gore girl's sex lives? I've gotten emails about how Palin is actually RESPONSIBLE for her son's downs syndrome. And of course all the blogging that the daughter was actually pregnant with the child. Very honestly, I'm actually shocked/amazed at how it has been seen as 'okay' to go after her 17 year old.
There is a special place in hell for the people that put this stuff on the front pages of magazines and blog and post about this garbage. I think wives/husbands should generally be off limits, and I REALLY think a candidates child should be off limits. I'm shocked more people are ashamed that they perpetuate this stuff. God forbid we start blogging about Obama's daughters. How can that possibly be acceptable? How can this poor adolescent who is likely going through a hell of a lot right now, how can she possibly deserve this? I've never posted on someone's kids, and I really can't imagine ever doing so.
I believe TomK wrote, and I agree with, it is a shame more people don't have the class of their candidate. I don't know how any candidate can ever unite a country when this is the way that media covers elections. If Obama wins, I simply can't imagine conservatives not harboring perpetual bitterness that, as an example, US Weekly runs a cover article on 'sex lies and babies'.
So, while I agree with your premise that the media frenzy is because of a surprise candidate, I cannot accept that attacking her daughter is part of the media's responsibility. This might not have been the best thread for this, but the aforementioned post on coverage of Palin just seemed like a decent spot to plunk it.
On a total side note, I'm trying to figure out from Russ' link how in the world biden's son could 'buy' a hedge fund for 2 million. what the heck could he be buying? the human capital? A hedge fund would need more than that in assets just to exist.
Say what you will about not getting the full story right away but there is evidence that media had the full story on Mrs. Palin firing of her ex-brother-in-law. He was suspended for various infractions while being a police officer and reported to have made death threats. This part of the story is only coming out recently rather than when the story was first reported.
And mentioned that National Enquirer had a story first. Pretty sad to bring up that rag. I believe we will find that the National Enquirer did indeed had the story first and that it was just a story. Apprarently, after "history's first draft", we find that there was a 40-page document that vetted Mrs. Palin. Well, I guess if you say that McCain did not vet her, that would be technically true. He had a team do it.
Also, I still say that news nowadays focuses on scandals and tragedies because they sell. To me that is not news. News is what is currently happening... good or bad.
BTW, I thought that since the subject of this topic is "Did McCain just hand Obama the Presidency" that discussion about running mates applies as well.
Lou,
Say what you will, but this media coverage in my mind has been awful. I think it is great to rip apart Palin's experience, education, ethics, her views on creationism and abortion, whether she really did take money for the bridge to nowhere before turning it down etc. I'd like to know the truth on all this stuff and any candidate should have this scrutiny.
However, Chelsea was pretty much left alone, as were the Gore girls, Biden's son, the Bush twins...etc. The smears on this 17 year old girl are abhorrent no matter how you slice it. Did the media report on the Gore girl's sex lives? I've gotten emails about how Palin is actually RESPONSIBLE for her son's downs syndrome. And of course all the blogging that the daughter was actually pregnant with the child. Very honestly, I'm actually shocked/amazed at how it has been seen as 'okay' to go after her 17 year old.
Hold on there buddy. What credible news outlet has talked about the pregnancy conspiracy theories? While all of the things that we consume are media, there has to be a line that's drawn between the credible news outlets and other random blogs. Not all blogs are bad, but to lump in the MSM with them is ridiculous. Find me some mainstream AP or Yahoo or NBC or whatever stories about the rumors. (yes, the theories were mentioned in the articles about the announcement, only because the announcement was made in a direct attempt to refute the rumors.)
I've gotten emails about how Obama is a muslim terrorist. Your point? (The likelihood of Down's goes up from 1% to 3% IIRC for a woman that is over 35, but she's not actually responsible for it.)
Like I said in another thread, there's no doubt in my mind that the right would have gone after a Democrat's daughter had this happened to the other side of the aisle. Is it right? No. But it's going to happen either way.
Quote:
There is a special place in hell for the people that put this stuff on the front pages of magazines and blog and post about this garbage. I think wives/husbands should generally be off limits, and I REALLY think a candidates child should be off limits. I'm shocked more people are ashamed that they perpetuate this stuff. God forbid we start blogging about Obama's daughters. How can that possibly be acceptable? How can this poor adolescent who is likely going through a hell of a lot right now, how can she possibly deserve this? I've never posted on someone's kids, and I really can't imagine ever doing so.
The Republicans could really do themselves a favor and NOT TROT OUT BRISTOL AND LEVI AT EVERY APPEARANCE if they wanted them to have privacy. I understand the privacy sentiment 100%, but don't scream about that and then have Bristol holding Trig at every speech.
Quote:
I believe TomK wrote, and I agree with, it is a shame more people don't have the class of their candidate. I don't know how any candidate can ever unite a country when this is the way that media covers elections. If Obama wins, I simply can't imagine conservatives not harboring perpetual bitterness that, as an example, US Weekly runs a cover article on 'sex lies and babies'.
Again, I think the line is important to know. Are you talking about the MSM or the internet in general? With everyone having access to the internet, this isn't going to change.
Ok, just saw the US Weekly cover. Well, they are a fine bastion of journalism, so the media is going to hell and a handbasket.
Seriously? We're worried what's on the cover of US Weekly? If this was from a magazine that I would call a journalism product, then I'd be worried. US Weekly is the magazine world's Rush Limbaugh--infotainment.
Quote:
So, while I agree with your premise that the media frenzy is because of a surprise candidate, I cannot accept that attacking her daughter is part of the media's responsibility. This might not have been the best thread for this, but the aforementioned post on coverage of Palin just seemed like a decent spot to plunk it.
On a total side note, I'm trying to figure out from Russ' link how in the world biden's son could 'buy' a hedge fund for 2 million. what the heck could he be buying? the human capital? A hedge fund would need more than that in assets just to exist.
Bristol Palin is in the public eye now. Her mother made that decision. Yes, she needs to be left alone, but the family needs to do their part as well.
__________________
Quoth David Banner: "Like a pimp"
It's not a beer belly. It's a gas tank for a sax machine.
(There's a story about Bristol. The story goes away if she goes away. I am unaware of any story that the Obama girls have made)
Is that the story? I'm sure there are many pregnant teenage girls throughout the US. The media is trying to make Britol's plight into a story. The are also trying to make a story of a disabled child. As Obama has said family, especially children, are off limits. Why can't the media lay off?
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
Linear Mode
