artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene





Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye


IRC Channels



Comment Feed:


30 August 2008

Sarah Palin booed for mentioning Hillary Clinton. I guess they might want to reconsider their tack here...
the first post-announcement polls show she's doing better among men than women, and virtually no difference was made for women who were unlikely to vote McCain a week ago.
posted by kellydamnit 30 August | 19:47
In a strange way, I feel bad for her. I think she is about to have some of the worst experiences of her life. I wonder, are any Republican pundit chatter praising her as a VP choice?
posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 19:52
I think you may be right, MonkeyButter. If they lose in November I imagine she will get saddled with blame. As far as Republican punditry, I'm not sure. I don't read any political blogs (well, besides MeFi, heh), but I've been keeping up on the news and some of the editorials. I think most of the pundits were so shocked and surprised by this that they're being very careful and noncommittal while the story develops. God forbid a pundit goes out on a limb about something...
posted by eekacat 30 August | 20:02
Here's a discussion of the poll numbers kellydamnit mentioned. Very interesting indeed.
posted by scody 30 August | 20:11
What's interesting, however, is that while there is a gender gap in these numbers, it's not the one many observers were anticipating. Rather, along a variety of metrics, men like the Palin choice better than women.

And she's a former beauty queen. Again, this is my surprised face.
posted by BoringPostcards 30 August | 20:16
The alaska papers are ripping into her, too.
Seriously, I want to know what they were thinking. There has to be some major reason for this I'm just not getting.
posted by kellydamnit 30 August | 20:20
It just seems a kind of a stupid choice akin to the choice Bush originally made for the supreme court in Ruth Meyers. I'm just not getting it either.

I read a blog post here that was a good local write about her. I don't remember where I came across the link, here or in the blue.
posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 20:28
I mean, is there NO other conservative woman in politics that would have been a better choice?!
posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 20:29
Act Two begins...
posted by Ardiril 30 August | 20:36
I wonder if part of the higher approval among men might be what I call "reverse sexism" where a man doesn't want to appear sexist, but their vote really isn't affected that much more than women. It's an interesting phenomenon, and something new for the pollsters to digest when designing and analyzing polls.
posted by eekacat 30 August | 20:40
She also polls badly among undecideds. But I bet she's really got the extremist anti-choicers and creationists in her corner!

Speaking of undecideds, I'm sure this is one of the top reasons Obama picked Biden over Clinton. Clinton has higher positive ratings among Democrats than Biden; in fact, among all Obama's potential running mates, she polled the highest (Biden came second). But among undecideds, she's got the highest negatives, while Biden has the highest positives.

I mean, is there NO other conservative woman in politics that would have been a better choice?!

That's the thing that surprised me: I mean, come on, I'm the furthest thing from a conservative, but even I felt deeply insulted for Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Five bucks says she was passed over purely because she's against overturning Roe v. Wade.

Yet again, the GOP puts ideology above all else. Because I actually think Hutchinson would have been a pretty formidable pick (and it was, frankly, the one I was secretly terrified McCain would make, precisely because she has the potential for broad -- sorry! -- appeal).
posted by scody 30 August | 20:43
From Scody's link above:
"Why does this gap exist? Don't know, but it may simply be a matter of ideology. Men are generally a bit more conservative than women, and opinions of Palin are very strongly determined by ideology."

I suspect, however, that there is some strange notion of 'woman' at play here, as you say Scody, 'reverse sexsim.' Palin is the sort of woman the Right's would have as a pin-up girl, at least ideologically. It's kinda gross to think about these wrinkled old white men licking their lips and breathing heavy at her being in 'power over them.'

posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 20:55
I recall reading somewhere that Hutchison wants to retire from national politics.
posted by Ardiril 30 August | 20:56
I suspect, however, that there is some strange notion of 'woman' at play here, as you say Scody, 'reverse sexsim.'

I wouldn't have thought that, but thanks for putting the creepy idea in my head.

I figured there'd be a good chance she would get met with hostility. Both for the "pandering" aspect, and simply because a lot of women will be hostile to anyone whose resume includes a swimsuit competition. That's not snark, that's serious. There's a huge stigma against getting by on your looks, and it's not an uncommon accusation among women. Multiply the normal "dirty glance at the water cooler" by a thousand when someone finds they actually DID use their looks to get ahead- like in a beauty pageant.
posted by kellydamnit 30 August | 21:20
but even I felt deeply insulted for Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Five bucks says she was passed over purely because she's against overturning Roe v. Wade.

Yet again, the GOP puts ideology above all else

Agreed, scody. I totally expected him to pick KBH, evil fucking shithead that she is.
posted by BoringPostcards 30 August | 21:22
Palin is the sort of woman the Right's would have as a pin-up girl, at least ideologically.

Pinup girl, indeed! That's the perfect way to put it. She's ideologically to the far right, she's young, and she's pretty -- so she's politically and personally appealing to precisely the conservative men who actually DESPISE Hillary Clinton and her "type," whether liberal or conservative. She's as close as they can get to nominating Ann Coulter, frankly (though to be fair to Palin, she doesn't seem to be either profoundly mentally ill or a fascist, unlike Coulter).

But what this betrays is a total lack of understanding why Hillary has such appeal among her most ardent supporters (women and men alike). They didn't vote for her (nor, among those who did, threaten not to vote for Obama) simply because she's a woman; it's not like she's the first female senator, and the sheer novelty of her gender is the main driving factor behind her popularity. They like her because of who she is both politically and personally; it is that combination that made so many people want to see her as the first woman in the White House.

No, to them, they evidently figured that picking a woman (who would be in line with their ideological agenda) would be enough. The fact that she's unknown, unqualified, and an extremist evidently seemed irrelevant. After all, she has a uterus! So does Hillary Clinton! And so do the women who like Clinton! Therefore, the women who like Clinton will like her! It's estrogen mathematics, boys!

It seems so fucking stupid to me. Which is why I fear getting too smug about its seeming stupidity; after all, Karl Rove is behind the McCain campaign, which means there's got to be some incredible dirty ratfucking trick built into it.
posted by scody 30 August | 21:22
Hutchison is running for Texas governor. She coyly told the Dallas or press she didn't have a ticket to Ohio but she did have one to Austin.

Most of the women republicans with national name recognition (Hutchison, Snowe, Todd-Whitman) have that little detail about Roe v Wade going against them. Amazing how Mr. Country First decided to look past so many other qualified republicans (of either gender) for Palin. Bill Kristol, Karl Rove, and Rush Limbaugh think she's perfect. Kristol and Rove at least have mentioned her name going back a while.

Palin is an up and comer in the party. She was scheduled to speak at the convention next week and tell her story. Similar to what Obama did in 2004. The republicans could have groomed her by getting her into the national spotlight gradually and then in 2012/2016 put her up as a candidate. I think putting her out there now was premature and especially if there's a misstep between now and November, she'll go back to Alaska and fall into obscurity. Pushing her into the national spotlight before she was ready sort of tells me the republican machine is desperate.

And we learn that McCain only met her once before. And there's some scandal where she's under investigation for abuse of power getting her ex-brother-in-law fired -- WITH EVIDENCE ON TAPE! And that she actually was for the bridge to nowhere before she was against it. Feels like this move was rushed. Which is so unusual for the people running the republican party.

(and MonkeyButter, from the video of her fist speech with McCain, I think the wrinkled old white man you're talkiing about is McCain... seemed like he kept thinking about the headline "McCain taps Palin". Seriously his staring down at her chest and/or ass and fiddling with his wedding ring while she was speaking had to be the creepiest thing I've seen this century)
posted by birdherder 30 August | 21:38
I think the ultraright's getting played. "Stand up for a real woman! One Just Like YOU! Vote McCain!"

I'm not at all surprised she polls better with men than with women. Limbaugh says "Babies, Guns, Jesus!" in praise of her, as if that's all she's made of, or all women are good for. I'm guessing Mr. Tucker Carlson doesn't feel threatened by her, either.

What's amusing me now is that she's not only in favor of but actually raised taxes on the oil companies in Alaska, working with the Legislature to do it.

I don't think McCain has thought his cunning plan through.

I know that Karl Rove is a pretty evil sumbitch, but I'm wondering if he hasn't lost his mojo, because he really doesn't get Obama. Rove didn't have it together in 2006, and I don't think he's gotten any smarter.

On preview: birdherder, he was checking her out? The mind boggles. What's really sad is I'm not surprised.
posted by lysdexic 30 August | 21:41
But I bet she's really got the extremist anti-choicers and creationists in her corner!

That's for sure. My anti-choice, creationist, hardcore Evangelical Christian father called me to rave about how much he LOVES her and how, hey! I can vote for a woman!

I told him that I wasn't going to vote for a woman in the first place because I wasn't GOING to vote for Hillary! I didn't vote for Hillary! I voted for Obama! Don't try to appeal for her ovaries here, you can't fool me, I still believe that Obama is the better candidate, no matter WHICH woman you put next to John McCain!
posted by grapefruitmoon 30 August | 21:46
scody, regarding why Obama picked Biden over Clinton, you're spot on. Hillary Clinton is very polarizing, and polls have shown there was very little middle ground with her.

and it was me that coined the phrase "reverse sexist". gimme some credit here! lol
posted by eekacat 30 August | 21:51
grapefruitmoon: heh, I just got a voicemail from my neocon mom, who said essentially the same thing -- "don't you think she's just so neat?! Don't you think she's the real feminist in the race? And SHE HAS THE SAME FIRST AND MIDDLE NAME AS YOU, honey! Isn't that a woman you'd like to see in the White House?!" Uh, wait, give me a second... no.
posted by scody 30 August | 21:54
@scody: After all, she has a uterus!
Just the kind of reductionist (out of touch) idea of woman these guys would have. I see your point.

there's got to be some incredible dirty ratfucking trick built into it.
This thought has risen prominently in my thinking about Palin. Something is going on here. Rove is not this stupid.

@ kellydamnit: a lot of women will be hostile to anyone whose resume includes a swimsuit competition.
Excellent pint! I hadn't thought of that simple fact cause, well, I'm a man. Also, I heard about McCain's wandering eyes. That's this guy's thing I guess. He's like the creepy old uncle that gets drunk when he visits on holidays.

@everyone: Have I enjoyed this little chat! It's given me lots to think about. Non the least of which, kellydamnit, is my own bias as a man and the assumptions I've been making about Palin AND Hillary.
posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 22:10
My mom said, "What do you think of McCain's VP? Isn't she so pretty?! She's really smart. McCain can make history, too." I said very dryly, "yeah, she's real pretty." She also called Biden a mean white guy.

It's very difficult for me to think about and discuss politics with my parents. It's pains me. We usually avoid the subject. My mother knows I dislike GWB.. I don't go much farther than that. You should have seen the commotion when I said I liked Hillary Clinton. I have no problem talking with my mother alone. My father is a hardcore conservative (but not a religious conservative) and is vehement in his beliefs and sometimes is unable to have vehement discussion. Things are fine when we're all on the same page but it quickly turns to hurt feelings and anger when we're not. I wish I had some magic gene to let go and accept and not feel do defensive and upset with my parents' political views. What is a person to do? I swear my chest hurts right now. It's nuts.
posted by LoriFLA 30 August | 22:16
OK, so I think I understand how this choice was made a little better:

1. McCain can appear to be the "maverick" he was once seen as before since he picked a woman.
2. Palin helps with the social conservatives who were pretty meh about McCain, and might have stayed home. Or voted for a fringe party.
3. As a bonus, she might pick up some Hillary votes who were pissed at Obama for not picking her, and at the Democratic party for allowing the sexism to persist.
4. She's marketed as anti-corruption and as a reformer.
5. She's seen as attractive and counters McCain's old gray, jowliness.

But, the negatives seem pretty obvious, and I have to wonder how she got through:
1. She's unknown, even to McCain, and 2 months isn't a lot of time for people to get comfortable with her.
2. She has very little political experience.
3. She has baggage apparently (which could be part of point 1.), and doesn't seem completely vetted.
4. She's seen as a choice obviously to pander to women voters. (The boos in the original article, and her rhetoric)

I too appreciate everyone's input here. This is helping me understand this. What an interesting election this year. In many ways, I'm tired of it, and I'm sick of the crap I hear from the rabid republicans at work (I don't belong to either party, but vote for candidates I like), but I have to say that Obama has restored some of my hope for this country. I hope he can follow through with that.

posted by eekacat 30 August | 22:20
Lori, just remember that what your parents believe is not going to change the world. With millions of other people agreeing with them, yes, but they are only 2 people that have little or no power. My dad is like your dad and he manages to slip in his intense disrespect for me when he has any kind of opinion in a conversation. It's hard to see it but they are scared children living in a complex world with the simplest understanding of how life works.
posted by MonkeyButter 30 August | 22:23
Wow, LoriFLA. My parents and I are on the same wavelength most of the time politically, but when I mention church or anything they get pretty stiff, probably thinking that I'm going to go off the deep end and turn off my brain*.

I've got a good friend that I disagree with on just about all things political. It drives me nuts that she's willfully ignorant on things, and knows it. It's that bizzare. We just agree to not talk about those things.

Her take on Palin, btw, is that she's not really going to change anything, but make people feel better about supporting McCain. She also laughed at this site, saying she felt exactly that way.

Every so often we forget, but the discussion peters off because we're just not going to go off on each other. The parental units, OTOH, sometimes aren't that respectful of me.

*Seriously. You should have seen the commotion when we gave mom a gag gift of gold, frankincense, and myrrh that'd we'd found at a bizzare little drugstore in Dania
posted by lysdexic 30 August | 22:32
Thanks, MonkeyButter and lysdexic. I notice I used vehement twice. I didn't mean to. I wish I could let it roll off my back. I'm trying. My parents dislike Democrats. They love Fox. They like PBS but not NPR. They call Obama a communist. They are pro-choice, anti-death penalty, pro gun, agnostic/atheist but respect religion. Basically they just really really hate the Democratic party. Why all the hate? It's stressful for me.
posted by LoriFLA 30 August | 22:37
eekacat, I agree with your point that picking Palin helps McCain burnish his maverick credentials, which have declined significantly with the Obama campaign tying him to BushCo. It also does help shore up his ultraconservative base, which has been in danger of staying home in large numbers come election day.

What this means to me is that I think the McCain campaign may ultimately be taking the gamble that they can win on a high turnout from the base (which was not guaranteed with a McCain/NotAntiChoice ticket, nor with having to put a lid on the now-wildly-unpopular Bush/Cheney on the campaign trail), as long as some of the undecideds/moderates come their way. Obama's selection of Biden, by contrast, is a clear play to the undecideds and moderates (with the assumption that enough of the Dem base will turn out for him, especially if they could get the Clintons to deliver at the convention and subsequently on the trail).

On the topic of disrespectful parents irt to political disagreements, I could tell you some stories that would make your hair curl. A few months ago, my mom sat in my sister's home (while my sister was recovering from surgery, by the way) and informed us with a straight face that Obama's daughters were secretly being trained to slit the throats their white schoolmates (it's part of the Islamic radical training that they are receiving, but which the liberal press won't report), and then -- when we all protested rather vociferously -- informed us that we were all fascists for not entertaining different viewpoints. Boy, that was a pleasant meal!
posted by scody 30 August | 22:41
My husband has a theory that my father is a hardcore conservative because he is mad at his now deceased father that was a Democrat. My grandfather was a union leader but this was before the Dixiecrats split and went to the Republican side. I don't think this is a valid reason.

I think it's a combination of idealism of where he wants to be, dislike of government interference and "handouts". Also he's huge on military defense and wants to be #1.

Wow, scody. I'm glad to hear some other parents have crazy ideas.

My dad is kind of a bully and gets pissed. He's intimidating. I have faith that I could argue my case if I were given a respectful ear.

*breathe, meditate, breathe*
posted by LoriFLA 30 August | 22:52
First, forget any notion that this helps or hurts significantly on election day. Most experts think a Veep choice might at best help deliver their home state. There are some regions where it might help; the longstanding Dem theory has been that you need a Southern moderate on the ticket. But nowadays the South is so solidly red that it's not worth the time of either the Dems or Repubs.

Second, the notion that Rove is actually running this campaign in secret is only vaguely true. His surrogate Steve Schmidt is now the "show-runner". But many true conservatives like Rove have long distrusted McCain anyway. I think there was an element of shrewdness in the timing of this, as it definitely deflated any national conversation about Obama's acceptance speech, and what the Dems will do to regain momentum next weekend is open to question. It also does throw some monkey wrenches in planned Dem attack lines, such as the hope that they could rip a McCain-Romney ticket for owning more houses than a Monopoly set. Biden will have to tread carefully. But as for an overall secret plot, not really. I think this was McCain's call through and through.

Basically, the GOP "Big Tent" idea has become a joke. There are approximately three planks in the platform: cut taxes, swagger militarily, and oppose abortion. Everything else amounts to deliberate misgovernance to reach the strangulation-in-the-bathtub point.

The abortion thing has become such an albatross to the party they can barely elect anyone who actually believes it, let alone usher them to national prominence. Almost every single candidate this year was a compromiser of some sort on the abortion issue.

Anyway, had a run-down of McCain's choices a month ago, and reviewed them post-Palin.

And regarding the boos -- I sure called that one. I was telling my mom today how delicious it is just to think of the cognitive dissonance in Republican minds on Wednesday when she has to praise Hillary again from the RNC podium. I mean, hell, after 2000, the conservatives had to do back-flips just to contemplate Mac in the top slot. Now they have to spend two months pretending they really like Hillary, the ur-demon of the conservative cryptonomicon.
posted by stilicho 30 August | 23:40
This post and these comments are soothing my mind over this pick. I've been fuming all day over it. I keep saying, "how DARE they? how DARE they?" over and over in my mind.

I'm glad this whackjob from Fishing Hole, AK is getting booed. Welcome to the NFL, sister.

People voted for Hillary because she's smart, tough, and has been there. You may not like her as a choice (I didn't), but she's solid, and deserves massive respect.

Sarah Palin is the girl who should be serving you little crackers and cheese combos on American Airlines.

I can't believe I just wrote that. The American Airlines part. But still, man...where was the vetting and the gravitas in this decision? Sorry, peeps....I'll settle down in the a.m.
posted by Lipstick Thespian 31 August | 00:19
LoriFLA, I had a big debate with my dad the other day, who is voting for Obama BUT believes that illegal immigration is a net negative to the economy, even when study after study proves that wrong. I had to explain what an ITIN is (basically an SSN for non-citizens so they can pay taxes), and explain that many immigrants, both documented and not, DO pay taxes.

He was particularly incensed over the "fact" that (his theory here, not mine) thousands of Mexicans come to the US on tourist visits, or to "shop" in the border zone, have their children in the US, and get US citizenship for their kids, which they then use to send their kids to school over the border and become citizens themselves. I asked him for evidence that this was actually a huge problem; he said "there are websites" which he hasn't sent to me, which means that he heard about it on talk radio and has no actual information on the topic. I didn't want to open the can of worms by suggesting that if the visitors were European we would never know - or we'd compliment them on their forthright planning and luck - even if they planned to do the same thing.

How we convinced him to vote for Obama I will never know; perhaps he just says that so we don't pester him constantly. ;)
posted by mdonley 31 August | 04:29
Palin has certainly galvanized the committed Democrats against McCain. She imparted far more unity therein than the fumbling efforts of Clinton and Obama during their convention.

If you would like a solid brickbat to throw at her, consider this. If she gets her way, americans will be paying far higher prices for natural gas and petroleum. Not federal taxes, but Alaska taxes. She's not in big oil's pocket; she's trying to tear a big hole in that pocket to keep as much in state as she can get.
posted by Ardiril 31 August | 04:37
There has to be some major reason for this I'm just not getting.

John McCain has no idea what he's doing.
posted by ibmcginty 31 August | 08:49
I think Bush had more control over his campaigns and presidency than McCain does now. McCain's had a hard on to be president for years. He was a good soldier and stood down after the machine fucked him during the 2000 campaign. Right now, he's just reading the script put in front of him and following the stage direction. This is why he's flip flopped so much. He might bring up to his people, you know I spent 20 years arguing against this idea? Their response: do you think people remember or care about that? He met Palin once before calling her up last week to offer her the job. I've had longer courtship periods and personal vetting selling an iPod on eBay.

This is it. He can't wait until 2012. I'd even be surprised if he, god forbid, is elected in November that he runs for re-election in 2012. He'll retire after one term in the tradition of Washington or some other bullshit. But who would be VP ready to run against those demoncrats. Certainly, Palin will be more experienced by then, but will she be VP in the Mondale/Bush/Gore/Cheney mold, or the type that sits around waiting for the president to croak or go to state funerals of second tier allies.
posted by birdherder 31 August | 11:44
LoriFLA: My father & stepmother are much like your parents in their utter distaste for the Democratic Party, which I just don't GET. The dislike the left has of the right can't even compare to the sheer hatred of the right for anything "liberal."

On the other side, my stepfather sings union work songs on a disturbingly regular basis, has Communist literature all over the house, and put an "OBAMA 2008" sticker on his car as soon as such a thing even existed. (That surprised me if only because he grew up with HRC and has a big sort of crush on her and I SWORE he would vote for her, but apparently not.) It's night and day.

It's situations like these where it becomes glaringly obvious why my liberal hippie mother, who was Buddhist when I was growing up, and my Fundamentalist Christian Republican Fox-News watching father didn't end up staying together.

It's for the best that my father and I have a sort of distant relationship because if I had to talk to him about anything even *remotely* political, like *anything* related to the outside world, I'd explode. I don't get how otherwise intelligent people can be so focused on their own outlook as to have such scorn and contempt for everyone who disagrees. I certainly disagree with the Republican mindset and believe that certain *members* of the Bush administration run on liquid evil, but I would never go around spouting nonsense about how Dick Cheney secretly meets with Satan, or whatever. Though in that case, he probably DOES.
posted by grapefruitmoon 31 August | 16:40
You kidding? Satan's terrified of Cheney.
posted by kellydamnit 31 August | 18:12
I'd explode. I don't get how otherwise intelligent people can be so focused on their own outlook as to have such scorn and contempt for everyone who disagrees.

grapefruitmoon, I don't understand it either. I would really like to get a professional opinion on why some people think this way. The hate. The amount of energy that is wasted on boycotting movies, newspapers, etc.

My mother is a wonderfully kind person. She's normal. She's smart. But if someone disses GWB she will automatically think they are an idiot. Today I had a fairly pleasant visit with my parents. I make the mistake of telling my mom that I stayed up late watching The Holiday with Kate Winslet, Jack Black, etc. She said, "I don't like Jack Black." I responded with, "Yeah, his poor acting is glaring against Kate Winslet." She said, "I'm not talking about his acting ability. He's a very hateful person." Right then I knew Jack Black must have said something against the Bush administration. I changed the subject.

*serenity now. serenity now*

I wish my parents had more understanding: He disagrees with my political views, oh well, he's entitled to his opinion. Instead of accusing a person of being hateful. As soon as I hear that she dislikes an actor, or a group, or a radio station because of their supposed political beliefs it frustrates me, even angers me a little. Maybe I'm just like her.

For all of you metachatters that have normal parents who you can have rational discussions, count yourself as very lucky.
posted by LoriFLA 31 August | 19:36
Wow, LoriFLA, it sounds like we have the same mom! It's incredible to me, too, how seemingly innocuous topics can trigger these incredible, ideological meltdowns -- we can no longer talk about movies, for fear that even the most cursory mention of the topic will trigger an anti-Hollywood, anti-liberal monologue because some actor in some movie has said something pro-Obama or antiwar; we can't talk about the weather because any mention of the heat or storms or brushfires will trigger a diatribe about how global warming is a fiction (proved by the fact that it still snows in some places in the winter); I can't even complain about my job because it will trigger a rant about how terrible it is to work for the Democrats in the L.A. county bureaucracy that run my workplace -- despite the fact that I have explained repeatedly that I am not a county employee, and that Los Angeles County has nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the museum where I work. (The last time I told her this, she responded "oh really?" in an arch, you're-lying-but-I'll-humor-you-anyway tone.)

The punchline to all of this is that my parents were die-hard Democrats for decades -- my mom used to run state elections in Colorado for people like Gary Hart and Dick Lamm. Now she reads Ann Coulter books and underlines sentences like "liberals despise America" and writes in the margins, "TRUE!!!!!!"

It's weird; my dad is totally capable of understanding that political disagreements don't have to be constantly wrangled over and worked into every single exchange; we can have totally normal conversations about a variety of subjects, and we just sidestep any direct discussion of politics. My mom is absolutely, positively unable to do this. EVERYthing is ideological, and ALL disagreement, no matter the topic, is anathema.

So yeah, for those of you who don't have to navigate this sort of familial minefield: count yourselves very, very lucky.
posted by scody 31 August | 20:24
Scody, the snowing in winter and the marking of Ann Coulter books made me laugh. I can so relate.
posted by LoriFLA 31 August | 21:33
Hm, back on topic (bear with me) I think there's some interesting wheels turning.

What if
1) Palin is chosen, mainly to create the buzz and detract from Obama's kick-ass speech
2) All the <gate>-gates come to light, and she proves herself not up to the task of dealing with the media/criticism
3) along with 2), she's discredited in Alaska, more so than she is now
4) she withdraws, citing 'personal reasons'
5) the "libruls" are blamed for driving her away, ensuring the ultra-rights show up to vote in her honor
6) she's no longer effective an AK, meaning the old guard can put in their pick, and Rove now has some powerful people who owe him favors.
7) McCain gets Lieberman after all.

Man, I'm cynical tonight.
posted by lysdexic 31 August | 23:10
Palin's 17-year old daughter is pregnant. How regular America.

Do the conservatives want to be viewed as Everyday America? I think they want to be above it.

I wonder if Palin disclosed this to the McCain people. They said they knew. Will it matter? This is better than a soap opera.
posted by LoriFLA 01 September | 12:08
And it's Obama who's supposed to be like Britney Spears?
posted by kirkaracha 02 September | 13:55
Goldman Sachs has an absolutely excellent, awesome website || Shoes!