Did Sarah Palin do what she needed to do?

Filed in National by on September 4, 2008

I have no doubt that Palin’s speech last night fired up the Far, Far Right, but how did it play with the middle? And, let’s face it, this election will be determined by Independents and Moderates. So, did Palin draw them in or turn them off?

She had another task last night. She had to show voters that she was VP material; that John McCain made the right choice, the best choice. Did she accomplish that feat? Did viewers turn off their TVs and feel confident in McCain’s selection. I’m thinking… no.

Tags: , ,

About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (118)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Chris says:

    “Did viewers turn off their TVs and feel confident in McCain’s selection. I’m thinking… no.”

    Then Pandora you must have been watching something else.

    If I could choose the President from among the four people on the ballot, no brainer. She is the only one that still remembers what an average American is.

  2. pandora says:

    Like I said, the Far Right is thrilled.

  3. mike w. says:

    “She is the only one that still remembers what an average American is.”

    Yup. She was genuine. That and she came out swinging at Obama, which is exactly what she needs to do. Also, the shots she took at Obama/Biden were done with a level of class and tact that someone like Biden is incapable of.

    I still have some substantive policy issues with her, but by and far she’s the right pick for McCain.

  4. Bookem says:

    Uh oh, she talk good, uh oh!

    What we liberals do know?

    Make up something. . .quick!

  5. meatball says:

    I think she had some good lines. Genuine? I ‘m not so sure after all it was the convention. I watched from about 7pm on. Marching out the women speakers of every color didn’t strike me as genuine, but rather as trying too hard. And the way they bumped all the men out of the front rows to fill them up with women, what was that all about?

    I think she looked really young, she used a little too much god talk, and her family looked uncomfortable on stage after the speech.

  6. DPN says:

    That was a joke of a speech, seriously it was filled with jokes. More jokes, less substance.

    The wing-nuts are in love. However, it is the middle of the road people that need to be impressed.

  7. DJK says:

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA BWWWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

    That’s all.

  8. Linoge says:

    Judging from this girl’s reaction, I am going to go ahead and go with “yes”.

  9. DJK says:

    That’s funny DPN, the “jokes” you speak of were actually truths about your jokes of candidates.

  10. Dorian Gray says:

    Genuine, eh? Yep, a genuine lack of substance. It really does say a great deal about a person who desires a chief executive you “want to have a beer with”. Granted, I am cosmopolitan elite – that’s the new disparaging adjective for elite apparently – but I’d rather have a beer with the President of the Harvard Law Review. Frankly, I don’t care to have someone’s ultra-Christian mom and grumpy grandfather as the White House tag team. Palin speech was more of the same polarizing bullshit. This regular person, family values gruel is kind of tiresome, no?

    If Obama or Biden gave a speech like this it would be panned viciously. But hey Republicans set the bar low. She’s a real person who talks like my mom… who gives a rat’s ass! I don’t care about her family, I don’t care about Jesus, I don’t care about guns or hunting or hockey. I need a fucking intellectual heavy hitter. But again I’m an arrogant elitist – at least I’m not a stupid fucking lame ass gun totting, fairy tale God believing, country bumpkin.

    Hey Rube, a red neck isn’t something to aspire to it’s something to be embarrassed of..

  11. David says:

    Even the foreign press loved her–I quote the Sun. For an unpopular party divided over Iraq and struggling to compete with Obama’s Messianic glamour, the choice of Palin looks absolutely inspired.

    Main Street America will have loved her performance.

    And it was seen by 30million voters – the greatest number ever to watch a candidate for the much-derided VP post.

    She is popular with voters for the very reason America’s snooty political establishment despises her: She isn’t one of the Washington gang.

    She’s a moose-hunting mum of five with a sledge-load of problems behind her own front door that workaday Americans can relate to.

    A child with special needs. A daughter of 17 pregnant. A constant juggle between family and career.

    As she said, her family has had its ups and downs like any other.

    Last night her first task was to introduce herself and her family to an American public incredulous that the unknown Alaska governor could within weeks be a heartbeat away from being their commander in chief.

    Compared to the journeyman career politicians dominating both parties here she seemed fresh, natural, one of us and not one of them.

    She spoke to America as one mum to another. She cracked good jokes.

    What’s the difference between a hockey mum and a pit bull?, she asked.

    Answer: One wears lipstick.

    What will have scared the enemy camp most is the devastating series of prime-time punches she landed on the jutting Obama jaw.

    Showing steel beneath her magnolia jacket, she slaughtered his lack of experience, his vanity, his emptiness beneath the windy waffle.

    It was the most powerful demolition of the Democrat hero I have heard in two weeks on the US election trail.

  12. David says:

    She not only did she do it. She has shown that we have found our Reagan. She is as good as Senator Obama. I think Republicans are additionally thrilled that we have someone on the ticket who has mastered English. It has been 20 years.

    The Wilm/WDov poll is about 86 to 7 percent. That seems like only the far, far, right. No only the far far left that hated Reagan won’t like her.

    Now the focus will be on McCain.

  13. meatball says:

    Well said, Dorian Gray.

  14. JadeGold says:

    Wow, Linoge cites a far-right blogger as proof that Palin did well.

    I guess we Dems are doomed.

    Did Palin do what she needed to do? Depends {insert McCain joke here} on what you believe she needed to do. If your definition is to perform damage control on the GOP base–then, yes, she did what she had to do. If your defintion involves convincing independent and/or undecideds that she’s fit to be VP–the answer is no.

  15. Joanne Christian says:

    Pandora–I fell in like…and I’m fallin’ in line!!! She was “real” and not pandering…example….she could have “milked” the “special needs” child to a much greater degree either from a long-suffering parent perspective, or been condescending about these “special spirits”, as speakers tend to dribble on about…instead….directedly she stated, “some of our greatest joys, can bring us our greatest pain”or some such statement…which believe it or not I thought she was going to speak about raising teens!! The gas station story was right on for us small business owners….and just that her husband’s work really is that “Pride in America” type of labor continued w/ the plusses. Didn’t hurt that son deploys next week (not that I believe he will). Down side for me–is that hockey mom stuff–it will never court me–but I was (am) a terrible sports mom..who only likes to work the concession stand–also down was hauling BF up on stage–please don’t let this be our “Bill Clinton” decriminalization!! I loved how shell-shocked and awkward they looked on stage….definitely added to that “outside the beltway” intrigue. She made HUGE points w/ again outlining style vs. substance w/ the epic producing Obama….and highlighting the tough choices McCain has already made whether right or wrong….and his “country/citizen first” approach to decision making….her feet are on the ground…but she already has on her kicking boots….she now has become fair game!!!!

  16. cassandra_m says:

    Well said, indeed, Dorian — can you imagine what the press would have said if Biden had given such a speech. But then, we do know that the media is grading the entire McCain venture on a curve this season.

  17. mike w. says:

    I cannot believe you Dems can actually say her speech lacked substance……. This wasn’t an Obama speech.

    Oh, and the media jumped all over her, at least MSNBC did. Why, because she criticized the media who for some reason have serious issues with anyone bad mouthing them.

  18. mike w. says:

    “I think Republicans are additionally thrilled that we have someone on the ticket who has mastered English. It has been 20 years.”

    It’s certainly a nice change from Bush/Cheney, where I literally cringed when either took the stage to speak.

  19. DPN says:

    So Republican Barbie can talk. Big fucking deal.

  20. mike w. says:

    Funny, when Obama gets his “hope & change” on you guys adore him as if he’s the greatest thing the world has ever seen.

  21. Joanne Christian says:

    No DPN–didn’t you mean walk the talk…or was that seal the deal…perhaps…blow the whistle…or showed me the money…cut the fat…questioned the quo…yea..she can talk…but just like Barbie she’ll be doing alot!!!!

  22. DavidV says:

    Can’t really comment to much…fell asleep from boredom. I was waiting anxiously for some shining moment that demonstrated her hidden abilities to manage the day to day operations of our country. Unfortunately all I got was and introduction to the family…who really gives a shit, and about how being a community organizer is a meaningless job with no responsibilities. Oh…and someone owns a gas station making her a small business expert. Sorry Mike…She may be the charismatic female the Republican base needs to feel good, and she’s good with one-liners, but she offers nothing to the needs of this country.

  23. cassandra_m says:

    Well maybe she did walk the talk if you can pretend that the party she was speaking to has been in power for the last 8 years and there was nothing there to address the spectacular mess they’ve made of it all. With the exception of handing money to their friends, of course.

    And she had to do it by lying (again) about her earmark story; by being completely incoherent on the energy front (and this is supposed to be her expertise) ; and dodging her own ethics issues (Bush Cheney style). I know they want to fight the Culture Wars again, but really — we don’t have more immediate and pressing issues?

  24. DavidV says:

    Oh yea…and McCain was a POW…forgot about that

  25. mike w. says:

    “She may be the charismatic female the Republican base needs to feel good, and she’s good with one-liners, but she offers nothing to the needs of this country.”

    And Obama does how exactly? The man is the epitome of “feel good” politics.

  26. Von Cracker says:

    She delivered a speech written for her very well…except for the silly condesending tone.

    She also lied very well too.

  27. Phantom says:

    Mike,
    It wasn’t a belief that her speech lacked substance. It is a fact. The only substance in regards to policy as VICE PRESIDENT of the United States was in regards to drilling and some energy initiative. Otherwise it was an intro to the family and then an unabashed slandering of Obama and Biden while trying to appear like she could tell the truth. If conservatives are so sure of thier superiority with regards to Obama’s econmomic plan then point out the VALID discrepancies.
    Oh, and PTA/mayor to VP doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence as that is what she stated was her experience (a la community organizer slander.)

    BTW, I am sure the people affected by Katrina, Gustav or any other national disaster appreciated the way she mocked the community organizers that are helping or helped them recover from the disaster.

    But she is just your average middle class mom whose family makes around $350,000 a year and whose husband only has to work approximately 3-4 months of the year. Just like every family I know.

  28. Phantom says:

    Oh, and you want to state that the “feel good” speeches given by Obama are nothing but empty rhetoric then I think you might want Palin to look in the mirror this morning b/c she has done nothing of substance on the federal level to become VP other than give a speech.

  29. mike w. says:

    “she has done nothing of substance on the federal level to become VP other than give a speech.”

    Nor has Obama and yet he’s running for President! It’s amazing how far feel good “hope & change” rhetoric will get you.

  30. Von Cracker says:

    BULLOCKS!

  31. DavidV says:

    Not defending Obama’s feel good rhetoric either. But the Republicans have nothing but God, war and drill. God has no place in politics, the war on terrorism and/or the war on drugs have accomplished little but the continued deterioration of our civil liberties and drilling for oil is not going to solve our economic problems. McCain has lost any signs of an independent spirit and has fully succumbed to the Republican agenda.

    Take a look around Mike, Gitmo, oil prices, valuation of the dollar, foreign debt, national debt, the rise of China and India, the resurgence of Russia, public tax dollars bailing out private investors, warrentless wiretapping..the list is very long. These things all happened on George Bush’s watch, many a direct result of his continued use of Presidential orders. McCain/Palin have not offered a single solution, rhetoric or not, for even a slight variation from these policies.

  32. mike w. says:

    “Take a look around Mike, Gitmo, oil prices, valuation of the dollar, foreign debt, national debt, the rise of China and India, the resurgence of Russia, public tax dollars bailing out private investors, warrentless wiretapping..the list is very long. These things all happened on George Bush’s watch”

    Unlike some folks I look at more than just the last 8 years of history. Change is fine, but Obama offers the same old failed socialist policies that have historically destroyed other nations. I want change from Bush, but at the same time I don’t buy the shit Obama is selling.

    Corporate bailouts aren’t Bush’s fault. Who voted to bailout the mortgage mess with taxpayer money? Oh that’s right, the Democratic Congress. Who stonewalled drilling when oil prices were at record highs. The Democratic Congress. The rise of China / India is Bush’s fault how?

    Obama has a government solution to every problem, real or imaginary. He believes that a government (with the right leadership) can heal all that ailes this country. The man has never seen anything for which “less government” is the answer, even when facts flat out say as much he’ll flat out ignore them. I know the “Bush Republicans” aren’t exactly small government types, but if the choice is McCain or the guy who’s blueprint for change contains the greatest expansion of the Federal government since FDR I’ll go with McCain. He’ll do less damage in 4 years than Obama, especially since we currently have a Democratic Congress.

  33. mike w. says:

    Von – Did you mean to have a link?

  34. David says:

    Nothing of substance at a federal level–You must have been getting a snack during the energy policy and national security parts. Maybe you didn’t like the substance, but you can’t deny it. Drill baby, drill… Natural gas pipe line, more wind, nuclear, solar, and clean coal technology come to mind. Winning in Iraq and stepping up pressure on the terrorist states like Iran who want nukes.

    You can’t deny the substance.

  35. Dorian Gray says:

    Mike – Didn’t I fucking bury you for saying the same tire shit over and over yesterday. Didn’t I explain what all the Obama substance was and how to locate it (New York Times Magazine, Fortune Magazine, The Economist, Obama’s website, Obama’s two books). Yet you continue? I believe strongly that you may be learning disabled.

  36. pandora says:

    Gotta love the way Republicans are turning “community organizer” into a bad thing, and it will remain a bad thing until a republican lists it on their resume… then it will be great.

    IMO, Palin had to do one thing last night – prove she was capable of becoming Vice President. The alarming lack of issues not covered didn’t help her case.

    Look, I get it. McCain and Co. have decided to run on social issues, which may work when everything is going okay, but strikes me as a huge risk given our present situation.

  37. mike w. says:

    Von – No, you didn’t. I’ve looked extensively at Obama’s legislative record, his talk, his website, and the policies set forth in his “blueprint for change.”

    My above comment still stands. What he proposes isn’t “Change” it’s regression. It’s more of the same policies that haven’t worked in the past, in the U.S. or other countries.

    No one said it was a “bad thing” to be a community organizer, only that it doesn’t qualify you to be President. Palin was dead on about the lack of responsibilities involved in Obama’s “experience”

    “You can’t deny the substance.”

    David – Sadly they can and they will. They’ll deny anything that doesn’t fit their worldview. The gun control threads are a perfect example.

  38. cassandra_m says:

    There was no substance, David. Drill Baby Drill is the title of a porn movie, not an energy policy.

    And I wonder what you think of the constant lying about the Bridge to Nowhere project?

    And the community organizer disses were puzzling — wasn’t Tuesday’s theme “Service”? Or maybe working within your community isn’t as respectable as hiring lobbyists to get you a few million in earmarks.

  39. Joe M says:

    After all the jibes against Obama supporters took about liking his oratory skills, I’m shocked SHOCKED at how many people now like Palin because of hers.

  40. Joe M says:

    Maybe I should listen to her speech so I can fall in “like” with her, too.

  41. Chris says:

    “She delivered a speech written for her very well…except for the silly condesending tone.”

    Love it. Am I too assume that Obama sits down and carefully crafts each and every one of his speechs. That is bull. Probably a team of writters among that 350 people he claims to manage in his campaign.

    And as for substance..what exactly did she not offer with regards to energy? Immediate drilling, new pipeline work on day one, and a desire to involve every type of alternative energy there is seems to be the definition of “comprehensive”. What has Obama talked about…windmills?

    Plain and simple. She is tough talking, and PROUD to be against the establishment politics. And I thought you libs were anti-establishment.

  42. mike w. says:

    “Plain and simple. She is tough talking, and PROUD to be against the establishment politics. And I thought you libs were anti-establishment.”

    And she’s actually gotten things done while standing up to the GOP establishment. Real, effectual change. Obama spends time talking about it while others actually get things done. He spends much of what little time he’s had in the Senate campaigning for President, then has the audacity to try and pass off his “running a campaign” as “experience.”

    Kind of like Obama talking about raising children in Bangladesh out of poverty, while McCain has actually adopted and raised an orphan from that country and not paraded around with her screaming “hey, look what I did!”

  43. cassandra_m says:

    And I guess lying about earmarks or having ethics issues is just SOP for a GOP candidate.

    Shame.

  44. Another Mike says:

    I didn’t watch much, but I saw enough and have read enough to know this is Bush/Cheney in a dress. Palin didn’t oppose the bridge to nowhere until it became politically expedient. And she never returned the money, she just used it for other things.

    Her family is off-limits, until she parades the baby daddy into the receiving line at the airport and in the family box at the convention. And until she keeps using her baby for a photo op.

    She’s a reformer who has hired an attorney on Alaska’s tab to defend her in the current ethics investigation of her conduct. And she has tried to get the investigation transferred to a board appointed by her.

    All because it’s God’s will.

    She took off the gloves last night, so I hope Obama and Biden (along with the press) don’t feel like they have to tread gently with her. She has avoided the media so far, but that can’t last. She will show some cracks eventually.

  45. Von Cracker says:

    LIES!

    sorry for the linkage issue… 😀

  46. DavidV says:

    Regression from the Bush policies is exactly what we need. We need a complete and total change of mindset. Otherwise its only smoke and mirrors.

    No real change of any substance is going to take place with McCain. Put a Dem in the White House with a Dem congress and many of the past eight year wrongs will be righted (and hopefully a few Repubs will be behind bars but I’m not going to hold my breath on that one). Put McCain in the White House with a Dem congress and we might as well start talking about 2012, because nothing will happen. Although with Pelosi and Reid in charge, caving in seems to be a specialty. Who knows, maybe the Republicans will learn something about moderation over the next eight years.

  47. Von Cracker says:

    The speech was all emotion, no substance on issues that matter…

  48. pandora says:

    For months and months McCain has been telling us how dangerous the world is, how given his experience he’s the one most ready to handle a crisis. He’s run on preparedness, and then picks Palin?

    Peggy Noonan is correct. It’s over.

  49. mike w. says:

    “Put McCain in the White House with a Dem congress and we might as well start talking about 2012, because nothing will happen”

    One can only hope! I love divided government. The less shit they get done the better.

  50. mike w. says:

    “For months and months McCain has been telling us how dangerous the world is, how given his experience he’s the one most ready to handle a crisis. He’s run on preparedness, and then picks Palin?”

    Obama runs on “hope & change” from the very beginning of his campaign and in his 1st choice picks someone who is the antithesis of “change.”

  51. JadeGold says:

    Biden got off the best line of the night when he said the GOP “couldn’t defend the past and won’t say what they’ll do in the future.”

  52. DavidV says:

    Mike…back up eight years and I would agree. But someone has got to lead us down another path. Even if its only long enough to get back on track.

  53. Von Cracker says:

    Biden’s very aggressive with advancing our public transportation infrastructure, environmental issues, rule of law, and clean, renewable energy.

    Compared to the regime over the past 8 years, I’d qualify that as change.

    So, if you believe that since he’s been a senator for 35 years, and therefore represents the status quo, then I would question your assessment capabilities.

  54. mike w. says:

    David – I agree, but voting for socialism isn’t going to get anything “back on track” If you folks had nominated a moderate Democrat we’d be having a different discussion.

  55. arthur says:

    Right now dems are thinking, “wow, why cant she be a dem”

  56. pandora says:

    Geez, Mike, can we drop the socialist talking point?

  57. mike w. says:

    Yeah, if Obama had someone like her as VP this would be in the bag for him……but he had to be an idiot and go pick Joe Biden.

  58. pandora says:

    Oh Arthur, I can assure you we are thinking no such thing. In fact, I couldn’t be more thrilled with your pick.

  59. Chris says:

    “She has avoided the media so far..”

    How can you even type that with a straight face? She has received more of a proctology exam in the last 5 days than Barak has had in his lifetime. It is so laughable when far leftists here honestly beleive that the media is HELPING her. It is the media that gave Obama his “rockstar” status without him actually doing anything…just because they thought it would make a great story. If you honestly believe the media (with the exception of Fox News) is doing anything to ASSIST the republicans…you are even more out of touch with reality than I thought you were…and that is hard to do.

  60. mike w. says:

    “Geez, Mike, can we drop the socialist talking point?”

    It’s not a talking point. Nor is calling the Obama/Biden ticket the most hostile ticket to 2nd Amendment rights in all of history.

    I’ll gladly call a spade a spade.

    Chris – As you can see there are folks here who don’t even pretend to be based in reality. “she has avoided the media.” That’s funny as hell. These are the same people who believe Conservative talk radio are responsible for any nutjob who does out and shoots someone.

  61. pandora says:

    She has avoided the media, which is different than press coverage.

  62. Chris says:

    “In fact, I couldn’t be more thrilled with your pick.”

    Then we finally agree on something!

  63. pandora says:

    See? There’s always common ground. However, I think the reasons we’re thrilled with Palin differ greatly. 🙂

  64. Von Cracker says:

    You’d think that the VP nominee would’ve been all over this past Sunday’s morning talk shows, but I guess she had to practice the speech that was written for Mitt Romney her instead.

  65. mike w. says:

    That’s true, there is common ground. Even Pandora and I agree on some issues, and she’s a bleeding heart liberal.

  66. DavidV says:

    “If you folks had nominated a moderate Democrat we’d be having a different discussion.”

    Moderation is not to be found in this campaign. McCain has his head far up Bush/Rove’s ass and Sarah Palin is pushing from behind as hard as she can. (somebody should make that into a cartoon).

    Your 2nd Amendment rights are under no more pressure than your 1st and 4th.

  67. mike w. says:

    “Your 2nd Amendment rights are under no more pressure than your 1st and 4th.”

    I love how often I’ve heard this same tired BS line here at DE Liberal that isn’t based one bit in reality. I’ve never seen such clinging to ignorance. The fact is Obama/Biden are the most anti-gun ticket ever, are openly hostile to 2nd Amendment rights, and have shown that hostility on the campaign trail.

    The facts are what they are, and they are in no way supportive of your statement.

  68. Chris says:

    “Moderation is not to be found in this campaign. McCain has his head far up Bush/Rove’s ass and Sarah Palin is pushing from behind as hard as she can.”

    Wow. Have you ever studied politics? Bush/Cheyney ticket was never Far right. In fact, they failed to stand on conservative principles like controlled spending and failing to seal the damn border on September 12, 2001.

    Yet McCain makes Bush/Cheyney look far right by comparison. In fact, the scary thing was that when the candidate pool was down to Obama, McCain, and Clinton….Clinton may have just been the most conservative.

    Yes, Palin was brought in to energize the base, because McCain is SO moderate that the conservatives felt lost and betrayed. We respect the man and hav enot minded having him as a Senator, but too middle of the road to make us really get excited about the election. Palin balances him. Moderate and conservative. Only lefties get left out. With Obama, only lefties will be happy. Most of America will be left out in the cold.

  69. DavidV says:

    sorry Mike…not drinking the Kool-aid.

    Bush/McCain/Rove/Palin have no respect for your rights unless they line up with their agenda. The desire to squash the 1st and 4th amendment are in plain clear view of our daily lives. They don’t even make excuses for it anymore. The real life examples of actual degradations of your rights are but a google click away.

  70. Chris says:

    “The desire to squash the 1st and 4th amendment are in plain clear view of our daily lives. ”

    Yes…and the “Fairness Doctrine” does SO much to right that.

  71. mike w. says:

    So you’re honestly telling me my 1st and 4th Amendments are under constant legislative onslaught the way my 2nd Amendment rights are? (and would be under Obama/Biden + Dem Congress)

    Do you honestly believe that? There are entire states in this country where the 2nd Amendment barely applies (or in some cases doesn’t) Name me a state where the same could be said about the 1st and 4th?

    The 4th has been under assault for decades unfortunately, and Dems attack it just as much as Reps.

    The Dems are no more fans of the 1st & 4th than Republicans are. Some of the attitudes of liberals on this site only bear that out.

  72. DavidV says:

    No arguments from me Chris.

  73. mike w. says:

    “The desire to squash the 1st and 4th amendment are in plain clear view of our daily lives. ”

    And the desire of the left to squash the 2nd Amendment isn’t? Have you been living under a rock? Have you even listened to Obama or Biden or looked at their proposals and records?

  74. pandora says:

    I’d really appreciate it if this thread didn’t go down the 2nd Amendment path.

    The post is if Palin reached outside the Republican base and won over moderates, and if she passed the VP test.

  75. DavidV says:

    agreed…putting down the gloves

  76. mike w. says:

    That’s OK Pandora, I was just countering a patently ridiculous statement.

  77. pandora says:

    So, did she reach moderates? Serious question.

    On another front, I spoke with my neighbor today. He’s a Rabbi, and since we’re close I jumped right in. What does the Jewish community think of Palin?

    His comment: McCain’s lost Florida.

    Hmmm… not sure about that prediction, but it was an interesting and LENGTHY conversation. Seems Palin’s hit a nerve in the Jewish community.

  78. Andy says:

    At least Joe can write his own speaches
    Palin had the Kool Aide drinkers in her pocket already
    all fluff and no stuff

  79. mike w. says:

    I’ve always found it incredible that American Jews would ever support folks who think outright gun bans are Constitutional. The history of their own disarmament and slaughter isn’t that old, yet some American Jews seem to have forgotten the lessons of history already. Of course the same could be said for blacks, who were the reason gun control came about in the 1st place, and now they enthusiastically ask to be disarmed. History repeats itself when you fail to learn from it.

    Thankfully Israeli Jews have not forgotten.

    And yes, I think she did a better job reaching out to moderates than Obama or Biden could ever hope to.

    Andy – You mean Biden the Plagarizer?

  80. Linoge says:

    Out of curiosity, Pandora, what did the Rabbi say were the sticking points the Jewish community had with Palin? (And, yes, this is an honest question, born out of honest curiosity.)

  81. pandora says:

    Fair enough, Linoge. Her strong evangelical opinions were the main concern. Let’s face it, having “Jews for Christ” come to your congregation isn’t going to go over too well.

    He also said that he has heard from (calls, emails, etc) other Jews (who were leaning McCain) that Palin is a deal breaker. There were a variety of reasons, but he kept coming back to her evangelical platform.

    He was upset by the Palin choice.

  82. mike w. says:

    Pandora – That’s understandable. Hell, her evangelical roots are my main beef with her too.

  83. Linoge says:

    Seconded, and certainly understandable. Different things are sticking points for different people, and religion is certainly a driving force for that community – no way around that.

  84. Duffy says:

    Pandora:

    “There were a variety of reasons, but he kept coming back to her evangelical platform.”

    I find this strange. I thought evangelicals were very supportive of Israel and (aside from their wish to convert them) Jews broadly.

    IIRC 60 Minutes did a story about evangelicals and specifically showed that they are overwhelmingly pro-Israel.

  85. mike w. says:

    That’s true Duffy, and hell, if Conservatives didnt support Israel they’d be screwed, because the left sure as hell doesn’t support them.

  86. Sharon says:

    Yes, Palin passed the V.P. test.

    Vice presidential candidates are supposed to be the attack dogs, saying things about the opposition that the presidential candidate shouldn’t say. That’s what Biden does (well, Obama says things anyway, but still). Now Palin isn’t “substantive” enough? Gimme a break! It was her acceptance speech. Those things aren’t designed for long in-depth discussions of issues. It’s designed to introduce the candidate, fire up the base, and attack the oppostion. Palin did it effectively.

    Bush/McCain/Rove/Palin have no respect for your rights unless they line up with their agenda. The desire to squash the 1st and 4th amendment are in plain clear view of our daily lives.

    I can say the same thing about Democrats. Ever heard of the Fairness Doctrine? That’s suppression of speech and it’s a top priority of Democrats. You want diversity in media? Don’t want the same line that NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, DNCNBC want you to hear? You won’t get that once they reimpose a Fairness Doctrine. Oh, and the internet? Well, that will probablly be gone as well.

    I’d rather have the CIA and FBI listening to me talking to my teenager about what time she has to go to work today than have the government deciding what I should be listening to or reading.

  87. Von Cracker says:

    “I’d rather have the CIA and FBI listening to me talking to my teenager about what time she has to go to work today than have the government deciding what I should be listening to or reading.”

    Oh please shut the hell up with this tripe; it’s fantasy land.

  88. Von Cracker says:

    And she pass her speech class, that’s all.

    Her VP test will be the next 2 weeks when she’s all by herself with the talking heads….if McCampaign allows it.

  89. mike w. says:

    Von – The “‘fairness doctrine” being pushed by the Dems is “fantasy?” I guess I’m not surprised considering you folks also believe Obama isn’t really anti-gun despite all evidence to the contrary.

    Sharon said,

    “Palin isn’t “substantive” enough? Gimme a break! It was her acceptance speech. Those things aren’t designed for long in-depth discussions of issues. It’s designed to introduce the candidate, fire up the base, and attack the oppostion. Palin did it effectively.”

    I couldn’t agree more Sharon. Palin did exactly what she should have in an acceptance speech. And the left/Obama supporters attacking her speech for “lacking substance” is one of the most laughable things I’ve ever heard considering the content of Obama’s early speeches.

  90. Chris says:

    “Her VP test will be the next 2 weeks when she’s all by herself with the talking heads….if McCampaign allows it.”

    That was what they said about the speech. Ok, so if she passes this NEXT test…then what…you come up with some other test to prove herself?

    An VonCracker, I know you don’t think it will happen, but if she destroys Biden in the debate, will she have poven herself then?

    At one point will she have “passed the test”?

  91. joe says:

    “Pass the VP test?”

    As a speech – it seems so – listening to and reading all news sources today. Major complaints about the speech boil down to “lacked policy descriptions” and “shrill” (Harry Reed’s words, but others making same observation to that effect).

    As for policy – as noted here – this was an acceptance speech that was not intended to discuss policy indepth. It remains to be seen how well she’ll fair there – the VP debates should reveal that. She was an attacker – the whole night was a groundswell of criticism, with Palin as the crescendo. Good? Bad? Politics – left and right. If you think otherwise, you’re crazy. It’s dirty biz.

    Shrill? Totally subjective obviously – largely interpreted based on one’s own biases. If you don’t like the content of what she’ s saying, you’ll be more inclined to find her “shrill.” If you love it – you’ll call it “fiesty” or “tough”… or dare I say “mavericky”.

    My take for what it’s worth – Palin is good at politics, and that’s upsetting some people bcz she comes from a (let’s face it) out-of-the-way state w/o national exposure. She played the crowd, fired up the troops, and is quickly becoming a celebrity. How is that different than Obama? It’s not. One might argue the difference is along the lines of policy and issues – and rightly they should, becz all of this crap talk of “knowing” the person, their character, etc. is BS. You DON’T know Palin. You’ve never met her, you don’t know what she’s like behind closed doors. You DON’T know Obama in the same manner. None of us do. Who cares if she seemed, “genuine” or if he seems to “care”? It’s – at the end of the day – about issues.

    Personally – I find her demeanor a bit put-offish, but perhaps in light of the firestorm around her and her family the past few days, she’s ready for a fight … like a pitbull, right?

    Finally – I still say the best part of the night was when they pulled that 17 yr old boyfriend/father/insta-family member who they threw a coat and tie on out on stage, and he starts giving the ‘politico wave’… waving to the crowd… Ha! Sad and hilarious at the same time.

  92. cassandra_m says:

    She passed the VP test with a speech.

    A speech!

    An acceptance speech, supposedly designed to be free is issues.

    Will wonders never cease.

  93. joe says:

    Image is everything: found this today: “Image expert” grades Palin speech:Watch CBS Videos Online

  94. Von Cracker says:

    Mike – Fantasy as in it stifles free speech, not that some dems are pushing it.

    The purpose, I believe, was to allow opposing points of view, if warranted, not to eliminate opportunities.

    Personally, I don’t think it’s needed now due to the vast amount of new media out there for consumption (internet, satellite, etc).

    When the Fairness Doctrine was imposed, the times were so different and the media outlets and accessibility were very limited. Slanted views easily could’ve turned into gospel, so I can understand the argument for it back then.

  95. JadeGold says:

    Thankfully Israeli Jews have not forgotten.

    What Mikey forgets–or is just ignorant about–is that Israel has much tougher gun laws than the US. First off, military service is compulsory for nearly all Israeli citizens (save for a small number of a religious sect of Judaism). So, unlike Americans, the vast majority of Israelis have actual firearm training.

    Second, all gunowners must be licensed. Obtaining a license involves a three month wait, background, medical and psychological checks, and passing a proficiency test. If you have a criminal history or a history of alcohol or substance abuse–you are denied a license.

    Third, a gun license is valid for 5 years before it must be renewed.

    Fourth, owning an unlicensed gun carries criminal penalties.

    Again, Mikey demonstrates his lack of knowledge.

  96. Joe C says:

    “How did Sarah Palin do as a sports reporter?”, you might ask. Apparently the McCain campaign has been busier than a sled dog in the Iditarod trying to remove Palin’s clip from the “intranets” but at least one survived.
    deadspin.com/5045284/you-can-take-our-sarah-palin-videos-but-youll-never-take-our-freedom
    Sorry its not the pole dancing some are hoping for but it’ll surface soon enough.

  97. DPN says:

    JadeGold, did you just out gun Mike W?

  98. meatball says:

    Evangelicals believe that the second coming can’t come without Isreal. No Isreal no apocalypse.

  99. Von Cracker says:

    No Vulcans, no Spock!

    man, religion really does poison everything.

  100. mike w. says:

    DPN – Not even close. I know what Israel’s gun laws are. What Jade fails to realize is that Israel undermines his entire argument for gun control. (as does Switzerland, which also has mandatory military training & service and requires gun ownership.

    If guns are evil, if they cause crime then a society where nearly everyone is armed should be a total bloodbath. He constantly screams “more guns = more crime/death/murder” yet Israel proves that the “blood in the streets” fantasies of the anti-gunners don’t come true.

    There’s gun violence and random shootings daily in US inner cities, but in Israel almost everyones walking around with TRUE machine guns and high capacity pistols and they don’t have the kind of gun violence someplace like DC has. Sure, they have plenty of suicide bombings but that has nothing to do with guns / gun laws. They are the epitome’s of Heinlein’s phrase “An armed society is a polite society.”

    In fact, here’s an Israeli gun blogger.

    http://doubletapper.blogspot.com/

  101. Jadegold says:

    Yay, an Israeli gun blogger. Wow.

    The fact is, fewer than a quarter of a million Israelis own guns. And that number is declining every year.

    If Mikey truly believes Israel is gunloon utopia–then he should support the same gun control laws Israel has. If he doesn’t–well, he’s showing ignorance again.

    BTW, Switzerland also has tough gun laws.

  102. mike w. says:

    “If Mikey truly believes Israel is gunloon utopia–then he should support the same gun control laws Israel has. If he doesn’t–well, he’s showing ignorance again.”

    No, I simply have healthy respect for Constitutional rights and the principles under which this nation was formed. Constitutional rights are not subject to licensing, registration, or government issued permits.

    Furthermore I would not push for Israeli/Swiss style gun laws because it would go against the principles of American liberty to require gun ownership.

  103. mike w. says:

    Jade – No more link to your site? I guess you don’t want people to see the bigotry, childish BS and flat out lies you spew over there.

  104. Jadegold says:

    Thankfully Israeli Jews have not forgotten.

    –Mikey, before getting his hindquarters handed to him

  105. mike w. says:

    Yeah jade, you sure showed me…….

  106. gun dummy says:

    What exactly do you mean by ” to require gun ownnership”?

  107. Jadegold says:

    I was kind of wondering about that, as well.

  108. mike w. says:

    I mean what I said “require that people own a gun” Just as it is unamerican for the government to infringe upon the exercise of Constitutional rights it is likewise an affront to personal liberty for government to REQUIRE that you exercise your rights.

    The Swiss require gun ownership. I may be pro-gun, but that doesn’t mean I support government forcing gun ownership on citizens, at least not in America.

    Here’s a discussion of swiss gun laws, from a normally VERY anti-gun source, the BBC

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1566715.stm

    (yes I know this is off-topic, go bug JadeGold about it)

  109. Jadegold says:

    There you go again, Mikey.

    The Swiss don’t require gun ownership. First, if you’re talking about military (or Swiss militia)service, one is free to choose another form of national service. In fact, there’s a Swiss soccer star who opted out of militia service and served his service, working with disadvantaged youth.

    Second, Swiss militia service doesn’t require gun ownership. I realize you’ve never been in the service–but you aren’t required to buy your own weapon. It is issued to you and remains Govt. property even after you’ve left the service.

  110. mike w. says:

    Jade – come back to me when you’ve actually read the article.

    “They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.”

    The guns are government property, but kept at home, meaning they can easily be used to commit crimes. Yet despite the huge number of citizens who keep a weapon at home we don’t see bloodshed and mayhem. Widespread civilian control (since they technically don’t own the weapons) isn’t resulting in violence and bloodshed as you claim gun ownership does.

    Once discharged from active service they are still given weapons (K-31’s) to keep at home.

    “Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles.”

    In addition – the article states,
    there are few restrictions on buying weapons.”
    “The government even sells off surplus weaponry to the general public when new equipment is introduced.”

    Hmm yet still there’s no epidemic of gun violence. Quite the opposite in fact. Plenty of guns in civilian hands and holy shit, little if any violent crime! Certainly makes one question the whole “more guns = more crime argument.

  111. pandora says:

    Guys… please… This is not a gun post, nor is it a gun blog. The post is about if Sarah Palin did what she had to do last night.

  112. mike w. says:

    Sorry Pandora – Jade and Nesmki pulled me into that one. It’s good now though. He’s been thoroughly discredited once again.

    You guys must really hate that the Republican’s have not only a conservative woman on the ticket, but one who’s tough, independent, and an excellent speaker.

  113. yep, one who’s speach was written entirely for her and even was written before she was chosen.

    hey, she can read…she must be worth of office.

  114. pandora says:

    Bet Mitt was lip-syncing behind the scenes!

  115. mike w. says:

    Yeah, because that totally sounded like a Mitt Romney speech. Get a grip guys…

    :”hey, she can read…she must be worth of office.”

    Hey you guys adore the Obamessiah for his masterful oratory skills. It seems to be good enough for him.

  116. Joe C says:

    Did she do what she said?The natural gas pipeline” deal was struck, we began a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence,” Palin said. Fact is, she only got endorsement from the state leg but there is no commitment to actually build it from the Canadian company that still has to sell it to gas producers.