WWTBAM Bored

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's husband, Todd, twice registered as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a fierce states' rights group that wants to turn all federal lands in Alaska back to the state. Sarah Palin herself was never a member of the party, according to state officials.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26524024/

I really doubt Democrats want to start digging into Michelle Obama's views when she was younger, as expressed in her theses and other writings.

silverscreenselect wrote:I really doubt Democrats want to start digging into Michelle Obama's views when she was younger, as expressed in her theses and other writings.

I'm sure the Republicans will.

Bob Juch wrote:Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's husband, Todd, twice registered as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a fierce states' rights group that wants to turn all federal lands in Alaska back to the state. Sarah Palin herself was never a member of the party, according to state officials.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26524024/

I just went to the RNC's website and no where on it does it say Todd Palin is running for President or even on the ticket.

22 years ago he was arrested for DUI and it makes the front page of the NT Times yesterday.

22 years ago Obama was doing cocaine. Never made the front page of the NY Times.

Todd registered as part of a non-vilent Alaskan independence organization.

Obama is freinds with a terrorist who in his own words did not bomb enough.

And according the the DNC website, he IS on the ticket.

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I really doubt Democrats want to start digging into Michelle Obama's views when she was younger, as expressed in her theses and other writings.

I'm sure the Republicans will.

Nah, there is enough in Barak's younger views and writings.

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I really doubt Democrats want to start digging into Michelle Obama's views when she was younger, as expressed in her theses and other writings.

I'm sure the Republicans will.

And the Democrats have given them the perfect opening to do so without appearing to be "unfair." Hillary was the only major Democrat who seemed to realize the trap they are getting into when she praised Palin's accomplishment but said it shouldn't take away from an examination of her stance on the issues. As usual, no one listened to her; instead hurling everything but the kitchen sink at Palin.

The problem when you launch a broadside attack against an opponent like this is that if Palin is able to turn aside some of the criticism (such as that of her daughter or her seeming lack of experience by making a credible showing during her speech), the public will very likely dismiss all the criticism as being unfair, mean spirited or true without getting into the specifics on every single issue.

And every line of criticism about "vetting" Palin leaves Obama open to dredging up all his past skeletons along with whatever else the Repubs will throw at him.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:I really doubt Democrats want to start digging into Michelle Obama's views when she was younger, as expressed in her theses and other writings.

I'm sure the Republicans will.

And the Democrats have given them the perfect opening to do so without appearing to be "unfair." Hillary was the only major Democrat who seemed to realize the trap they are getting into when she praised Palin's accomplishment but said it shouldn't take away from an examination of her stance on the issues. As usual, no one listened to her; instead hurling everything but the kitchen sink at Palin.

The problem when you launch a broadside attack against an opponent like this is that if Palin is able to turn aside some of the criticism (such as that of her daughter or her seeming lack of experience by making a credible showing during her speech), the public will very likely dismiss all the criticism as being unfair, mean spirited or true without getting into the specifics on every single issue.

And every line of criticism about "vetting" Palin leaves Obama open to dredging up all his past skeletons along with whatever else the Repubs will throw at him.

I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

silverscreenselect wrote: And the Democrats have given them the perfect opening to do so without appearing to be "unfair." Hillary was the only major Democrat who seemed to realize the trap they are getting into when she praised Palin's accomplishment but said it shouldn't take away from an examination of her stance on the issues. As usual, no one listened to her; instead hurling everything but the kitchen sink at Palin.

The problem when you launch a broadside attack against an opponent like this is that if Palin is able to turn aside some of the criticism (such as that of her daughter or her seeming lack of experience by making a credible showing during her speech), the public will very likely dismiss all the criticism as being unfair, mean spirited or true without getting into the specifics on every single issue.

I disagree that Sen. Clinton was the only major Dem who took that approach, but unfortunately she and the others were drowned out by the screaming from the rest.

I agree with everything else in the quote. SSS was right, it's Rovian politics at its finest -- or worst, depending on how you look at it.

Bob Juch wrote:I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

No, its just that that is what the media does, probably by choice because IF they did discuss the important stuff their candidate wouldn't get elected.

Irrelevant.

BackInTex wrote:Obama is freinds with a terrorist who in his own words did not bomb enough.

That's a bald-faced lie, and you know it. Obama visited Bill Ayers' house one time when he was 8 years old. Obama and Ayers were in the same board meetings a few times many years ago. But that's it. They have never been friends. This is a lie propagated by Harold Simmons, one of the biggest funders of the Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth" in 2004. The lie is so blatant and so outlandish that not even Jerome Corsi would put it in his smear book, "The Obama Nation".

The supposed relationship between Obama and Ayers is nothing compared to the 30-year relationship between the Bush family and the bin Laden family.

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:Obama is freinds with a terrorist who in his own words did not bomb enough.

That's a bald-faced lie, and you know it. Obama visited Bill Ayers' house one time when he was 8 years old.

Now that's really funny, Nelly just told us that Obama visited William Ayres in 1969!!!!

BackInTex wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

No, its just that that is what the media does, probably by choice because IF they did discuss the important stuff their candidate wouldn't get elected.

For years, the media have wanted Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani head-to-head for the 2008 presidency. The media did a fantastic job at making that happen, didn't they?

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: I'm sure the Republicans will.

And the Democrats have given them the perfect opening to do so without appearing to be "unfair." Hillary was the only major Democrat who seemed to realize the trap they are getting into when she praised Palin's accomplishment but said it shouldn't take away from an examination of her stance on the issues. As usual, no one listened to her; instead hurling everything but the kitchen sink at Palin.

The problem when you launch a broadside attack against an opponent like this is that if Palin is able to turn aside some of the criticism (such as that of her daughter or her seeming lack of experience by making a credible showing during her speech), the public will very likely dismiss all the criticism as being unfair, mean spirited or true without getting into the specifics on every single issue.

And every line of criticism about "vetting" Palin leaves Obama open to dredging up all his past skeletons along with whatever else the Repubs will throw at him.

I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

Well, you are falling for it!

I'm a lifelong Repubican embarrassed by Bush. He had no business winning in 2004 - yet he did, not because he was so great, but the Dems had awful people running an awful campaign.

The Dems are repeating that mistake now.

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

No, its just that that is what the media does, probably by choice because IF they did discuss the important stuff their candidate wouldn't get elected.

For years, the media have wanted Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani head-to-head for the 2008 presidency. The media did a fantastic job at making that happen, didn't they?

There's a difference in being lazy and being biased. The media is lazy every year in picking USC as number one, but they are also biased in doing so because that promises better ratings for them. Different motivations.

Here, picking Hillary and Rudy were the lazy things to do. But when it came time to take a stand, the media chose to run four articles on a 17-year old girl, while John Edwards sat at home.

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:That's a bald-faced lie, and you know it. Obama visited Bill Ayers' house one time when he was 8 years old. Obama and Ayers were in the same board meetings a few times many years ago. But that's it. They have never been friends.

Umm....Obama visited Ayer's house in 1995 for a political introduction event.

If what you say is true, Obama, as I've contended all along, is not qualified to be president (though for a different reason). He is only 21 years old!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html

article wrote:Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.

Bob Juch wrote: I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

Well, maybe, but isn't the Democrats who keep bringing this stuff up? I doubt that it was a Republican blogger who started the nonsense about how Palin's youngest child was actually her grandchild, for example, nor were they the ones who started talking about Palin's husband's DUI conviction of 22 years ago, nor were they the ones who falsely stated that she was a member of the AIP, nor were they the ones who started talking about her husband. All that nonsense (much of it false, and the true stuff entirely irrelevant) seems to have come from the other side of the aisle.

It just kills me that Democrats and other people on the left keep going on about 'the Republicans will start slamming dirt' and 'more Republican dirty tricks,' but so far this year, all the nasty dirt has come from the Democratic side, either the stuff that went on between Hillary and Obama, or the stuff that has since been hurled at Palin. Maybe it's not the Republicans who are the leads on the nasty stuff after all...

wintergreen48 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: I'm beginning to think the Republicans' game plan is to have people talking about all sorts of crap like her pregnant daughter instead of the important stuff.

Well, maybe, but isn't the Democrats who keep bringing this stuff up? I doubt that it was a Republican blogger who started the nonsense about how Palin's youngest child was actually her grandchild, for example, nor were they the ones who started talking about Palin's husband's DUI conviction of 22 years ago, nor were they the ones who falsely stated that she was a member of the AIP, nor were they the ones who started talking about her husband. All that nonsense (much of it false, and the true stuff entirely irrelevant) seems to have come from the other side of the aisle.

It just kills me that Democrats and other people on the left keep going on about 'the Republicans will start slamming dirt' and 'more Republican dirty tricks,' but so far this year, all the nasty dirt has come from the Democratic side, either the stuff that went on between Hillary and Obama, or the stuff that has since been hurled at Palin. Maybe it's not the Republicans who are the leads on the nasty stuff after all...

I mentioned in another post today that, pre-Palin, the Republicans would have had to successfully turn the convention into another anti-Obama crusade in order to have a chance and, frankly, that's what I thought they would try. The MSM and the Obamites would have labelled it all as rehashing and Swiftboating and he might have skated.

Now, the Republicans will trot out their heavy lumber against Obama in the next couple of weeks (with whatever else they've been sitting on), and the Democrats will be hard pressed to cry that it's unfair or dirty politics, especially if Palin emerges as a likable sort of person from all this.

I do believe the Republicans are past masters of the art of the dirty trick and that we'll probably see some of it this time around as well. The problem is that the Democrats have been more than willing not only to stoop to the Republicans level, but to do it first. And they're just not as good at it as the Republicans are.