Friday, January 22, 2010
Snarky question of the day
Word:
Have any of the people who are still complaining about John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his running-mate expressed any regret at having supported John Kerry*, whose selection was, by any imaginable standard, much, much worse?
___________________
* The haughty, French-looking former junior senator from Massachusetts, who by the way served in Vietnam.
The other obvious point was that John Edwards was much less than a mere moral cretin. He was, when Kerry nominated him, no more "experienced" than Sarah Palin was in 2008. The refusal of the non-Fox mainstream media to acknowledge that point last year was the most compelling evidence that its main purpose during the 2008 general election campaign was to amplify the Obama campaign's talking points.
CWCID: Glenn Reynolds.
26 Comments:
By 
, at
Fri Jan 22, 09:41:00 AM:
Nobody makes enough of the fact that Obama was not as experienced as Palin. She had been a governor, while he had no real executive experience, in government, in the military, or in business.
It sure shows, now.
By 
victoria, at
Fri Jan 22, 10:00:00 AM:
Sorry. Still think it was the worst choice ever. Did it get him elected, hell no. She is an empty vessel, nothing there. Can repeat stuff and can attack but there is no real substance.
Really, who cares about the other people when you have Sarah the divine. Please.
By Bomber Girl, at
Fri Jan 22, 10:01:00 AM:
I liked John McCain a lot as a candidate until he picked Palin. In spite of the unfortunate tendency of politicians to pick running mates to capture certain parts of the electorate, I happen to think the most important qualification for a VP elect is that they are qualified to be President in the case of the untimely demise of the Prez. I don't put Sarah in this category in spite of her governorship. Anyone who spends more time in her tell all book lambasting Katie Couric for making her look bad than talking about serious issues such as foreign policy needs a bit of seasoning, to put it mildly.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 10:22:00 AM:
I thought McCain was a lousy candidate! I like Palin and her style but am not sure that she'll be the best candidate for President in 2012 or any other year.
What I do LOVE about Palin, however, is her ability to TERRIFY the captive media and anti-American leftists. She can divert their resources and have them ranting over nothing. She will be a factor against the Kenyan in the years ahead!
By Christopher Chambers, at
Fri Jan 22, 10:29:00 AM:
Snarky question, indeed. But a good question. Maybe they are both douchbags (Palin and Edwards). it's just that Edwards managed to keep his darkness in the closet, rather than exhaulting it, till it burst forth?
My snark: So now you are a Palindrone, TH? Someone as supposedly smart and worldly, a "corporate executive," exposed to diverse people as you? Lord what turns in the windmill of your mind? LOL So she is the future of the GOP for you now (seeing that you have finally fessed up on saying you're an "independent" or "libertarian" [smirk]...where'd the love for Kean, or General Powell go?).
Here's more snark, and maybe Palin in her cocoon on Fox, or Edwards in hiding like Tiger, can weigh in this, too: I am SICK of all this attention to poor Haitians and Taylor Swift singing for these savage black orphans, when here Big Business is just as downtrodden, disenfranchised, abused and VOICELESS! Thank you, non"activist" Supreme Court justices for striking down precedent to give the wretched of the earth a voice! Their faint trill couldn't be heard by politicians. ROLL JORDAN ROLL, PRAISE DA LAWD.
Excuse me while I pull my zipper back up. I'll whip it out again for the next inane post you put up. Or for people who refer to the President as "The Kenyan." Why not just say nigger? Be emboldened!
By Purple Avenger, at
Fri Jan 22, 11:26:00 AM:
We really dodged a bullet when we got Joe Biden as VP.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 11:28:00 AM:
Chambers, you're one sick puppy!
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 11:30:00 AM:
That takes trolling to a whole level.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 12:26:00 PM:
Obama's an idiot. He has proven it to all but the most partisan. And Biden is truly pathetic.
Was Sarah fit to be president? no. Was Obama? no.
Does Palin crush Michelle in looks, body, etc.? yep. I'd rather see her in the news every day.
The only difference between the candidates, and the Veeps, was that people drank the cool aid. They showed their cocktail party friends that they weren't racist by voting for the brown guy (you know, he's HALF black?, I feel so Progressive when I say I voted for him).
McCain sucked as a candidate. The NY Times' selection for the GOP candidate worked, but we all paid for it.
I predict that another 9 months of hopechang Bambi-style will demonstrate that the best way to beat the Democrats will be to just let them have control. Give 'em the WH and a super-majority, and let 'em really F it up good. Teach us all a lesson in how good we had it before. Then let the new guys fix it.
And yes, the GOP did a good job of F'ing it up good too.
Oh yeah, and hopefully the news media gets their jolly's and the moves on from the Silky Pony. Nice VP candidate your party ran against Bush in 04.
And where's the transparency, pull-out from the ME, responsibility, non-corporate welfare solution, etc.? We've dropped a few extra trillion, figuring it should be right here, but can't find it.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 12:56:00 PM:
"...an empty vessel, nothing there. Can repeat stuff and can attack but there is no real substance."
Sorry, Victoria, were you speaking of Obama, or was it someone else?
By Georg Felis, at
Fri Jan 22, 12:56:00 PM:
Heh. I have to admit, I’m getting to like CC’s comments.
Nobody thought that the Republicans could run a candidate pair where the Republican VP had more experience than the Democrat Presidential candidate, with a fiscally conservative McCain in a period of fiscal crisis, and a socially liberal McCain in a period where we were all supposed to be getting so socially liberal. And lose. It took a lot of work, I kind of like McCain, but I admit I yelled “What in (censored) are you doing?” more than once at the radio during the campaign. About the only thing he did perfectly right in the campaign was to pick Palin for his VP (and then screwed it up by assigning her staff). She is an up and coming threat to the Progressives, and they will spare no effort to destroy her.
By victoria, at
Fri Jan 22, 02:14:00 PM:
Obama, a whole other thing. No no, alanstorm, I meant Palin. Listen to her closely. She actually never says anything. Nor does she offer any solutions. She is a physical talking point, that's all.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 02:38:00 PM:
victoria
I meant Palin. Listen to her closely. She actually never says anything. Nor does she offer any solutions. She is a physical talking point, that's all.
Really now? Prove your point by getting a Sarah Palin speech or column and and use your awesome analytic powers to Fisk it for us. Put your money where your mouth is. Show us.
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Jan 22, 04:18:00 PM:
If we're going to discuss crappy Vice Presidential picks, here's my nomination. Why would the selection if Biden, a serial-plagiarist who made wildly inaccurate statements about foreign policy events that occurred *while he was on the Foreign Relations Committee,* (I refer specifically to his claims on live TV about when the US and France kicked Hezb Allah out of Lebanon, which never ever happened, ever; he was in pure bullshit mode. There was at least one other example from the same period, but I've since forgotten) rank below that of Palin?
Palin was chosen to invigorate the social conservatives, and she did. Money poured in, and McCain's polls finally went above Obama's for a while.
Biden was chosen... why? It wasn't for his political acumen. He's a gaffe-machine. It wasn't for his supposedly vast foreign policy experience; as I just pointed out, he has none. It wasn't to invigorate some portion of the electorate. So, why? Assassination insurance? Dirt on Obama? The only other senior Democratic politician (other than Hillary, who was never a possibility) willing to come aboard?
Biden was an awful choice, who lent no obvious political benefit to the race and has ended up being deliberately isolated by the Administration because he's an idiot.
By victoria, at
Fri Jan 22, 06:58:00 PM:
listen to her resignation speech. Nothing of substance. Nothing. Meandering, pointless and stupid. Please.
By Dawnfire82, at
Fri Jan 22, 07:15:00 PM:
Ah. So almost being kicked out of law school for plagiarizing 1/3 of your law review article, being shut down in a presidential run because you plagiarized *again,* completely making shit up on the spot to show off your 'foreign policy credentials,' and a comically epic string of monumentally stupid things uttered in public is all less bad than giving a crappy speech.
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, given who's President now.
By , at
Fri Jan 22, 07:30:00 PM:
victoria
listen to her resignation speech. Nothing of substance. Nothing. Meandering, pointless and stupid. Please.
I will repeat myself, as my message isn't getting through.
Really now? Prove your point by getting a Sarah Palin speech or column and and use your awesome analytic powers to Fisk it for us. Put your money where your mouth is. Show us.
Something on policy would be preferable, such as her Hong Kong speech, or what she has written on Obamacare.
By , at
Sat Jan 23, 12:22:00 AM:
What has become of America?
http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/pdx/1442403975.html
By victoria, at
Sat Jan 23, 12:43:00 PM:
So Boludi, I have to select what you feel is right and appropriate. What you said in your last post was "a" speech or column, not selected columns concerning policy. Hmmm, that is the rightie way, selective hearing, selective reasoning.
By , at
Sat Jan 23, 12:47:00 PM:
Looks like Victoria can't or refuses to document her statement. Why are we not surprised? More of the "I FEEL it is so, so it MUST be so" way of dealing with reality. Good thing Victoria doesn't design bridges for us. "I feel this is a good design. I just can't prove it.Take my word for it that it is a good design."
By , at
Sat Jan 23, 12:57:00 PM:
Victoria:
So Boludi, I have to select what you feel is right and appropriate. What you said in your last post was "a" speech or column, not selected columns concerning policy. Hmmm, that is the rightie way, selective hearing, selective reasoning.
1) You in no way gave documentation to support your statement about her resignation speech, citing chapter and verse,as it were.
2) If one is going to prove that a politician is not up to snuff, it is more appropriate to choose a politician's statement on plicy.
3) Since you didn't bother to Fisk her resignation speech, I suggested that you Fisk policy.
4) Something is better than nothing. If you want to Fisk her resignation speech, please do so. But you haven't.
By victoria, at
Sat Jan 23, 02:03:00 PM:
Boludu,
So I still have to give you chapter and verse on policy. Actually, what is more representative of a politician and more revealing about their true nature is not what they say about policy, it's all the other stuff. You can memorize policy and regurgitate it on command. Screw Fisk, hide behind it you might, and you do. Go on to youtube and just listen, it is amazing. Fisk ,fisk fisk, just and excuse to hide. Rightie rhetoric,attack, attack. Is this a new buzz word you learned and now you are going to use it everywhere, eventhough it doesn't fit. You are like my 5 year old grandson with a new toy.
By victoria, at
Sat Jan 23, 02:04:00 PM:
Something is better than nothing? Seriously? Do you hear yourself?
By , at
Sat Jan 23, 03:41:00 PM:
So I still have to give you chapter and verse on policy.
Contrary to what you wrote in the above statement, I indicated I would settle for a a Fisking of her resignation speech. Here is what I wrote: “You in no way gave documentation to support your statement about her resignation speech, citing chapter and verse, as it were….If you want to Fisk her resignation speech, please do so. But you haven't.”
Fisking involves documenting what someone said in a speech, such as “North Dakota has the warmest winters in the US,” and documenting why such a statement has problems. Documentation does not involve telling someone to watch a video. Here is an example of doumentation in Fisking a video. Nor would documentation involve telling someone to “read Das Kapital” or “you can find it in the Library of Congress,” for that matter. Documentation needs to be a bit more specific.
Wouldn’t you love to have the opportunity to tear apart Sarah Palin’s statements? Apparently not.
Something is better than nothing? Seriously? Do you hear yourself?
Perhaps rewriting it will make it clearer: “4) Fisking something is better than Fisking nothing. If you want to Fisk her resignation speech instead of one of her policy statements, please do so. But you haven’t.”
I find it rather ironic that in a blog that by definition resorts to the written word, you are unable or unwilling to give written reasons to support your point of view. I am convinced by written, documented arguments. If you are either unwilling or unable to provide written, documented arguments to support your point of view, you will not convince me that your point of view is right. Nor will you convince most people who use logic and information to make decisions. It’s that simple.
It’s your call.
Ciao.
By , at
Sat Jan 23, 04:07:00 PM:
Here is my example of a partial Fisking of Sarah Palin’s resignation speech.
Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations - such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters' questions.
Sounds accurate to me.
every one - all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We've won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted THOUSANDS of hours of YOUR time and shelled out some two million of YOUR dollars to respond to "opposition research" - that's money NOT going to fund teachers or troopers - or safer roads.
This is an example of the BS she has had to put up with in the last year.
And this political absurdity, the "politics of personal destruction" ... Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight.
This is a pretty good reason to get out, if you are going to be a continuing target. The time spent in dealing with frivolous complaints also takes time away from other, more important tasks. Note the above: the complaints have been dismissed. Some have considered this an invalid reason for resigning, supporting this argument by resorting to the like of HST’s famous saying, “If you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen.”
And I'll work hard for others who still believe in free enterprise and smaller government; strong national security for our country and support for our troops; energy independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and LIFE... I'll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won't deride them.
It is debatable that joining Fox is the best way to achieve those goals.
See, it’s not that hard to do.
By , at
Tue Mar 30, 05:36:00 PM:
Fascinating logic. So the president of a 100 person firm would be more qualified to take over GE than the CFO of a Fortune 100 company? Simply b/c the president of the small firm had "executive experience" and the CFO did not?
