Saturday, November 08, 2008
Rick Lowry spoke to Steve Biegun, the former Bush NSC staffer who briefed Sarah Palin on foreign policy matters. He calls bullpucky on the various anonymous accusations against Palin, including that she did not know the members of NAFTA and that Africa was a continent:
In general, according to Beigun, Palin had a steep learning curve on foreign issues, about what you would expect from a governor. But she has "great instincts and great core values," and is "an instinctive internationalist." The stories against her are being "fed by an unnamed source who is allowed by the press to make ad hominem attacks on background." Biegun, who spent dozens and dozens of hours briefing Palin on these issues, is happy to defend her, on the record, under his own name.
Whatever one thinks of Sarah Palin's brains, that the accusations against her come from anonymous sources and that putatively respectable media organizations are honoring that anonymity says much more about the degraded morality of our journalists than it does about Sarah Palin's intelligence or lack thereof. The networks and newspapers that are publishing these attacks are simply acting as vehicles for somebody's political ambitions. How is it intellectually honest to publish these charges without also telling us who benefits from their publicity?
Ronald Reagan spent years writing short radio essays for GE. They can be found in "Reagan in his Own Hand."
If Palin wants a major future in US politics, something like that is a must. If she still wants it after the savaging in the media, she's got more guts than McCain.
Palin really got under the left's skin, she's obviously a future contender or they wouldn't bother
And she seemingly got under the right's skin too: The bottom sucking MSM scum are reporting what the former Bush/McCain campaign advisors are telling them!!. Now, why do you think members of her very own party would be doing that??
BTW, it was Carl Cameron, Chief Political Analyst at Fox News who reported that there were um, er... "gaps" in her knowledge.
And the fellow, Steve Biegun, the subject of this post, and the former NSC staffer who came to Palin's defense? He was fired from the McCain campaign before the election for attacking co-workers while defending Palin. Seemed he wasn't willing to play nice.
I see a book here.
Two disappointments here: The only person who could rectify this assault is silent...John McCain. To me that implies that it was done with his knowledge and consent. Would that he was as savage when it was REALLY important...utilizing the damning association of Reverend Wright against Obama. An association that, if the roles were reversed, would (or should) have disqualified one's candidacy for high office.
The other sad thing is Carl Cameron. He has always been as factual and balanced as anyone in the media. Of course this makes him look like a right winger in contrast to all the tingly-legged supplicants on the competeting outlets. That being said, the prospect of him going on about unsubstantiated character attacks from an unconfirmed, unidentified source is right out of the Huffington Post. I didn't think he was capable of such irresponsible journalism.
Gee, can I still get Radio Free Europe?? Where does one go for the truth??
The way Palin was savaged doesn't bode well for future women candidates ... Hillary is an exception because she rode Bill's coattails. Attack dogs went at Sarah and found nothing in her personal life ... as she married her high school guy. The press tried to invent a story about her having an affair, and ran innuendo about her and her daughter's two-headed love children. Be assured, if she had had a few flings in college we'd know all about it. God help her if she had ever had an abortion, or dated a black guy.
Because of this, I can guarantee that any woman running for President will be swiftboated over her sexual history, and that this will affect potential Democratic candidates even more. It's an awful double standard, but one Axelrod and the Democrats just helped to reinforce. Do Maureen and Peggy know they've helped bring this about?
A relative who was a mid-level operative for Romney tells me that it is former Romney staffers who were pissed from the beginning that she got the nod instead of Mitt and want to damage her so she is less of a threat to him in '12.
As to Romney's gang being involved in swiftboating Sarah, I wouldn't be surprised. As they say in Godfather II, someone gave the order.
Mitt wasn't the right guy in 2008 to go wide .... but he could be in 2012, on a platform of fixing Obama's economic mistakes. Is he already the silent front runner? Mitt's issue is that when he goes wide, he'll come off as a robot, or the spawn of a species superior to Joe the Plumber. Huckabee said it best: "he's the guy who fires you." Big brain, no heart .... he'll have a problem "connecting" ... Just the guy to prescribe tough economic medicine. Look for lots of pictures of his perfect children jet-skiing in summer and heli-skiing in winter.
Is Sarah permanently tarnished? Can she build a broader constituency, or will she just be the darling of Rush and the religious right? I think it will be the latter ... she's too boxed in. It'll be too hard for her to convince large swaths of America that she's smarter than a fifth grader. Which isn't fair, but it's now a reality. With her base, she can still win the nomination ... or influence who does get it.
Is Bobby Jindal the guy, kind of young, but with a great resume. Sad to say, but if you want to run for President as a small state Governor it helps to be a Rhodes scholar. Everyone focuses on the Evangelicals, but Catholics are the big religious swing block in Presidential elections. We haven't had a Catholic President since the one and only ... JFK.
How is it intellectually honest to publish these charges without also telling us who benefits from their publicity?
For the most part, I don't think journalists or their editors even think in such terms anymore.
And increasingly I see that as more their problem than mine.
New Poll: Palin a GOP Rock Star
Friday, November 7, 2008
Despite some news reports suggesting otherwise, a new poll shows that Sarah Palin was a definite asset to John McCain in his run for the White House.
According to a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, 69 percent of Republican voters say the Alaska governor helped McCain’s bid for the presidency. Twenty percent of GOP voters said she hurt the ticket, six percent said she had no effect, and 5 percent were undecided.
Other results of the poll:
91 percent of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin.
65 percent of Republicans have a very favorable view of Palin.
8 percent of Republicans have an unfavorable view of Palin.
3 percent of Republicans have a very unfavorable view of Palin.
64 percent of Republicans say Palin is their top choice for the GOP 2012 presidential nominee.
12 percent of Republicans say Mike Huckabee is their top choice for the GOP 2012 presidential nominee.
11 percent of Republicans say Mitt Romney is their top choice for the GOP 2012 presidential nominee.
Same thing for future anonymous leakers during the Obama administration, and I doubt people here will be demanding that they be unmasked.
Well, yes and maybe.
There's a huge and obvious (to me) difference between government officials/employees leaking critical information about the policies of our government versus ex-campaign figures leaking dirt about a (losing) candidate.
In one case, we're talking about the policy-makers that make decisions that directly or indirectly affect our lives. Using our money.
In the other, we'll, we're really just tossing around gossip.
I have been in the field of management and psychology for 30 years. And I never reacted to a comment from a person unless the comment was written and signed. To do so harms the person who is being talked about.. Mrs Palin has a future in politics, lets be with her and help her. Paul Napier ED>S
From Sarah's interview with Fox (to be aired tonight)
Q -- Why did your campaign lose?
A -- I think the Republican ticket represented too much of the status quo, too much of what had gone on in these last eight years, that Americans were kind of shaking their heads like going, wait a minute, how did we run up a $10 trillion debt in a Republican administration, how have there been blunders with war strategy under a Republican administration.
If we're talking change, we want to get far away from what it was that the present administration represented and that is to a great degree what the Republican Party had been representing. People desiring change I think went as far from the administration that is presently seated as they could. ... It's amazing that we did as well as we did.
Good grief. Bush, 41, Qualye, Dole, Bush '43, McCain, Palin. How is it that in the past 20 years Republicans have yet to nominate/elect a candidate that can construct a simple sentence? Remarkable
This may sound better than it reads ... and her comment is spot on. McCain couldn't find a way to distance himself from Bush. There's a good article in the current New Yorker about how Obama's polling led to his strategy for how to hang Bush around McCain's neck in order to capture indpendent voters. It worked.
I'm all for articulate speakers, but Sarah's style may already work with the masses. You have to be fairly smart to be articulate, but not being polished doesn't mean you're not smart. Sarah needs a couple of years of seasoning to reach the lofty heights of a Biden.
"Good grief. Bush, 41, Qualye, Dole, Bush '43, McCain, Palin. How is it that in the past 20 years Republicans have yet to nominate/elect a candidate that can construct a simple sentence? Remarkable"
I didn't notice any 'Uhs' or 'Umms' in that, unlike with a certain Messiah I've heard of.
Palin made those comments without a teleprompter...and their content is actually a very accurate and valuable appraisal of why they lost.
In other words...she ANSWERED THE QUESTION!
Flash to WonderBoy's first press conference...a celebration of obfuscation and stammering until he reached the pinnacle of the event..."What kind of dog will you have in the White House?"
Speaking for my selfish, unpatriotic self....I don't give a rat's ass what kind of dog he's going to get, dammit, I want to know how high he's going to take my marginal tax rate!
That's a question everybody needs to know, even though they may not think they are "rich".
And while I'm at it...I guess you've heard that he's going to bring all the Guantanimo terrorists over to the mainland for a nice show trial, reinstate the NO DRILLING provisions and start tinkering with the mortgage and 401K deductions.
Where exactly did we put that Misery Index that got stowed away when we finally got rid of Jimmy Carter..we are definitey going to need it.
Where's John McCain's honor when we need it?
We'll find out tonight, when the Arizona Republican appears on "The Tonight Show" with Jay Leno. In the week since the election, Mr. McCain's campaign team has leaked some nasty stuff about Sarah Palin. These leaks are personal, and they speak more to the character of Mr. McCain and the leakers than they do to Mrs. Palin. So it will be telling if Mr. McCain stands up for his partner and says how offended he has been by what some of his staffers have done to her.
Ouch! And from the Wall Street Journal no less! C'mon John. Man up.