New Contact Email

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Send Sarah?

UPDATE: As proof that this idea is not crazy, allow me to point out that Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol is thinking the same thing:

"As for the question of Friday night's debate, which some in the media seem to think more important than saving the financial system--if the negotiations are still going on in D.C., McCain should offer to send Palin to debate Obama!"
I'm interrupting our regularly scheduled program (a column on Franklin Roosevelt), to bring you my thoughts on the temporary suspension of the McCain-Palin campaign and the looming showdown over the first presidential debate. Obviously, McCain is going back to the Senate to participate in the negotiations over the bailout proposal, which could theoretically go long into the night on Friday and at the very least will bring his debate prep to a screeching halt. This is the right thing to do, and frankly I think that Senator Obama should have done the same thing; the debate is far less important than breaking the logjam on this emergency legislation. But, of course, the Gentleman from Illinois is insisting that the debate go on as planned, and it appears that his campaign is salivating over the prospect of potentially putting their man on stage alone.

This leaves McCain in a tricky position. If he has the courage to stay at work, Obama could turn the "debate" into an infomercial and harangue McCain for not coming. If he shows up, however, he will be going back on his word and possibly letting the negations disintegrate at the eleventh hour. While most people think that this puts McCain's back to the wall, they are failing to consider a third potential option: McCain could stay at work and offer to send Gov. Palin as a surrogate if Obama continues his temper-tantrum.

I know that this sounds rather crazy, but work with me here. I promise….I am not saying this just because I'm a Palinite. Offering to allow Sarah to debate Obama could conceivably produce three possible results

A) Obama rejects the offer and throws a hissy fit - Under this scenario, Obama would be forced to pull out of the debate himself, allowing him to be in Washington for the negotiations and ruining his infomercial

B) The CPD (Commission on Presidential Debates) refuses to allow a surrogate and gives Obama his infomercial anyway – This sets the stage for protests, accusations of bias, and a very messy situation if Sarah shows up at the hall. I doubt that the CPD would be this stupid, as it would jeopardize their reputation in the future.

C) Obama accepts – The novelty factor would likely produce one of the most-watched debates ever. Expectations for Palin, who will have had only days to prepare, will be so low that anything short of a complete meltdown will likely be deemed a success. Plus, Palin is already prepping to debate Joe Biden, who I would classify as a tougher opponent than Senator Obama himself.

As a bonus, simply making the offer would totally undermine the idea that McCain is "hiding" Palin from the world. In fact, it would invite criticism based on the idea that McCain would be exposing his "delicate" running mate to excessive stress (and it's always good for the GOP when the media suddenly has to reverse their arguments).

Now, is this necessarily going to happen? I don't know, but I think that it is something that the McCain campaign should seriously consider. It would reinforce the notion of McCain as the ultimate maverick and turn the race on its head for the second time in a month. Otherwise, Sen. McCain is placing himself in a danged-if-he-does, danged –if-he-doesn't situation. So, please, if Obama wants a circus, let's give him one by forcing him to take on Sarah face to face!


Carlos Echevarria said...

Great idea, it was my first instinct as well...unleash SarahCuda on Obambi!

robin in alabama said...

I was thinking the same thoughts when I heard the announcement. Send Sarah. They are a team and as VP she should be able to step in and help the President out when needed. I think Senator McCain is doing the right thing for our country and I pray that the problem can be solved quickly and correctly. I agree Send Sarah

Mountain Mama said...

FANTASTIC! My husband suggested this same idea exactly 1 minute before I read your article, Adam!
Great minds, eh? (wink)

(You realize this means that McCain's sending Gov. Palin to debate Obama must be an INSPIRED idea!)

Do you see what's MOST cool about it? We all know that Obama and Palin have approx. the same experience, yet B.O. is on TOP of the Dems' ticket----which is odd. His debating Palin would serve to underline this oddity, and that's a good thing for our team.

QUICK, everyone: send this idea in to the McCain campaign! I'm also sending it out via email as a petition.


bluesuede said...

Adam, you read my mind. I think it would be a great idea to send Sarah!

Unknown said...

Of course, all Obama need do is say let Biden and Palin debate. Biden won't need any preparation, but I doubt that Palin is ready.

Carl said...


I don't know about this one. I said yesterday (as I defended conservatism against 8 others and a professor in a seminar) that Mccain should go to the Senate and do something about this. For the second time in a month I can't believe he did it (the first being of course picking Sarah for VP).

There's one problem with Sarah debating Obama. It might cause too much heat at the bottom of the ticket. If she kills Obama won't people ask why she's at the bottom of the ticket instead of the top?


pHaT_aL said...

Is it legal? Is it allowed? If it is, well then, let's put her in.

Erin said...

I like this idea, but I don't know that Obama will go for it. I suspect he'll say he's urgently needed in DC and get out of it that way. I say that because it would have Obama aiming at the bottom of the ticket again, and I think they've had enough of that after the beating he took in the polls the last time he took her on.

Has anyone checked to see if this is even a viable solution? Are there regulations against such a thing?

I have to say, I think McCain did this for the right reasons. Reid asked for him specifically, and I think there's a reason for that. He's a good leader with solid relationships in both parties. However, this could backfire for his campaign. Time will tell. If it looks like he was just making hay, take the ball and go home; the game's over.

But if the Dems actually allow him to do some good here instead of roadblocking the issue because it would help a Republican, this could win the election for him.

Sound like a cause we were championing on, oh, August 28th?

pHaT_aL said...

Looks like it's not gonna happen.

Is McCain irrational? Fearful? Or just plain cunning?

Dean said...

I think this would be good however, I agree with richard that Obama will suggest that Biden and Sarah go ahead and debate.

Erin said...

Apologies for possibly double posting...

BO said earlier today, "It's my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who in approximately 40 days will be responsible for dealing with this mess," said Obama. "Part of the president's job is to deal with more than one thing at once."

The last sentence is quite telling. HE'S NOT PRESIDENT!!! He's a member of the Senate, and he cannot focus on the job he HAS because he's reaching so hard for the one he wants. This doesn't say much for HIS multitasking skills. If he loses, when this is over, his credibility (if he has any) should be shot in the Senate. Oh well. GO SARAH!!!

WickedWitch said...

I'm really hoping this happens also

This would directly address the "Palin isn't ready to be President" criticism that many are making and put her to the test in what is supposedly her weakest area (foreign policy).

If that debate occurs, then basically three things could happen.

1) she actually outperforms Obama (or does as well) in which case the campaign is over for Obama-Biden.

2) she gets blown out by Obama in which case the campaign is over for McCain-Palin

3) she might not do quite as well as Obama, but gives a decent performance (in which case this would also be a positive since expectations would be low) and the campaigns can actually do things like having their respective policy positions considered by the American people

If Obama refused to debate Palin, that would also be catastrophic for his campaign.

huskyonspeed said...

I don't know about this proposal; if Sarah is ready and willing then go for it, but she shouldn't be there just for the sake of having someone from the ticket present. I do like that McCain is going to DC to work on this financial problem. Both of these men are still US Senators, which means we are still paying their salaries, so i think they should be working on this and other problems.

huskyonspeed said...

I know this is off topic, but isn't Joe Biden starting to sound like Dan Quayle? Even i knew that Hoover was pres. in '29.

Friend08 said...

I realize that this comment may be a bit off-topic, but I just watched Governor Palin's interview with Katie Couric today. Let me be clear that I am indeed a big fan of Gov. Palin, however, I am somewhat baffled by the campaign's 'handling' of her thus far. If one watches or listens to interviews with the Governor over the last 2 years prior to her VP candidacy, she is confident, knowledgeable, charming, and intelligent. The apparent strategy to give her 'talking points' for media interviews at this time seems to do her a disservice and obscures her true depth. Governor Palin is better than that - I say let Sarah be Sarah!

Thanks for letting me vent...I didn't know where else to turn...

McCain/Palin 08!

Ted said...


Sen McCain -- send Sarah to debate Obama! (why not?) See this --

ajv007 said...

This is a fascinating idea.

I would like to offer a variation of this very same idea:

Send Sarah Palin but don't announce it beforehand. In other words, the McCain camp could say that McCain is not going to debate, period (without mentioning the possibility of sending Sarah).

Sarah could be secretly sent to Mississippi without telling the media. Obama could begin the solo debate performance thinking that he's gonna have the night to himself. Ten minutes or so into the debate, Sarah walks in and takes him by surprise.

AND BINGO. It would be the most talked about debate event ever.

I know this sounds crazy, but there is a historical precedent for this in the U.S. Territory of Puerto Rico (which is where I'm from). Back in the 1988 gubernatorial election, the incumbent governor was facing an uphill re-election bid. There was some kind of crisis going on so he said that he was going to skip the debate in order to work on the crisis for the good of the people of PR. The debate went on though. His opponent was the only one on the stage while the other podium was empty. He began his solo performance thinking that he would have the night to himself. About 15 minutes into the debate, a guy in a suit walked past behind him towards the empty podium. It was the Governor of PR! The Governor won the debate and ended up winning the election. This political stunt was regarded as highly ingenious and effective. It essentially turned the race around, as the Governor looked poised and extremely confident thanks to the element of surprise involved.

This election season has been full of surprises. Sarah Palin could potentially pull off a similar stunt.
I know it sounds crazy, but I don't see any circumstance in which the CPD would not let Sarah Palin into the premises. That would be a suicidal move for the commission.

What does everyone think? Could Sarah "surprise" the world once again?

Palintologist said...

Brilliant idea, Adam. And all I've heard tonight from Letterman, Fergeson and the like is "You don't suspend democracy!" I agree. Send Sarah!

Mongo Mere Pawn said...


I'm afraid I must concur with Friend08 that Governor Palin does not appear to be prepared to debate at this time, based upon the Gibson and Couric interviews. When talking with Larry Kudlow on oil and gas exploration and ANWR, she was confident and knowledgable ... because she knew the topic area better than pretty much any politician in the country. Similarly, if allowed to address culteral issues important to the conservative base of the party, and quite a few independents and conservative Democrats, she would do well in advocating her positions. Again, because she knows what she is talking about.

Unfortunately, the MSM will steadfastly avoid asking energy policy questions and the McCain campaign will not allow her to address abortion or gay marriage in any manner other than to do so quickly, quietly and with great humility, bordering on the embarassed (in effect, leaving Senator Obama's vulnerabilities -- can you say Born Alive Infant Protection Act and Defense of Marriage Act -- to be revealed by proxies unaffiliated with the campaign).

So, you can guess what the strategy of the MSM is and will continue to be: ask no questions concerning energy policy (or any other policy important to an Alaskan governor), ask leading questions on abortion and gay rights that the McCain campaign will not allow her to address headon, and repeatedly ask complex, open-ended questions about every other possible topic to give the impression that she lacks depth when she doesn't give a treatise-like answer.

That's what happened with Couric tonight. She asked an open-ended question about Senator McCain's record that assumed the irrelevance of the best answer. It was like asking the scientist who cured polio what he had done to irradicate the disease other than cure it. Other than specifically call for increased regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago to avoid just this type of meltdown, what did Senator McCain do the remainder of his 26 years in office to stave off this disaster?

The bias in that question was unbelievable. First, it acknowledged as its basic premise that Senator McCain actually foresaw this crisis and tried to do something about it. Second, it treated such foresight and effort as totally immaterial to either the very crisis thereby foreseen or Senator McCain's qualifications for president. Finally, when Governor Palin pretty much told her that his foresight was the most relevant thing people needed to know about Senator McCain on this issue, Couric reprimanded her like a wayward student by telling her she had not answered the question. I almost choked on the condescension.

And where was the same question to Senator Biden about his running mate's record on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Or about his own record concerning this crisis? In the same dustbin as the question about Senator Obama's continuing ties to Jim Johnson and Harold Raines, and Fannie and Freddie's contributions to his campaign.

So, what to expect during the debate from Gwen Ifill? More of the same. I will be suprised if there is a single question about our energy policy, and if Governor Palin tries to address energy as part of a national security or foreign affairs or general economy answer, Ifill will probably call her down on it. There won't be any questions about abortion because Senator Biden is currently in the doghouse with his bishops and it wouldn't do to jeopardize his Cathoic bonafides just now. If there is a question about gay marriage it will be leading to the point of assuming its sanctity.

And that leaves foreign policy and the economy. Again, any answer about energy will be tut-tutted as incomplete and not getting to the heart of the issue. And there won't be any question about Iraq because that's just going too well right now. So there will be open-ended, complex questions about Iran, Russia, China, the EU and, of course, the Palestinian question, all designed to let Senator Biden bloviate and to reveal Governor Palin as uninformed.

Unfortunately, Governor Palin's knowledge of foreign affairs and economic policy appears sufficiently limited that she is in danger of confirming that image.

In retrospect this is not surprising. As governor of Alaska, her foreign policy experience, and her knowledge of financial markets, IS limited, just as was Governor Clinton's when he first ran for president. Where Governor Clinton had literally years to polish up on these topic areas in preparation for his run for president, however, Governor Palin had only a couple of weeks. I doubt you could select any other similarly situated governor, who had not already been running for president, and give them two to four weeks to cram, while campaigning full time, and be in much better shape. Under similar circumstances, Senator Obama would be at a loss. Heck, even after campaigning for two years he still referred to Iran as a "little" country of no military consequence.

The public will not make such distinctions, however. Governor Palin will simply need to be much better during the debate on quite a range of topics.

Finally, my Richards-Gore caveat. When George W. debated Governor Richards way back when, to any trained debator, she mopped the floor with him. But the voters of Texas didn't see it that way. Arguably, Vice President Gore was substantively better than Governor Bush in the presidential debates. Again, the public didn't see it that way.

The reason is that the public looks for instincts and principles, not treatises on war and peace. They know that any president will have access to the very best minds on any subject, so the character and decision-making process of the candidates is much more important to them. It's akin to Buckley's desire to be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phonebook, rather than the faculty at Harvard.

If Governor Palin quits trying to spout the talking points and just answers based upon her instincts and principles, she will come accross much better.

And the very best principle for her to articulate is that this is a country of the people, by the people and for the people, and with every answer, she should emphasize that the people should be free to make their own decisions.

Drilling in ANWR? What's wrong with energy freedom with appropriate environmental safeguards? Tax policy? How can you go wrong letting the people keep more of their own money? Use of military force? We have an absolute right to defend ourselves, even when the UN doesn't think so. Again, the people of this country make that decision, not some beaurocrats in New York or Brussels.

If she sticks to her instincts and principles, she will do well. I recommend that the McCain campaign let Palin be Palin.

Flavius Aetius said...

Great idea. I'm on-board. Go for another "Hail Sarah Pass," I say. Don't leave the podium empty. She's been prepping for the gaffe-ridden Biden. Put her up against Obama. She either proves or disproves critics and supporters. If she holds her own, it discredits Obama and demonstrates she's able to take over the role of President if necessary.

Scott Dawson, M.S. said...

This is an excellent idea. Based on Sen. Obama's comments and actions as of late, we can pretty much gather that he no likey chiquitas too much anyway. Might just throw him for a loop. Sarah can go pragmatic in her approach, keeping things simple, clear and concise against his long-winded nuanced non-answers. Kind of reminds me a spousal argument. And, as usual, SHE wins.

Palinesque }*~*{ said...

Definitely send Sarah, it would settle the issue of whether she is up to the challenge of acting in the absence of the President and though she would not have to be the "world's leading authority on the world" --that is the media's claim-- she could just be herself and not put on faux political stature, a refreshing thought during this season, and admit that there are teams that work with the office of the president and that the goal should be to hire the best team of collective world experts, etc. so that both presidential candidates, get over the bootstrap=posturing to shine bit. Palin could pull it off and the media would finally have something real to talk about. (we get the point of being a maverick -- it worked within the party, perhaps now it is time to show the tag team approach and Send In Sarah (SIS)!

Mountain Mama said...

WOW, Mongo Pawn! I've missed reading your brilliant insights----and (thankfully for moi!) I agree that there IS a risk with having Sarah Palin debate in McCain's place on Friday, because she isn't as experienced in foreign policy (which is COMMON in her circumstances, as it was for Bill Clinton).

But again, neither is Obama all that experienced: Palin and Obama are virtually on a par.

I agree that, if Gov. Palin sticks to articulating general principles, she could very well WIN the debate vs. Obama. He always takes forever to articulate his ideas!

Then again, what about Richard's idea: that Obama would just send BIDEN to debate in his stead? Yes, Biden is loquacious and gaffe-prone-to-the-max, but he's also extremely experienced in foreign policy (often taking unwise positions, however)----and will be a formidable opponent for Sarah.

Gwen Ifill seems liberal and not all that bright. Never mind: they'll hand her many of the questions, which absolutely will be designed to trip up Sarah Palin. (I could still slap that Charles Gibson for his smug attitude!)

But it's time to unleash Sarah Palin, and let her ENERGY return to the campaign. She seems too programmed and robotic of late, and under the McCain campaign's thumb. Let the joyful, enthusiastic, positive Sarah of three weeks ago RETURN!

S.K. said...

It is completely appropriate to send the VP candidae if the Presidential candidate can not make the debate. Absolutely Sarah should be sent to debate Obama.

If Obama wants tv air time and rhetoric while Rome burns let Sarah take him down a peg.

Better yet let McCain and the congress pass the bill Friday night while the debate is going on. Now that's politics!

Laura Lee - Grace Explosion said...

This is not a "gimmick" by John McCain. This is AS SERIOUS as a threat of invasion. We are IN DANGER of a GREAT DEPRESSION!!!

That is as serious as being invaded or struck by a terrorist attack on our own shores. Our entire system of government is AT RISK... if we plunge into a Great Depression at a time when our enemies want to launch terrorist attacks and destroy America, etc.

This is no "campaign gimmick". This is literally John McCain putting America first.

If we do not get this matter addressed, we will not have taken whatever action is necessary, and appropriate, to avert an economic disaster greater than the Great Depression potentially.

Let's get this clearly understood in our minds. This isn't a movie. This is the greatest economic crisis in a century or perhaps the history of the United States of America.

As far as the debate - whatever. I am concerned that America, as we know it, may collapse.

I am a financial advisor...and I see the potential of a Great Depression of a greater severity than 1929. What will happen - I don't know.

But if there is a run on the banks, and the FDIC must "cover" insured accounts... after or even without a $700 billion bailout... we risk both shutdown of business, more mortgages, and HYPERINFLATION because of government money flooding the system... at the same time jobs and income are lost...and retirement savings have been wiped out.

The cataclysmic potential of the destruction of our entire nation's economy... the government continuing to feed a spiral of hyperinflation by government aid... creating money with no tax base left to get money from... government default on loans... GROUND ZERO ECONOMICALLY FOR OUR ENTIRE NATION!!

ETC> ETC... is beyond the ability of me to wrap my macroeconomic lil brain around!!


Forget the debates!!!

GEt this taken care of!!

Thank God for John McCain!!

Tinkerbellee said...

A President often has to deal with many different, urgent demands on his attention at the same time. If you get to be President you're NOT going to be able to phone Putin and say, "Hey, dude, can you stop invading Georgia for a minute, we're having an economic crisis over here." More than ever, these debates need to be held so that the American people know what both candidates think about this issue (and others), and what they think the best solution would be.

Mountain Mama said...

You should SEE Obambi, speaking to this Global Initiative conference, having FOUR TIMES to stop, repeat a few words, and then haltingly start speaking again, because the teleprompter wasn't running correctly. One time, he entirely stopped speaking for about 8 long seconds!!!!!!!!

WOW! He isn't capable of covering this mishap!

Remember how Sarah was PERFECT when she spoke without showing distress, in a flowing way, though the teleprompter was dysfunctional?

Remember how Bill Clinton delivered a State of the Union address FROM MEMORY for a few minutes when his teleprompter showed an entirely wrong speech!

Oh, Lord, please help McCain-Palin win. I just can't take this guy for four to eight years!!!!!!!!!

techno said...

As John McCain would say this is time for straight talk. Here are 10 thoughts on recent developments: 1)the jaded, political cynic will always find a reason to impugn a noble action while the partisan will always side with his candidate's version of cause and effect; regarding McCain's decision to directly participate and intervene in the negotiations to bring about a 'rescue package' to 'save' the American economy and people from financial ruin I believe this is where reason and politics are perfectly aligned--if a package is not passed (the Republican conservatives are balking at passing bailout legislation) soon the American economy will falter ruining the lifestyle of millions of Americans (Warren Buffett) and the Republicans will get the blame for this, meaning that McCain will lose the election; for Obama it is a question of expediency-if the package fails he will blame the Republicans which will give him more ammunition to implement his socialist agenda after he is elected; if it passes he will call McCain a 'drama queen' or 'showboater' whose input was just a political stunt that was a calculating, diabolical ploy to improve his economic credentials and his standing in the polls. In addition if McCain passes on the Friday debate Obama will accuse McCain of being irresponsible and disrespectful to the American people and cite polls that the majority of Americans wanted the debate to take place, regardless of circumstances. Of course, Obama will ignore the fact that he is not President yet and that as a Senator still has an obligation to the people of Illinois and the American people to do his job that he was sent to Washington to do and still collects a salary for. 2) Regarding the polls, again as of this morning, despite polls appearing to favor Obama, according to REAL CLEAR POLITICS AVERAGES McCain still claims a potential of 265 EV and with NH (4EV) trending his way that would give him 269 EV into a tie with Obama; the MSM is not reporting this; instead they are empahasizing certain national polls that give Obama more than a 5 point lead that reinforces their argument that McCain's campaign is floundering and his policies are being rejected by the American people. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. In addition there are national polls on RCP that show that McCain is leading. 3) This has not been Sarah's best week, but if this is the worst week she ever has in her political career, I would take it anytime over the goofy Joe Biden who is a perpetual gaffe machine. 'Do no harm' does not apply to Joe Biden. To be fair to Sarah half of it is not of her making but due to the machinations of the McCain campaign to keep her in a bubble; 4) I believe that the McCain campaign, despite my reference to the current polling data, got derailed from the bad economic news and like a ship in a storm was buffeted and blown off course for a while before they could trim their sails and stabilize their rudder. That the McCain campaign is still standing is a tribute to the charisma and political presence and vote-getting prowess of Sarah but also to the inability of Obama 'to close the deal' and not been able to convince more disaffected Hillary voters to jump on his bandwagon (Yahoo reports that in June 58% of Hillary voters would support Obama, In late September it is still 58%--that means that 42% of Hillary supporters are NOT going to vote for Obama: this ia a huge problem for Obama) 5)95% who view Obama with contempt do so not out of racial prejudice but from the terror that he would impose a socialist agenda on the USA, that he is weak on defending the American Constitution, that he would not vigorously defend America if threatened or attacked, that he is not a leader, and that he doesn't respect strong women. These 5 points have nothing to do with his ethnic heritage or race but more his personality, with how he views the world and the credibility that he brings to the Presidential table. 6) Day by day Sarah is getting better and more conversant with the issues;if she was a bimbo and insignificant why have Obama, the Democrats, and the loony left resorted to such despicable and sleazy tactics in an attempt to destroy her. 7) The Democrats are literally terrified that if McCain wins the Republicans may keep the White House for the next generation; along with that their interest groups (radical pro-abortion feminists, African-American groups, and envirnomental wackos)fear that their grip on the daily agenda of America will be greatly diminished; 8) Obama will win the election if he takes Florida or Ohio; McCain will win if he takes Pennsylvania or Michigan; 9)Voters over 60 are more likely to vote than voters under 25; it is a political fact; currently McCain has a substantial lead in the over 60 age group; 10) McCain can still win despite the MSM, political pundits and commentators, and the majority of celebrities being in the tank for Obama but I don't think he will win if critics, dissidents or backstabbers in the Republican party continue to undermine McCain's candidacy. Republicans, of every stripe, I implore you--please keep your mouth shut unless you have something good to say about John or Sarah or their campaign.

Unknown said...

This is absolutely a very scary time economically, and it has to be taken care of. This is serious, and every senator should be required to vote. That's what they were elected to do.

I think Sarah can handle the debate, especially if she's allowed to be herself. That's what has gotten her elected in the past. She has the instincts.

Laura Lee - Grace Explosion said...

I, personally, take this economic very seriously. I'm watching to see what's progressing... just like everyone else. Bill Clinton states that he believes John McCain is acting in good faith - this is not a gimmick. John McCain really is a Maverick. He will function by his conscience, his ethics. When he says this is him setting the campaign to the side - that's what he means. It's straight talk. This is not political maneuvering. This is not a gimmick. John McCain is saying what he really believes. Please see Bill Clinton. He agrees.

Please copy and past to view.

I am hoping this matter is resolved. News is that they are very close on an agreement.

McCain is a war hero who has proven his patriotism and his dedication to country first again and again and again.

This is no political gimmick.

McCain is seriously concerned for the welfare of America and us as Americans. That's my opinion.

If the Lord does not build the house, they labor in vain that build it.

The Declaration of Independence was not a secular humanist manifesto declaring independence from God. Rather it stated dependence on God by whom we, as a new nation, declared independence from the oppressive rule of tyranny by man.

May we confess our dependence on His Providence and Sovereign Lordship. May we not place our faith or dependence upon a secular humanist government of man.

May God forgive the national sin of secular humanism, and may God bless us once again.

God bless America.

techno said...

To the question about Rick Davis this should have been Sarah's answer: "Katie, I agree with the statement that was put out by our campaign earlier today regarding Rick Davis that asserts what you say is not accurate." (This is an inside baseball question that Sarah should not involve herself with.This was not the time to rise to populism.) Great sincere answer to the bailout; 'inaction is not an option'; 'unless there are amendments to Paulson's proposals Americans will not support this...Americans are waiting to see what John McCain is going to do on this proposal and not waiting for Barack Obama to see which way the wind is blowing' (this ia an awesome, wow answer and previews the actions that McCain took)...not looking at poll numbers...Americans will look at track records... (this answer has gone virtually unreported). To the answer regarding the Great Depression she should have said: "Katie, the extent of the fallout from not dealing with this crisis will be severe--how severe is yet to be determined." Regarding the question of foreclosures she should have said that our approach to this issue is fluid and based on the what type of 'rescue package' is agreed to by Congress(avoid saying John and I have had discussions and no agreement has yet been set')--the latter part of her answer is pretty good regarding parameters; to the question re: specific examples of John' 'leading the charge to more oversight she should have said: "Katie, let me say that John McCain is not totally familiar with every issue that I took on as mayor Wasilla, a member of the Oil and Gas Commission and Governor of Alaska, as I am not totally versed with every approach, policy and decision that he has supported in his 26 years in Congress; but what is of paramount importance to me Katie is what my running mate is proposing to do now and in the future; if you want specific, historical examples feel free to contact our campaign for that info or send one of your interns out to scour the Senate archives of Washington. (Katie was baiting her and when she said that she did not want to belittle the point in actual fact that is what she was doing--never treated Biden this way); regarding the question if the bailout fails: good answer again as a cheerleader of John McCain 'protecting taxpayers; "I love John McCain's idea on the bipartisan oversight board." (I don't think Cindy could ever be this gushing over John). She shows great certitude in dismissing 'politics as usual' as a flawed outlook in a crisis situation; good answer linking the bailout to the Republican agenda-playing to the base trying to allay their fears-her credibility is outstanding for the base, for liberals she is right-wing nut job; 'predator lenders'-great phrase

Unknown said...

I bet Ole Miss and the debate audience would go wild if Sarah showed up unannounced!!

This would be the perfect opportunity to prove she's absolutely qualified to be "a heartbeat away" (Geez. I am SICK of that phrase)

By this time, she surely knows where McCain stands on all the foreign policy issues and I don't think it would even matter if she wasn't able to state all the answers perfectly, just the fact that she show herself willing to be there would tell the "undecideds" everything they need to know about her.

Such a move would surely put to rest all the snarky "questions" about whether the McCain campaign trusts her, whether she's being "shielded from the media." etc. etc.

Risky? Maybe - but as Sarah herself said in her introductory speech on August 29. "A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not why the ship is built."

(Hope someone from the campaign is still lurking)

manajordan said...

Did anyone catch the CNBC special "the Hunt for Black Gold"?
The Governor was awesome on that. I agree the McCain campaign needs to set her loose.

Health And Fitness Geek said...


Democratic Congressman Warns Jews, Blacks to Beware of Palin

Contact this moron:

Trent Williams said...

I know everyone is saying that they thought of this too, but I (and I am sure many other people) actually thought Sarah should debate Barack before the presidential debates.

I hadn't thought of it as a response for this economic crisis meeting.

Is their some way we can make this happen (sign a petition, wear sandwich board signs, call up the Commission on Presidential Debates etc.)?


Sarah Palin would eat his lunch. His problem would be he underestimated how great of a speaker she really can be in a debate. She does not back down. He would be expecting to debate a novice and when the debate is over, he will find out she was a great adversary.

Do you remember in the movie Back to the Future where they kept asking Marty if he was chicken.

So lets ask Obama,

"Are you chicken?"

Zack said...

Thanks for posting this idea. That was my first reaction as well. I don't know if Sarah is up to this, but I am sure McCain does know. McCain seems quite capable of sending Sarah in his place, and if that is his intention, he will likely make the offer late enough that the Democrats have little time to react.

The network would love this as Palin would likely get them much higher ratings than McCain would.

I seriously doubt Obama would debate her, though. I would be very high risk with little political upside for him. Likely Biden would show up instead. However this all plays well for McCain.

Reality is that McCain is on track to lose this election unless something dramatic happens, or unless the polls are a lot less accurate than they have been the last couple elections (which is quite possible). If McCain can go to Washington and actually accomplish something of substance, it could turn things around. It's worth a shot.

McCain is currently ahead on foreign policy and has little to gain (and much to lose) by debating Obama of foreign policy. McCain is getting killed on the economy, and needs something dramatic to turn it around.

Erin said...

I'm starting to become highly concerned about this deadlock on the bailout plan. I agree with everything that conservatives want to see changed in this bill. However, if they continue to hold out to win this battle, it WILL cost them the White House as well and possibly the Senate seats the Dems need to override future philibusters. If they hold out for this battle, they WILL lose the war. Predictions are that if this deal isn't done by Sunday night, the world markets will shred, and we'll get to watch our own do so when the market opens again.

So the Republicans win the battle by holding out, and McCain gets all the flack the Dems are somewhat successfully trying to pin on him as it is.

Obama came out and had his little comments about injecting presidential politics into this and how it wasn't a good idea as he predicted. They're throwing McCain under the bus, and the Republicans are driving it.

The best thing House Republicans can do is agree to the bill and say that McCain talked them into it for the good of the people more than the good of the party. Of course it's not a perfect plan. Macroeconomics are not meant to be done on the fly. But if this blows up, our party is going to wish that the amount they watch fly by at President Obama's hands was as paltry as 700bil.

tom paine said...

Wow, with all the "preaching to the choir" going on this may take a while!

First, it's absurd to think that Gov. Palin could debate Obama. I have no idea what you folks see when you watch even the softball interviews she has done so far.

Couric is about the worst news person I have even seen. Consider what Couric could have done:

1. When Gov. Palin made her inane comment that living close to Cananda and Russia did give her foreign policy experise, Couric should have asked Gov. Palin exactly how many times she had ever spoken to leaders of either country about governmental issues?

2. When Palin said that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were necessary because we had to "win" Couric should have asked Palin to describe what "winning" in Iraq would require?

3. When Gov. Palin said that the war in Iraq was also necessary so that the Iraqi people could get freedom and democracy Couric should have asked Palin how that jives with the fact that a huge majority of the Iraqi people want us OUT of their nation? How can we pretend we are there for "freedom and democracy" but we refuse to grant it to the citizens of Iraq!

3. When Gov. Palin mentioned the economy Couric should have asked Palin what percentage of sub-prime loans did Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae hold? Couric also should have asked Palin if she knew how many government regulation bills McCain had voted against or opposed during his 26 years as a US Senator?

After stuttering like she did per the Rick Davis question, if Gov. Palin was asked the above rather simple questions she would most likely said "Uh, I'll have to get back to you on that Katie."

Next, pretending it's important that McCain get back to Washington is ludicrous. What is he going to do...maybe suggest some of those evil "regulations" that he was totally against for the paast 26 years? Or tell Congress and Paulson and the financial guys that "Since I was a charter member of the infamous "Keating Five" during the 1980'S Savings & Loan scandal, I am the now going to be your savior." Get real!

I cannot think of ANY member of Congress who has less credibility per a financial crisis than Sen. John McCain. Except maybe that Dem crook who was hiding money in his freeezer! McCain doesn't know exactly how many homes he and Cindy own and he is going to make wise suggestions on a $750,000,000,000.00 bailout? This is the kind of material that comedians dream about.

If McCain had an ounce of sense he would say that he is going to wait and see the proposals and then make his decision on how to vote. Cancelling his campaign (which he really didn't do) or ducking the debate or running back to Washington in the hope that he will appear "presidential" will most likely be judged by historians as among the most phony and totally polical move of all time. (but it would be difficult to displace Team Reagan paying off the Iranians so that they would not release the hostages until after the election. Actually the announcement was made on Jan. 20, 1981, the day Reagan was sworn in. Probably just a huge coincidence huh? :)

This is getting too long. I'll address the other...questionable...posts forthwith.

tom paine said...

grace explosion said..."This is AS SERIOUS as a threat of invasion. We are IN DANGER of a GREAT DEPRESSION!!!"

Um...and who exactly was asleep per our nation's economy while repeatedly blurting over and over "the transcendent threat to our nation is radical Islamic extremism" instead of even having a clue that an economic collapse could bring down our nation without a shot being fired???

I must have heard McCain make that statement at least a dozen times in the past 6 months.

You say that you are a "financial advisor" and I have no reason to doubt your claim. But there is one other event that (on top of the non-regulated mess we already have)could almost certainly drastically lower our standard of living...if not cause an outright depression. Do you know what that might be?
And it is not a run on the banks or more US companies going belly up or anything that we have any control over.

If you reply to this...we can share notes on the correct answer.

And just for kicks, give us one example of anything that John McCain could do or bring to the table per an economic issue, much less a crisis? Keep, in mind that this IS the man who just a few short months ago admitted that he really didn't know very much about economics.

Or did McCain take a crash course in Economics 101 during breaks in his campaigning?

Palinesque }*~*{ said...

The reality Erin is not as fatalistic as you present, specifically, the dems and reps for the past few decades have been different pockets on the same pair of pants, it is typically the dems who wax dramatically about how "we" hurt each other at the expense of the party, but the ups and downs of an economy are never resolved by a presidential election, rather by the bipartisan efforts of the house and senate, and of course their ability to represent the interest of their backers (rarely the little guys) sufficiently enough to get re-elected. We generally debate over where to spend the products of the worker bees' efforts while the investments and offshore accounts of the top ruling class (bi-partisan) roast chestnuts and exchange gifts/currency miles away from the day to day effects of the national rhetorical blogs/debates. National elections, as we know, are not that dependent upon public opinion polls, so why not separate out these issues: the economy and the electoral college's interests reflected in each party's platform? how can we as supporters of McCain/Palin, catalyze efforts to give them the edge on election day? I believe that our elected officials on both sides of the isle, understand the interconnectedness of their accountability and would not sacrifice pant leg to make a point to the world, it is not helpful to to lose faith in the only system we have entrusted to protect the country first!

Unknown said...

I have to disagree, Erin. Of course the Dems are blaming him and the media is helping them point fingers. But think about it this way. This is a HORRIBLE burden for taxpayers and public opinion is against it.

Remember, Harry Reid (despite his subsequent denial) said on Tuesday that if McCain didn't buy into it, it wasn't going to fly because the Democrats didn't want to be left holding the bag.

In other words, even though the Democrats have the majority and can pass the thing virtually without Republican support, they know it will be political suicide to ram it down the throats of their constituents.

If that happens, many of them who are up for re-election stand to lose in a big way. They HAVE to work with their enemies and it makes them furious.

So, while they're trying to say they already had a deal, they really didn't. What they had was something they CLAIMED was acceptable to both sides, but which was actually only marginally acceptable to SOME Republicans.

They'd like the public to believe that everything was peachy until John McCain showed up and ruined it, but that isn't true.

Don't listen to the spin. McCain and the Republicans have the upper hand here - the Democrats are going to have to make them happy enough to sign on so both parties share the blame when the chickens come home to roost. They don't have a choice.

DaveF said...

Letter I sent to

To whom it may concern,
Send Sarah as John's alternate for the debate. It will
give her experience, and allow her to face her chief acuser. It shows
we are not afraid of Obama. Put the Dems on the defense. Here's how I
would work the open ended questions. "Let me make sure I understand
you." Not the question, the questioner. I would then repeat the
question back, asking, Is that correct? Then answer the question.
Also, I would ask whether they want my opinion or what I would do. If a
question poses a response to a crisis type situation, then I would
explain the process needed to make a sound decision.
I would convene the appropriate cabinet members and advisors. Get an
intelligence estimate. Talk to my people, if available, on site,
ie...ambassadors, bureau chiefs, and
expert on the region in question. I would not make a critical decision
before I have a clear picture of the situation. Even if they aren't
satisfied with the answer, it shows
common sense and intelligence in the process. I see it as a level
headed response to a problem with several ends. No one, even experts on
a particular region, ethnic group, etc. can know how a leader or group
is going to think or do. People change, and so does their motivation.
In regards to the topics of abortion, gay rights, religion and
education. Let Sarah be Sarah. Do you want my opinion or how I would
govern? Yes my opinion is....but I "Do Not Govern according to my
views, but the Letter of the Constitution!"

I say again..."Unleash the Barracuda!" People want to
see her in action. I trust her and believe she can do it. So let her.


" Non Sibi Sed Patriae "

Erin said...

trueredhead said: "Don't listen to the spin. McCain and the Republicans have the upper hand here - the Democrats are going to have to make them happy enough to sign on so both parties share the blame when the chickens come home to roost. They don't have a choice.

I've been in GM country through too many devastating bouts of chicken to have much optimism. Upper hand or no, if on Monday the market tumbles more than it has at any point in this mess so far, Obama stands to gain the most--substantially. It's the nature of Republicans holding the presidency for the past eight years, even if this started under Clinton's watch. The American people blame the GOP for this mess.

I hope you all are right, but I stand by my belief that we could lose this election if Monday melts down.

techno said...

CNN in dissecting Sarah's interview (part II) with Katie Couric seek again to prove she is unqualified to be VP implying that her answer regarding Alaska's relationship to Russia is stupid and that her 'good guys' comment in reference to Iran is irrational and undiplomatic. They want to portray her as a country bumpkin, a rube, a unsophisticate, a simpleton, an idiot. But what CNN and the elites fail to realize that Sarah is middle America, the way they think, talk, feel, and live. Middle America also thinks Iran is the bad guy. Middle America is not stupid: they know Sarah is no Henry Kissinger. But the elites of America will never understand their passionate love for Sarah: she is one of them; she is not pretentious, deceitful, or smarmy. Not since Reagan has a Republican been more cherished by the base of the Republican Party. The more the elites seek to diminish and marginalize her, the more the good folks will embrace her and circle the wagons around her. Elites, you just don't get it: she is family-you screw with her, there are countless millions who will rise up to defend her to the death and the more determined the base becomes to see her elected. You see CNN and your liberal cohorts, the Republican base fully understands life as they know it in America is at stake if Obama gets elected. Before Sarah there was little hope to beat back the socialist hordes of Obama; now the base will not rest until Obama is sent packing.

tom paine said...


When you ask "Send Sarah?" you may be asking the wrong question. A more pertinent question might be "Why does McCain need to send anyone?"

If you think back a few weeks, Sen. McCain did basically the same thing at the start of the GOP convention. He "suspended" the opening of the convention so that he could "help" with Hurricane Gustav.

Now, skeptics might say that Team McCain used Gustav to make sure that President Bush and Cheney did not actaully attend the convention. And considering the political liability that GOP Bush and Cheney inflict upon GOP McCain that is not an unreasonable suggestion.

But my question is what exactly did Sen. McCain do or accomplish with his grandstand play of suspending the start of the convention? Name one single, solid thing that McCain actually accomplished "for the American people" (as he said) by delaying the start of the GOP convention?

After groping for an answer, the only conclusion for reasonable people is that McCain indeed did pull a grandstand play and he used the people affected by Gustav.

Better yet, ask the people who were affected by Gustav if they know of any person, anywhere who was helped by McCain after he suspended the GOP convention?

Kasey said...

I believe that it was, at least, in part a sincere move on the side of McCain to choose to fulfill his role as senator and participate in the discussions for bailout. I do however agree with Obama that presidential politics will almost assuredly inflict the debate with a sided outcome. I say Bring on Palin. Adam, please, "if Obama wants a circus" where does this come from? He certainly did not cry over McCain's decision to stay in Washington. He gave his opinion that the debates should still go on and that the two of them would be of little help...and might cause more problems, nonetheless Obama is working in Washington. If McCain can't be there, I will miss him, but I would welcome Palin as an alternative though I don't think it will be very positive for the grand old party.

The Law said...

First off, good job on the Colbert Report!

In any argument, there will be two opposing sides. Allow me to offer the other one. Sarah Palin fails every single time she is interviewed (without her script). Her lack of substantial experience on any issue has all but destoryed her credibility. What Obama lacks in years in Washington, is more than made up for by his sheer intelligence, and true understaning of the middle class, the people for whom he has advocated for his entire academic and political career. The change Obama offers is more dynamic than government reform, it's cultural interdependence. By working together and raising the standard of all Americans so we all have a shot at achieving the American dream.

My undergraduate school was at a town a lot like Wasila, so i have observed "small town" culture. I have no doubt that Palin excelled as a mayor, and later governor. But her reach only extends to the homogenous communities of the "small town" nature. Her message is ineffective past that. Please continue to cheer for her, because she is not a bad person by any means, just bad for this job. Thanks in advance for allowing me to offer a differing view.

Oppie Stop said...

If she is as coherent as here, BO doesn't stand a chance :-)

"COURIC: Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? Allow them to spend more, and put more money into the economy, instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?
PALIN: That’s why I say I, like every American I’m speaking with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it’s got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade — we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation."

mars2boys said...

That would indeed be an interesting situation. I do agree that Biden would instead step in.

Unknown said...

This is a video you should see if you want to understand what caused this crisis...

Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis?

Joe said...

All right, folks. As an original supporter of Sarah, long before she was picked, and one who watched with fascination the night before her announcement, I believe we need to step up and start screaming at her handlers.

The Sarah Palin who has been on the interviews is not the Sarah Palin who we watched rise to incredible popularity in Alaska these last several years.

The Palin on the interview programs is playing into everything that her detractors had hoped for. She lacks confidence, she lacks depth, and she lacks the ability to think on her feet.

This is NOT the Palin that has been the Governor of Alaska and the mother of 5 children. Either she is not as good as we have somehow hoped she was, or her handlers have somehow completely taken the teeth away from her.

Sarah needs to be let loose. I understand the need to control her, but clearly this is NOT WORKING for this particular individual person.

I don't think it is too late, but it is getting pretty darn close. I'm worried that not only will her vice presidential candidacy be at risk (as McCain indeed has an incredibly uphill battle, we all know that), but she will be labeled from this time forward as a shallow, unthoughtful small town politician who was not able to stand up to the big boys.

I KNOW that Palin could crush these interviews. LET HER LOOSE. She should NEVER let anyone question her abilities because she didn't have a passport until just recently. This is an INSULT to most Americans, and the old Sarah would jump down the throat of anyone who raises such a ridiculous issue.

We have had a large role in the rise of her candidacy, but strangely this blog site has nearly flickered out. We need to get back in the game, and start screaming to the McCain handlers to let Sarah be Sarah, before it is too late.

Tinkerbellee said...

I really don't see why McCain can't take part in the debate. He might be a presidential candidate, but in his current senatorial position, his involvement is only necessary as far as any other random senator (i.e. to vote on the recovery program). It directly falls under Chris Dodd and Barney Frank in the senate and house respectively. Furthermore, the first republican in line would be Richard Shelby. McCain is nowhere near the top of this particular bill's food chain.

S.K. said...

Does anyone know if there is a provision clause in the debate agreements for a Vp candidate to stand in in case of iillness, death, or other emergency?

I assume there is such a clause in the agreements.

Mountain Mama said...

Dear Tinker:
Wrongo, reindeer! McCain has for decades been an extremely effective LEADER in the Senate. He knows how to push compromises (instead of stalemate always reigning) to get bills enacted, so his presence is necessary to prod his Republican colleagues to listen to other viewpoints and help move a bill forward about this economic crisis. (Otherwise, they instead try to help their careers short-term, to the detriment of our nation long-term.)
To that end, McCain worked the phones yesterday, pulling the members of his party together, to help Americans NOT get screwed by the first proposed bill.
Also, President Bush demanded that BOTH Obambi and McCain, as well as ALL the other legislators, haul their rears into D.C. and DO THEIR JOBS, so that they ALL are taking part in enacting this economic bill. That way, they will NOT later be able to say they took no part in it, and whatever happens isn't their fault.
(Naturally, Obambi is trying to stay away, so he can blame the Republicans for whatever bill passes.)

The TRUTH is that AMERICANS are to blame for this economic mess! WE elect politicians who give us what we want, which is: anything that will help us live beyond our means, where we can try to stick the bill with other people, so we don't have to pay for it ourselves.

It goes without saying, but I'll write it anyway: GOD cannot bless such lack of character and greed.

Anyway, if ANY government officials can help pull us all together, it's John McCain and Sarah Palin. They have the correct FACE REALITY attitude about life and politics.
However, pushing the McCain campaign to "let Sarah Palin loose" is only partially correct. Yes, her former nature isn't shining through----her energy and savvy----but that's because she's trying hard not to make gaffes, cum Biden.
Furthermore, Sarah Palin has ALWAYS tended (watch old videos of her to confirm this) to string together quickly a series of ideas that she's prepped herself to focus on, whether or not linking them makes sense at the moment, or answers a particular question; this IS her style.
So the McCain campaign is correct to measure out her important interviews, so they can review them with her, and help her SLOW DOWN and let her own POSITIVE ENERGY come through as she speaks in a focused way.
The bottom line is: McCain's staff can only prep her; she must succeed herself, which she will if she keeps calm, focused, and STUDIES----and eventually she'll learn to manage interviews more perfectly. Keep PRAYING for her to win the VP debate.
McCain has to win this election, and I think his staff is doing very well, considering that they are facing opposition not only to McCain specifically, but against a general anger against an extremely unpopular president and war, and concerns about this economy.

God is in control----but we are called to do our part. PRAY that our leaders will set aside their career goals and DO THEIR DUTY by America, calling us to do OUR duty as well and accept OUR OWN responsibility for however each of us have contributed to this mess.

Mountain Mama said...

Okay----Fox News is reporting that McCain has resumed his campaign and will attend tonight's debate----and that he HAS been instrumental in bringing his party members together to form a NEW bill, to save Americans from being ripped off in this process.

The McCain campaign needs to minimize Sarah Palin's campaign appearances (make them last ONLY an hour each),and help her be with her family and STUDY.

Gov. Palin can do this; she's very bright and savvy. We support you, Sarah, so focus and STUDY. You'll do great!

techno said...

Here are my current observations regarding Sarah's performance lately: 1) As I have mentioned I don't think Sarah had her best week but compared to Biden (no coal plants in America, FDR went on TV in 1929, his flip-flop on the McCain E-mail ad),Obama (call me and I'll come) and McCain (the fundmamentals of the economy are strong)Sarah's remarks on Alaska's proximity to Russia and Canada and the trasde missions between Alaska and Russia may have been weak but not as outrageous as the other 3; 2) we are so quick to criticize Sarah and treat her as a fallen idol (Laura Ingraham today)but wasn't it just a week ago she appeared with Sean Hannity (funny there wasn't more attention paid to that interview with the MSM)and was asked foreign and domestic affairs questions as well as questions regarding her record in Alaska and performed very well-did she suddenly become an idiot in 1 week-let's face it every candidate has an area where they wish reporters didn't go: Biden (he's an idiot everywhere; Obama (his past relationships with questionable characters and his lack of resume) McCain: (the economy and George Bush)-to just focus on Palin's performance in one isolated interview is not fair; what the aim of the liberal media is for the Republican base to cast doubts to Sarah's abilities, and then have it beocme self-destructive and eat their young; 3)McCain's handlers have been overcautious in protecting Sarah but a past Republican operative (I can't remember which one) suggested that the McCain would be performing political malpractice in exposing Sarah to constant biased and gotch-ya questions daily in this sleazy and tabloid atmosphere where the MSM is in the tank for Obama and Obama, the Democrats and MSM have as their only goal to destroy her. The McCain campaign has a strategy regarding Sarah-we aren't in a position to judge it in its totality until after Palin's debate with Biden. 4) With Biden being a daily gaffe machine, why should Palin speak--let the Democrats destroy their own credibility! 5)For those Republican dissidents who think that Romney, Pawlenty or somebody else would have been a better choice, can you honestly say that in the past 2 weeks of this terrible economic news that McCain would still be in the hunt with somebody else on the ticket and that he would be increasing his support among independents and women? If you do then you are an idiot! Ed Rollins referred to this on CNN the other night. 6) If anybody has detracted from the ticket in the past 2 weeks it has been McCain--his inability to communicate economic principles and policy and his suck-up to Andrew Cuomo and his musings on immigration reform-rather than Sarah's comment that Iran are the 'bad guys' or a failure to adopt some sort of 'bailout plan' could result in another 'Great Depression'. 7) Look, there are still 5 weeks to go before the election. We all know that Sarah has extraordinary communications skills. Unless she contracts laryngitis, she will be fine. There is no substitute for talent. 8)As I keep on repeating until this is no longer true McCain still can still lay claim to 265 EV (RCP avg) and with NH (4 EV) trending his way 269 EV-a tie with Obama. Even the right-wing pundits agree Obama should be way ahead right now in EV. 9) McCain has not yet unleashed his campaign among 'the coal regions' to take advantage of Biden's gaffe on coal development; 10) and accept what you can control which is your own vote and your ability to get others to vote for the McCain-Palin ticket and dismiss totally whatever Democratic propagandists, the MSM, and the left-wing pundits say about McCain or Sarah or what their interpretations are of events. Treat it in the same light as Hitler's claim at Munich that he would not invade another country after he took Czechoslovakia.

Unknown said...


You are quite right that Sarah Palin is a perfect representative of Middle America. But do you think what Middle America wants is average for President? If so, we might as well have a lottery to pick the President. Obama can be criticized as experienced, but Democrats were willing to choose his strength over those weaknesses after an intensive 18 months of scrutiny. John McCain took that choice away from us when he chose Palin.

Joe said...


We need to be very honest about Sarah's recent performances. Joe Biden has made dopey statements, but we already know that about him. Sarah Palin is an unknown for 99% of the population, and therefore her situation is very different. If she comes across as clueless, if she comes across as one who can't think on her feet, if she comes across as only superficially informed about the big issues, this will unfortunatly stick.

Therefore, she needs to correct the situation, and quickly. WE know that she is smart, WE know that she has strong convictions, ans WE know that she has very good communication skills, but the voting public needs to see this, and fast. She needs to go on the offense in these interviews, rather than timidly trying not to make a mistake.

On a separate note, I can't for the life of me see why she is not out on the campaign trail, on a daily basis, talking in depth about energy policies. She should be talking about drilling every day, in every state. She should be talking about clean coal in Pennsylvania. She should be talking about natural gas and the pipeline in the Midwest. And she should be talking about how this all ties in to our national security. No one can out debate her on these issues, which are at the center of ALL of our problems, and potential solutions to the problems, in the year 2008.

The McCain campaign seems to be wasting an enormous opportunity, but it is not too late. Let Palin be Palin. And drill, drill, drill.

Mountain Mama said...

No----you can't keep pushing Sarah One-Note re. energy resources and the impact on national security.

Sarah must STUDY and learn about foreign policy and other issues, too. I mean five hours/day, every day, until the debate. SERIOUSLY study. ALL the other presidents have had to study to learn what they aren't expert at, believe me.

manajordan said...

I absolutely agree with you techno. Sarah Palin needs to hold a press conference and lay out an energy plan. She needs to talk about how drilling now will set up the opportunity to then explore coal and otehr energy options. She needs to talk about how doing so will create more jobs. She needs to be more aggressive in her interviews and she needs to do more of them. Let her mistakes if need be, but also let her be herself.
I also think that every time she is attacked for lack of experience she needs to turn that right back around and be a mirror for who is at the top of the ticket for the democrats. If she is questioned about it, give an answer and then point out Sen. Obama. She needs to bring out the barracuda!!

Joe said...

I believe that simply studying is not the solution. Yes, it is important, but at the same time it is impossible to read up on every single national security and domestic issue, memorize, and then be ready for a debate with Biden.

Instead, when a person might not know details of a certain policy or fact, one has to step back to basic convictions and philosophies, and communicate this to the audience. I personally don't expect her to be an expert on Bosnia, or Georgia, or Saudi Arabia, but I expect her to be able to be thoughtful, and rely on good instincts, to be able to tackle questions on just about any issue, even if she has not studied the night before.

Mountain Mama said...

Oops, I need to specify what I mean by, "study." It's not merely learning facts by rote about nations or international matters. Instead, experts need to sit down with Palin EVEN MORE than they obviously are now, helping her learn better how to address those "Gotcha!" questions that ARE about facts.
For example, face it, Sarah didn't know even ONE of the four Bush Doctrines. SOME information she just must know; she can't always bring up energy issues, or duck answering!
We ALL tend to remember only what interests us, OR what impacts our jobs or families.
She can do this; they just need to minimize her time out on the stump and prep her better. She needs to listen WITHOUT furrowing her brow and tightening her mouth; she looks tense. She needs to relax, take deep breaths, learn to flow in an interview, and sometimes to crack terrific jokes. THOSE she must memorize now; they ALL must for debates.
I know much of this study/prep work is probably being done already, but just NOT ENOUGH to help her refine her personal style of relating for a national stage.

techno said...

The 10 most important and illuminating but underreported stories in the MSM since the Republican Convention: 1) that 42% of Hillary's voters during the primary as of today say they will not vote for Obama (Yahoo survey)together with not acknowledging many PUMA support for Sarah; 2) Bill Clinton's remarks that the Democrats in Congress are mainly at fault for the Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac mess and the ensuing financial crisis; 3) Sean Hannity's interview with Sarah Palin; 4) Sarah's speech that she would have given to the anti-Iran rally; 5) the whole story behind hacking Sarah's E-mail, including the aftermath of postings over the internet; 6)that the polls are over the place; 7)that Obama and Biden voted for the Bridge to Nowhere; 8)that Hollis French of Troopergate is an avid Obama supporter; 9) that the Iraq surge is working; 10)that there are still a high number of undecideds

Joe said...

I just watched the Bartoromo interview from CNBC from just before she was picked by McCain. Although obviously talking about her most comfortable issue, this still presents solid evidence of the Palin that should be vice president.

One does not have to be an expert on all the nuances of various foreign policy issues, nor on the nitty gritty details of the current financial crisis to still come off confident, with conviction, and with an ability to compare and contrast one's reformist conservative philosophy against the liberal, stale policies of Obama and Biden.

After reviewing this and other tapes of her previous interviews and debates, I again have confidence that Palin has what it takes. She has to relax, and McCain's handlers need to let her loose. SOON!

pHaT_aL said...

Still want to vote for Obama?

Here you go, guys:

Spread the news!

Mountain Mama said...

What is the TITLE of that video on YouTube? (The URL doesn't work somehow.)

techno said...

creative MSM definitions: 1) self-fulfilling prophecy: ballyhooing skewed favorable polls to increase actual support and depress the opposition; 2) Hail-Mary pass: being behind by a field goal at half time and panicking before you even step on to the field in the 2nd half; 3) unqualified: saying the USA and Israel are the good guys and the terrorists and Iran are the bad guys; 4)unbiased media coverage: ignoring Bill Clinton's remarks on the Democratic Congress being mainly responsibile for the Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae debacle; 5)disgraceful : temporarily suspending a self-serving political campaign to do the job you were hired to do and to participate and have impact on a critical issue that if left unattended has the potential to make millions of Americans penniless; 6) right wing extremist; any devout Christian who favors traditional marriage and traditional families; 7) tolerance: the absence of criticism levelled at liberal celebrities and leaders due to their perceived altruism; 8) terrorist: anybody who has been aggrieved and should not be faulted for seeking revenge or restitution; 9) obsession: Sarah Palin's lack of sophistication and religious and political nuance; 10) opposition research: the discovery that Sarah Palin fired a cabinet member for not doing his job and that she once met a Kenyan witch-doctor.

pHaT_aL said...

Burning down the House: What Caused our Economic Crisis (google YouTube):

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.

You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.

You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.

You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.

- Lincoln

Mountain Mama said...

WHAT AN AMAZING VIDEO! THANKS for posting its title!

I've sent it on to EVERYONE in my Address Book! Everyone: please do so as well!

Unknown said...

Sarah is the VP candidate and isn't Obama is running for President so I don't think they will let her do that but after hearing about the Couric interview I think that Sarah should be kept out of the interviews as much as possible until the election is over and then when she wins then she can do interviews and things like debates. When is the debate ?

Scott said...

george it was about 12 hours before you posted your comment... friday night at 9pm eastern

Babette's Blog said...

I think Sarah is all about energy. Why not have a "Repower america" theme- energy, buy american- cars ford, chrysler etc...Look at all the labels and buy American products.Bk in Bronxville NY