VP Debate

I'm at the office and can't watch. Any information about it would be appreciated...

Comments

says...

palin just lost the race for mccain. this is embarrassing. she keeps looking in the camera and smiles when talking about nukular iran threat.

[CBBB]

I had to stop watching - it's infuriating how Palin just lies and lies and says utter nonsense. Poor Biden has to keep setting things straight! This is exactly how I thought it would go. I think Palin is going to be seen as the winner due to the soft bigotry of low expectations - however for any thinking person (of which there aren't many) her performance was dreadful. At one point I believe she implied that if the US REPLACES imported oil with domestically produced oil this would help control greenhouse gases...somehow...

I'm from Canada, I had really hoped the US would change this time but I think a lot of Americans will be fooled. Well they get what they deserve I guess.

[DL]

Palin won, simply by not losing. "She held her own" is the only fair take on how she did, if you take politics out of it. Because the expectation was that she wouldn't hold her own, she won.

Everyone knows what they are getting with Biden. There was no upside possible for him, other than being a part Palin implosion, which did not happen.

You can stream it at cspan.org, by the way.

[mrrunangun]

I liked Biden more than I did before. Palin seems like a nice woman, but Veep? Don't think so. I just cannot see how Obama doesn't win the election. McCain is running a poor campaign and is making mistakes. Palin is one of them. Obama can just stay out of the way and let the McCain-Palin ticket keep beating itself. If McCain needs any help beating himself he has Bush, Paulson, and Bernanke who are already helping him do it.

[mikeh]

I thought that Biden won, but he should have due to his years of experience. Palin did not implode like she has on interviews in the past, but she didn't say anything specific. I watched CNN and they had the focus group rating each person as they spoke. It was interesting that when Palin talked "folksy" she was rated high, then when she repeated the "same old lines" the ratings were really low. I think this shows that people are tired of her not saying anything specific, she doesn't know what she's talking about. When Palin was asked about VP responsibilities she was way off and doesn't understand the constitution. This is where I think Biden really made points, showing people that he understands foreign policy and the workings of the senate and can get things done. McCain would throw her out the door the day he was elected and tell her to go play somewhere else. She is of absolutely no value as a VP.

[rufus]

I'd have to agree with analysts that effectively called the debate a 'push', not a game changer.

I think Governor Palin's use of colloquialisms, similar to those employed by George Bush, will likely play well with much of the audience. A couple points stood out for me.

Senator Biden stressed the connections/similarities with McCain/Palin and Bush/Cheney while Governor Palin shunned those efforts adequately.

When the question regarding powers of the VP office was raised (in regards to agreeing or disagreeing with Cheney's most recent interpretation), the Governor did not differentiate her position from his, while the Senator made clear his disagreement with Cheney's interpretation.

I also hope that it will be possible to read others take away and criticisms of the two candidates performances here, without engaging in personal attacks.

[First name in baby book]

Palin won by winning. McCain may not win but its not because he's not better.

[CBBB]

Palin "won" by not losing, and you know not tripping over a cable or whatever people were expecting. Most of what she said was vapid and nonsense while at the same time avoiding many of the questions.

[Asia]

My problem with the "team of Maverick" in the debate is: their answer to any questions in Economics is "Tax cut and spending cut". How maverick is this? Does interested audience see that they really have no tricks or knowledge of how Economy works?

If the audience are smart enough to note that, the debate serves its purpose. It does not matter who "win" in making big headlines. In the end, this election is about economy and if the voters can't see the problem with the "team of maverick", so well presented in the debate, the country is doomed.

But I have more hope that people do see through their think veil of lies and vague talks.

[CBBB]

All Palin seemed to talk about in terms of the economy is how great she is at cutting taxes.

[Richard]

Palin did not screw up as badly as expected, which, in the perverse way that others have mentioned, was a win against expectations. Biden was clearly more articulate and better informed, and consistently achieved higher ratings from the CNN undecided-o-meter. Thus the McCain campaign defused the potential implosion which an awful Palin performance might have caused.

[Robinia]

Biden was intelligent and clear, showed a deep understanding of the issues, and displayed both an ability to lead, and a willingness to offer independent advice to Obama. This would bring a diversity of views to a deliberative administration.

Palin was scripted and cutesy, by-gosh, all winks and folksy. She talked about what she wanted to (Alaska and being a mom, John McCain Maverick) and ignored the question asked if she felt like it. She referenced Ronald Reagan repeatedly-- and reminded one of him: a charismatic and charming actor making people feel good about America. No statemanship, good bit of attack.

If we want the world to respect us, we can't keep the cowboy/cowgirl act up. Candidates are going to have to stop appealing to voters as somebody they would like to have a beer with... we need to look for an ability to understand policy.

[Asia]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/17612767/detail.html
Here is an interesting observation:
===================================

ATLANTA -- Rachel Kraemer and her son, Michael Tarwater, don’t see eye-to-eye when it comes to politics.

The Troup County mother considers herself a Republican, while Michael, 20, a first-time voter, is a Democrat.

# SURVEY: Who Do You Think Won The VP Debate?

But both mother and son found themselves undecided on with which party to settle, so they joined several other undecided voters to watch the much-anticipated vice presidential debate Thursday night at the Channel 2 studios in midtown Atlanta.

“I’ve been going back and forth between McCain and Obama,” said Tarwater.

“I like McCain because of his Christian beliefs, but I also like Obama because of his views about the economy,” said Kraemer.

For Ishmail Hasan of DeKalb County, the debate would hopefully help him choose a candidate too.

# FORUM: Did VP Debate Sway Your Decision?

“Both candidates are saying things I like,” said Hasan, a Veteran and Democrat.

During the heated debate, Sen. Joe Biden and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin battled it out on a wide variety of issues, from the Iraq War and foreign policy, to the current economic crisis and same-sex marriage.

As Biden and Palin gave their closing statements, many undecided voters in the small group had come to a decision.

“If I had to vote tonight, I would vote for Obama,” said Hasan. “I took away that Sarah Palin danced around a lot of the important issues for me.”

And the mother and son, once divided politically, both came to an agreement as well.

TEAM 2 COVERAGE: VP Debate Wrap Up, Local Reaction

“I came to Channel 2 as a strong McCain supporter. But if I too had to vote tonight, I would vote Obama. I’ve had trouble paying my mortgage, and I’m a small-business owner,” said Kraemer.

“Biden explained their plan. I still don’t know what McCain’s plan is. She [Palin] didn’t give direct answers,” Kraemer said.

Two of the six people who gathered to watch the vice presidential debate at Channel 2 left undecided on which candidate would get their vote.

[Michael McKinlay]

Who won ? Where you stands depends on where you sit.

For her audience I thought Palin won. She was repetitive, especially on energy, but she drove home her message while touting and defending McCain. Her attacks were simplistic and mostly subterfuge but very effective. I can remember all of Palin's talking points, very few of Bidens'.

Biden was credible and straight forward but no match for the innuendo Palin was dishing.

Jaded description ? Yep, but we are talking about the American Public ... I'm sure the MSM will have spun this to Bidens' advantage by tomorrow.

Me ? I'm voting Green ...

[Jesse]

It stressed my faith in democratic institutions.

Panem et circenses.

[Greatest VP of All Time]

For perspective, compare Sarah Palin to Dan Quayle. Quayle was great. Dumb. Incompetent. Highly entertaining. They should have made him permanent vice-president. He's not so funny anymore though. Now he's serious and he's mixed up with the PNAC crowd. Anyway, I knew Dan Quayle. Dan Quayle was a friend of mine. Sarah Palin is no Dan Quayle.

[Captain Quirk]

You remember that scene in The Truman Show when his wife, under duress, picks up a box and starts advertising it to the audience.

That was Palin. The entire debate. Selling a product, the McCain/Palin presidential combo.

She's smooth, shallow, and nauseating.

I'm glad it's over.

All those who set up strawmen arguments that she won because she didn't spontaneously combust are, well you know, arguing against a strawman.

And she loves to wink at the audience. Fershure.

[Alex Tolley]

As DeLong notes, Gwen Ifill was the loser. The questions and format allowed Palin to waffle in a folksy manner. If you closed your eyes, her comments were mostly content free. Open them and she appeared charming.

Overall I thought Biden showed his substance well in comparison to Palin's lack of same. On substance Biden won, but whether voters cared for that, I have no idea.

[Jim Harrison]

Everybody talked about how the big issue of the debate would be how Palin came across as if her performance was the only thing that could possibly make a difference. I now think that's wrong. I didn't expect the debate to change my opinions on the candidates, but I came away with considerably more respect for Biden. I'm also more impressed with Obama than I was before because I now see that his choice of a running mate was far more than the result of a political calculation. If I were Obama, I'd certainly want to have a smart and passionate man like Biden on my side.

[Nona]

What's interesting to me is that when I went to the Obama website, what's listed there is completely different from what Biden stated as their plans for the economy. And what's all this about the Small Businesses getting a tax break? They're going to be paying over 50% in taxes when Obama comes to office. Where's all this money going to come from that Obama's promising?

What you have to understand is when they mention "Government", they're really talking about "The People". The people pay their taxes and thus fund the government. So when they're talking about how the government is going to pay, we're the ones really footing the bill.

[Ryan]

This will be a non event within the next 48 hours. Nothing particularly relevant or engaging was said by either side. Biden was full of contradiction and distorted facts, and while some might applaud Palin's ability, not to droll all over herself, I remain unimpressed.

[Linda]

In all my reading and post debate tv watching, no one has said anything about what I saw as a Palin gaffe. Each candidate was asked to discuss what might be their Achilles heel, versus the conventional wisdom (lack of experience in Palin's case, lack of discipline in Biden's). Sarah Palin appeared not to understand the question. It wasn't simply that she was changing the subject, as she did several other times. She responded (she genuinely thought she was responding, I think) with the strength of her executive experience. To me it seemed to come out of left field. I wonder if she knows the term, "Achilles heel."

In response to the question asking each of the candidates to discuss a single policy issue in which he/she was forced to change a long-held view in order to accommodate changed circumstances, Biden gave an effective answer that also managed to bring in the issue of Supreme Court judges - something that is noticeably missing from debate questions going all the way back to 2000. Palin talked about not vetoing state budgets she wasn't entirely happy with because she didn't have enough support (not responsive) and then said that she's never had to change her position on matters of principle - eerily like something George Bush has said a number of times - followed by a non sequitur about bipartisan compromise.

[BJ Feng]

Palin won outright, there was a point not too long into the debate where she said something to the effect of, I'm not going to answer the questions the way Biden or the moderator wants me to, I'm going to speak directly to you, the American people, on what I think is important and you decide. It was at that point when she began to get comfortable and, in the words of an NBC commentator, transcended her surroundings.

Let's be honest here, we all watched because of Palin, Biden wasn't terrible, he was just irrelevant. You could've carted him off and replaced him with an audience member, all the attention was focused on Palin. And all people will remember is Palin's performance.

I think Joe Biden performed better than Obama did in his debate, but the fact is that Biden was just a prop for Palin's show. He's received ZERO coverage since the DNC, and now that he's fulfilled his role as an extra, he can go back into obscurity. The fact that Biden is mentioned only within the context of Palin shows the dynamics at work here.

[Worker]

CBBB,

Actually, Palin is correct that replacing foreign production with domestic production would reduce greenhouse gases. Shipping costs and resulting inefficiencies are much lower for domestic sources.

Likewise, a migration of the US petrochemical and other energy intensive industry to the middle east and other regions with copious energy supplies and negligible environmental lobbies will reduce greenhouse gases.

Not necessarily the desired outcome though for the workers who will be losing their jobs in these sectors. Maybe they will fight the new religion after their people get in.

I think the greater falsehood articulated is the claim that US propserity can be built solely on the back of solar and wind power presently.

[Worker]

I thought Biden flat out lie (in a political sense) that he supported clean coal when he's on tape two weeks ago assuring an environmentalist that he didn't support clean coal in the US.

Then I realized he's a man of fine nuance- he DOES support exporting "clean coal" technology that we won't allow to be used in the US to China.

Sounds like a solid plan there. Plus we can export them the coal that we won't use here also.

Palin would have seemed a lot smarter if she attacked how stupid some of Biden's positions are.

[BJ Feng]

It was obvious that Biden was being deceptive in his answer. Palin avoided going into a, you said, no I didn't kind of exchange that ends up being so convoluted that the viewers stop paying attention. All you need to do is make it obvious the other side isn't being completely honest. Just like what McCain did with Obama's opposition to the surge. Obama can deny it all he wants and wiggle out of it, but we all know he was wrong and made a poor judgment. Obama only looks trite when he continues to explain away his wrong decision. I believe McCain pointed out the similarity to Bush and his stubbornness to admit when he's wrong. It was only in passing, but that's why I thought Obama got his head handed to him. Obama needs Biden to debate McCain, unfortunately, no one cares about Biden. Like Quayle was in 1992, he's a complete non-factor, if Obama is to win, he has to do it alone.

[anne]

Here, then, is how a university professor analyzed the debate:

http://www.juancole.com/2008/10/non-debate.html

October 3, 2008

The Non-Debate

Not only was there no debate but Sarah Palin was not required actually to answer any of the questions put to her, and she announced before she began that she was just going to throw up on us all the talking points that she had binged on in Arizona for the past few days.

She mugged for the camera, winked like a bar fly, and just went on talking and talking and talking, oblivious to whatever anyone else said. Not only did she ignore most of Gwen Ifill's questions,she paid no attention to what Joe Biden said. When he choked up over the loss of his family, she did not have the decency to express any kind of condolences. It is almost as though she is autistic and unable to connect with human beings....

-- Juan Cole

[anne]

http://www.juancole.com/2008/10/non-debate.html

She mugged for the camera, winked like a bar fly, and just went on talking and talking and talking, oblivious to whatever anyone else said. Not only did she ignore most of Gwen Ifill's questions, she paid no attention to what Joe Biden said. When he choked up over the loss of his family, she did not have the decency to express any kind of condolences. It is almost as though she is autistic and unable to connect with human beings....

[The careful shaming of a woman. "Bar fly, talking and talking and talking, oblivious, paid no attention, autistic, unable to connect with human beings...."]

[anne]

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/10/moose-munch-2.html

October 2, 2008

Moose Munch!!!!!

Moose Munch!!!!

Moose Munch!!

-- Brad DeLong

[The ceaseless shaming of a woman.]

[anne]

http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/yes_andrew_sarah_palin_is_a_di.php

September 30, 2008

Yes, Andrew, * Sarah Palin Is a Disaster

* Andrew Sullivan

[Conservatives stereotypically destroying a woman, just to show they too can be like self-styled liberals.]

[anne]

This morning an analyst on public radio, an analyst who happens to be an Indian woman, explained that a Vice Presidential candidate, a woman who has a pregnant daughter, would not be considered a proper role model in the Indian community for having a pregnant daughter.

[hari]

I knew it was going to be a non-event as far as 4th Nov election is concerend, so I decided not to see it.

[anne]

"She's smooth, shallow, and nauseating."

A respected university professor used the same respectful metaphor.

[anne]

Interesting too, having a moderator of the debate who has just written a book on Barack Obama, a book that will be published just after the election and be ever so much more valuable should Obama happen to be elected, but the criticism of a respected university professor of journalism, several times, was only that the moderator would not be tough enough and was not tough enough on Governor Palin.

Ethics is a sometime thing.

[Julio]

Jesse:
"Panem et circenses."

Panem??

[Julio]

Typo of the day:

Ryan:
"...Palin's ability, not to droll all over herself..."

I respectfully disagree.

[Julio]

juancole

"The Non-Debate

Not only was there no debate but Sarah Palin was not required actually to answer any of the questions put to her, and she announced before she began that she was just going to throw up on us all the talking points that she had binged on in Arizona for the past few days.

She mugged..."

STOP! STOP! You were doing just fine!!

[JeffF]

"In response to the question asking each of the candidates to discuss a single policy issue in which he/she was forced to change a long-held view in order to accommodate changed circumstances..."

I suspect this was a good example of how heavily canned her answers were. She wasn't coached to answer the "when did you have to change your mind" question, or forgot whatever she was supposed to say, but did have an answer to a "when did you have to compromise" question, so she gave it as the closest she could get to the actual question.

[Now I Understand]

Palin is only being criticized because she is a woman, just as Obama is only being criticized because he is an African American. It all makes sense now.

[anne]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/vice-presidential-debate.html

October 2, 2008

The Vice-Presidential Debate

BIDEN: With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen....

Look, we have spent more money -- we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.

Let me say that again. Three weeks in Iraq; seven years, seven years or six-and-a-half years in Afghanistan....

[Beyond the Obama-Biden refrain of wanting ever more war, this emphasized comment is completely and purposefully deceiving.]

[anne]

The comparison is between American development assistance in Afghanistan, as though there were not tens of thousands of American soldiers in the country and more wanted by Obama and more coming, as though there were not tens of thousands of NATO soldiers in Afghanistan and more wanted, as though there were no United Nations development programs in the country, and comparison with complete American spending in Iraq.

Senator Biden is being completely and purposefully deceiving.

[anne]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/vice-presidential-debate.html

October 2, 2008

The Vice-Presidential Debate

BIDEN: Look, we have spent more money -- we spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country....

[This was repeated three times.]

[reader X]

Apparently there is nothing that can be said about Palin that will not raise bizarre complaints from Anne.

Anne, you come up with some great stuff sometimes, but this is just ridiculous. Female or Male, Palin was an embarrassment to any thinking adult last night on the stage. She probably thinks she did just super you betcha, but I'm sure McCain had his head in his hands.

[reader X]

Anne, Afghanistan is a failed state. Just who should be patrolling and policing it? Bush broke it, the US and the world must try to stabilize and fix it.

As far as Iraq, no one can coherently explain what the hell we're still doing there.

[Now I Understand]

This is interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081003/
ap_on_el_pr/debate_fact_check

Some facts adrift in veep debate By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer
Fri Oct 3, 7:58 AM ET

"WASHINGTON - Republican Sarah Palin criticized a version of a Barack Obama health care plan that doesn't exist and Democrat Joe Biden clung to a misleading charge about Republicans and big oil when the two clashed in the vice presidential debate Thursday.

Some examples of facts cast adrift in the debate:

PALIN: Said of Democratic presidential candidate Obama: "94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction."

THE FACTS: The dubious count includes repetitive votes as well as votes to cut taxes for the middle class while raising them on the rich. An analysis by factcheck.org found that 23 of the votes were for measures that would have produced no tax increase at all, seven were in favor of measures that would have lowered taxes for many, 11 would have increased taxes on only those making more than $1 million a year.

___

BIDEN: Complained about "economic policies of the last eight years" that led to "excessive deregulation."

THE FACTS: Biden voted for 1999 deregulation that liberal groups are blaming for part of the financial crisis today. The law allowed Wall Street investment banks to create the kind of mortgage-related securities at the core of the problem now. The law was widely backed by Republicans as well as by Democratic President Clinton, who argues it has stopped the crisis today from being worse.

___

PALIN: Criticized Obama's "plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program" for health care, and added: "I don't think it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the Feds."

THE FACTS: Wrong on several counts. Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers — with one option being a government-run plan.

___

BIDEN: Warned that Republican presidential candidate John McCain's $5,000 tax credit to help families buy health coverage "will go straight to the insurance company."

THE FACTS: That's not surprising — the money is meant to pay for health insurance. The Obama campaign tried to capitalize on the candidates' health care exchange by issuing an ad Friday contending that the Republicans can't explain "the McCain health tax."

___

PALIN: "Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures. He sounded that warning bell."

THE FACTS: Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska led an effort in 2005 to tighten regulation on the mortgage underwriters — McCain joined as a co-sponsor a year later. The legislation was never taken up by the full Senate, then under Republican control.

___

BIDEN: Said McCain supports tax breaks for oil companies, and "wants to give them another $4 billion tax cut."

THE FACTS: Biden is repeating a favorite saw of the Obama campaign, and it's misleading. McCain supports a cut in income taxes for all corporations, and doesn't single out any one industry for that benefit.

___

PALIN: Said the United States has reduced its troop level in Iraq to a number below where it was when the troop increase began in early 2007.

THE FACTS: Not correct. The Pentagon says there are currently 152,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, about 17,000 more than there were before the 2007 military buildup began.

___

BIDEN: "As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health care industry — deregulate it and let the free market move — like he did for the banking industry."

THE FACTS: Biden and Obama have been perpetuating this distortion of what McCain wrote in an article for the American Academy of Actuaries. McCain, laying out his health plan, only referred to deregulation when saying people should be allowed to buy health insurance across state lines. In that context, he wrote: "Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

___

PALIN: Said Alaska is "building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets."

THE FACTS: Not quite. Construction is at least six years away. So far the state has only awarded a license to Trans Canada Corp., that comes with $500 million in seed money in exchange for commitments toward a lengthy and costly process to getting a federal certificate. At an August news conference after the state Legislature approved the license, Palin said, "It's not a done deal."

___

PALIN: "Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year."

BIDEN: "The charge is absolutely not true. Barack Obama did not vote to raise taxes."

THE FACTS: The vote was on a nonbinding budget resolution that assumed that President Bush's tax cuts would expire, as scheduled, in 2011. If that actually happened, it could mean higher taxes for people making as little as about $42,000. But Obama is proposing tax increases only on the wealthy, and would cut taxes for most others.

___

PALIN: Said a McCain-Palin administration "will support Israel," including "building our embassy ... in Jerusalem."

THE FACTS: Moving the U.S. Embassy from its present location in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem is a perennial promise of presidential candidates courting the Jewish-American vote. In fact, moving the embassy is actually required by U.S. law. But successive administrations of both parties, including George W. Bush's, have made the same pledge only to find that the realities of Middle East peacemaking have forced them to invoke a waiver to delay it. Jerusalem is claimed as a capital by both Israel and the Palestinians and Israel's occupation of east Jerusalem is not internationally recognized. The city's status is one of the key issues of disagreement in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians."

Instructions: To be taken with a grain of salt

E.G. "Biden voted for 1999 deregulation that liberal groups are blaming for part of the financial crisis today."

Biden voted against GLBA (who fact checks the fact checkers?)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

[reader X]

Anne, I expect you will fact-check and correct the insidious lying (with a wink) that Palin delivered nearly non-stop during the debate.

Please, please, please, stick to the subject. And the subject is Palin's suitability for VP. You are dead wrong if you think sexist attitude are holding her back. I hate to say this, but sexism goes a long way in explaining why she even made it to that stage.

I'm not one who is hypersensitive about sexism, but brazen tokenism from republicans disgusts me.

[Adam]

The debate should have been between Joe Biden and the member of John McCain's staff who would really be responsible for making executive decisions in the event of McCain's death. McCain and Palin should know themselves she's not up to the task and putting her in a position where there's even a remote chance she'd be commander in chief would be treasonous. No she didn't start crying on stage and yes she can make snippy snide comments that people who have no idea what the candidates are talking about can appreciate, but that's just not enough. How would Palin handle a terrorist attack? A financial crisis? A decision about war (yes knowing the names of your generals would help here). Being able to say "Cut taxes" and "maverick" isn't enough. I'm embarassed as an American that she's in a position to be president I think most of the people on this blog could do a better job.

[anne]

"McCain and Palin should know themselves she's not up to the task and putting her in a position where there's even a remote chance she'd be commander in chief would be treasonous. No she didn't start crying on stage...."

Notice the language, even the violence to the language; the need being to destroy a woman.

[George]

From Ta-Nehisi Coates:

http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/sarah_we_are_not_that_different_you_and_i.php#more

I've been thinking a lot about this nomination and rewatching the videos of Palin's interview. Honestly, it's all made me tremendously sad. There are lot of us lefties who are guffawing right now and are happy to see Palin seemingly stumbling drunkenly from occasional interview to occasional interview. I may have been one of them. But I'm out of that group now.

The Palin pick was the most crassest, most bigoted decision that I've seen in national electoral politics, in my--admittedly short--lifetime. There can be no doubt that they picked Palin strictly as a stick to drum up the victimhood narrative--small town, hunters, big families and most importantly, women. Had Barack Obama picked Hillary Clinton, there simply is no way they would have picked Sarah Palin. To the McCain camp, Palin isn't important as a politician, or even as a person. Her moose-hunting, her sprawling fam, her hockey momdom, her impending grandmother status are a symbol of some vague, possibly endangered American thing, one last chance to yell from the rafters "We wuz robbed." Lineup all your instances of national politicians using white victimhood to get into offices--Willie Horton, White Hands, Sista Souljah, Reagan in Philadelphia etc.--they were all awful no doubt. But I have never seen a politician subject an alleged ally to something like this.
...
In election season, there is a price for being turned into a symbol. When actual journalists, with a rep to protect, show up, they are going to do their job. Which brings me to the sexism of John McCain. He knew full well what Sarah Palin was going to face if he nominated her. He knew that reporters would go through her past, that they'd quizz her on the present, that she would need to be ready, and he shunted concern aside, and tossed her to the wolves. Think on that for a mement. For one last run at the White House, he risked a future star of the party he claims to call home. How do you do that? I don't meant to rob Palin of agency, certainly she is also a victim of her own calculations and ambitions. But where I am from the elders protect you, and pull you back when you've gone too far, when your head has gotten too big.

Of course the irony of all this is how conservatives have, for years, lampooned the liberal pursuit of multiculturalism/identity politics. But here's the thing, even when done haphazardly, awkwardly, and imprudently, the fight against bigotry and ignorance has rewards. But when you decide to not be a leader in the fight against sexism/racism and simply criticize those who do, you rob yourself of political experience. Put differently, there is a price--bigger than the black vote--to be paid for disengagement. You become ignorant of a growing sector of the world. They expected Hillary. And if it were a black man, they never even knew it could be someone like Barack Obama. So these guys go to the well one more time, and ressurect the old spectres of "Us against Them." But the fools haven't been paying attention--the"Us" has changed. This isn't Alabama, and it ain't 1968 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lurleen_Wallace#Governorship_and_illness]. There is a whole class of educated, working women, themselves, the children of educated working women. And this is what McCain has to say to them, "I don't care if you know a thing about foreign policy. I don't care if you know a damn thing about the economy. Here is what you are to me--breasts, hair and a lovely smile."

Turns out it helps to actually care about the fate of women, to know something about them, beyond your own lust, when going for their votes. Who'da thunk it?

[evagrius]

anne- could you please stop it with fixation on sexism?

Given your logic, no woman should ever be attacked for holding any intellectual or political view, even if the view is totally idiotic, simply because she's a woman.

[MW]

Biden's continual assertions about being fair were bordering on infantile. "Give me cookie, cuz Suzie got one." Fair is a liberal term used to describe low expectations. If someone worked hard and achieved greatness then they should be required to be FAIR and give you some of their money too. Even though all you did was ... nothing.

[myron]

so, anne. Do you believe Governor Palin is a good candidate for the office of Vice President? If so why?

Is it sexist to even ask that question in your eyes?

[anne]

"The Palin pick was the most crassest, most bigoted decision that I've seen in national electoral politics, in my--admittedly short--lifetime. There can be no doubt that they picked Palin strictly as a stick to drum up the victimhood narrative--small town, hunters, big families and most importantly, women."

Astounding; now please do lecture victim me on sexism since being a victim I need the lectures. Please, I so need to understand sexism better to make my victimhood less painful. Ouch. Was selecting Joe Lieberman as a Vice Presidential candidate done because of sparking a sense of victimhood?

[kthomas]

If Palin had pulled off her undies and taken number 2 on stage, anne would still come to her defense. Sorry, ms anne.

[anne]

"There are lot of us lefties who are guffawing right now and are happy to see Palin seemingly stumbling drunkenly from occasional interview to occasional interview. I may have been one of them. But I'm out of that group now....

"There is a whole class of educated, working women, themselves, the children of educated working women. And this is what McCain has to say to them, 'I don't care if you know a thing about foreign policy. I don't care if you know a damn thing about the economy. Here is what you are to me--breasts, hair and a lovely smile.' "

Astounding; the ultimate in sexism but that's just victim me thinking so.

[anne]

http://www.juancole.com/2008/10/palin-raped-women-must-bear-child.html

October 2, 2008

Palin: Raped Women Must Bear Child

-- Juan Cole

[The headline is of course false, mercilessly false, but there is the way in which a woman is to be treated.]

[anne]

http://www.newsneconomics.com/2008/10/male-and-female-executive-pay-shocking.html

October 1, 2008

Male and female executive pay: Shocking but not surprising
By Rebecca Wilder

I am female and assure you that I do not run around fighting for women’s rights or anything like that, but I will appeal to economics when I note three ostensible differences between male execs and female execs....

[The need for a woman now must be to apologize for being a woman when one might be mistaken for being the wrong kind of woman. Not me though, for I am not one of those women who care about, well, you know. The need is to shame Governor Palin even when she mentions caring for Geraldine Ferraro as the only other woman to have run for Vice President. As another respected university professor found comical this day.]

[CBBB]

Worker:
"Actually, Palin is correct that replacing foreign production with domestic production would reduce greenhouse gases. Shipping costs and resulting inefficiencies are much lower for domestic sources."

I think you give Palin too much credit here. The far more realistic explanation of why she mentioned substituting domestic oil for foreign oil (which will never happen because the US doesn't have even close to nearly enough oil to make the substitution) is she confused her "energy independence" and "environmental" talking points.
Her wording to me seemed to be blaming foreign countries for being big polluters via producing the oil - the oil America demands. Perhaps a comprehensive strategy of oil conservation would be a far wiser way of reducing all that pollution from the transportation, production, and consumption of oil - but you won't hear that sort of thing coming for McCain/Palin.

[Julio]

anne,

"October 2, 2008

Palin: Raped Women Must Bear Child

-- Juan Cole

[The headline is of course false, mercilessly false, but there is the way in which a woman is to be treated.]"

I totally agree that the headline is a lie, specifically an attempt to deceive those who don't have the time or inclination to go beyond the headline.

But how is it different than, say, the Swift boat campaign, or the many other such political lies -- lies directed against men? How is this sexism?

[anne]

Julio, a fine question that I have to consider fairly beyond being annoyed as I have been. Thank you for re-framing the matter.

[Holly W.]

I watched the first hour of the debate, but had to go to bed ... I thought both candidates comported themselves well, with very different styles which might affect who one thinks "won." They both dodged questions about equally.

My quibbles aren't with personality, though, but I do have two problems with Palin's assertions of why we should vote for her ticket.

First, she repeated the old canard that "Government isn't the solution; it's too often the problem" -- well, with a financial crisis like we're seeing, I'd sure like to think that good government is part of the solution, but I'm not sure how people who define government as a problem can provide good leadership, or even recognize it when they see it. To be fair, I think John McCain does sincerely believe in good government, but he's really had to kiss up to some nasty right wing elements during this campaign -- can he kiss them off if he's elected?

Second, Palin kept repeating that a McCain Whitehouse will get government off of the backs of businesses, but that it will also provide plenty of oversight to prevent a future repeat of the current debacle. Can government be simultaneously off the backs of business, and in its face?

[anne]

Terrific criticism.

[elementaryteacher]

Okay, Holly wins for the most succinct and telling analysis of Palin's arguments.

Anne, if pointing out the vacuity of Palin's "talking points" is "sexist" and self-hating on my part as a woman, sign me up.

The princess-wanting-to-be-empress has no policy and all the "king's" courtiers trying to help her cram, and all the "king's" attack dogs picking at Gwen Ifill's "objectivity" can't make Sarah a credible running mate again.

Frankly, it may be a weakness of the ticket, what is their economic policy? Less taxes, less government, but keep this from worsening or happening again--isn't that more government?

It's why the conservative blogosphere is high on Fannie and Freddie and CRA being the culprit for the current credit crisis. They want to run against government, not for more regulation.

How's that for mixed metaphors, lol.

[elementaryteacher]

This is making the rounds: http://marcrichards.grapesoda.com/?p=190

[BJ Feng]

Holly, when we get away from the cliques, government MUST and DOES both regulate and permit businesses to operate with a free hand. When to regulate, when not to, the amount of regulation, and the specific method used to regulate are the important questions that make a regulation either good, or bad. That's why specific details are SO SO SO SO SO important, they can make a very well intentioned and even necessary regulation, into a net negative. We also have to look at the costs, both economic and social to see if a regulation is a benefit or not. That's the complex real answer that is far too complex to mention in a soundbite.

"Government isn't the solution; it's too often the problem".

Why do conservatives believe the above? Because the very nature of a bureaucracy's structure creates problems that make it very difficult for government to be efficient and effective. There are papers that explain in detail, again, it's too lengthy for a soundbite, but the conservative viewpoint is based on research and evidence. Government is good at some things and terrible at others. Below is analysis of why governments don't respond well to catastrophes like Katrina and the Tsunami, but it applies generally as well. So the real answer is that we have to consider each proposal and think if government is capable of performing the task asked of it. Furthermore, will the costs produce enough benefits? Are there better options?

In most cases, government does not, either the gains are net negative (bad) or there are better options that provide more net gains for society. It's the organizational structure that hinders government and it is inherent, which means it cannot be eliminated.

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet;jsessionid=05BCFC2214C7E8C5F5E29C6DA5681B0A?Filename=Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Articles/0420190206.html
Failures of the bureaucratic approach

Three failures of the bureaucratic approach include decentralized knowledge and centralized decision-making, ignoring outside information, and commitment to failing courses of action. These are highlighted in the following section (Takeda et al., 2005).

Bureaucratic management systems rely heavily on group decision making because roles are formalized and information is highly codified, creating a system in which people are “experts” in their limited role in the process. This creates a necessity for knowledge sharing via meetings and other communication tools. While this knowledge sharing helps to reduce uncertainty, it also requires large amounts of time and effort. The heavy reliance on knowledge sharing hinders the system's ability to take swift and decisive action.

In addition to the heavy reliance on the knowledge sharing, the bureaucratic model is also based on the centralization of decision-making. While a large number of people have a role in the decision-making process they do not have authority for action. In a decentralized, holistic system, the magnitude of the responsibility for data gathering and processing is easily absorbed at all levels and acts as a buffer to the threat of random occurrences and operator error (Cole, 1989). But, in a centralized bureaucracy, the heavy reliance on the sharing of information and centralized decision-making makes responding to a rapid demand to incorporate “outside” information and resources difficult.

Socialization refers to the processes by which individuals acquire positive, affective, and evaluative orientations toward aspects of a system, while acquiring the necessary knowledge and skills to operate effectively within the system. In bureaucratic systems, socialization can lead to a high level of understanding of the system, which in turn causes individuals to adhere to the system's “local” framework of norms, values, and assumptions (Smith, 1983).

Because socialization facilitates a commitment to the system it can lead to an inability to properly consider relevant outside information when facing an unusual event. “Relevant outside information” is defined as any information, individual or activity which is not currently part of a system, but relevant to the task(s) faced by the system. This inability to properly consider relevant outside information consists not only of a reluctance to analyze outside information, but also includes a disdain for accepting assistance from actors outside of the system and an aversion to using activities which are not already part of the system.

In addition to the socialization of system rules and procedures engendering a powerful sense of loyalty to “the way things are done” and a dysfunctional response to information “outside” the system, the third failure of the bureaucratic approach to catastrophe results from escalation of commitment. The bureaucratic knowledge and information sharing structure engenders a high degree of commitment by organization members whose identity is synonymous to their role in the organization (Ishikawa, 1988). The roles are bound together by a codified system of decision-making. These roles have the potential to hinder the system's ability to identify and to react appropriately when the system is following a failing course-of-action. Because people are so committed to their role (“role fixation”), even in a failing course of action, their commitment may escalate. This commitment may produce a loyalty that is considered “extreme”, resulting in behaviors that are designed to perpetuate the role (thus, the system) and are not necessarily rational or functional given the circumstances facing the individual.

The idea that extreme loyalty and commitment to a greater system produce a reluctance to identify or abandon a system's failing course of action is based on prospect theory (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979), which holds that people will “throw good money after bad”. Prospect theory suggests those “sunk cost effects” (Arkes and Blumer, 1985; Sharp and Salter, 1997) naturally occur once an investment in money, effort or time has been made, since individuals are reluctant to halt a failing course of action after they have a “personal stake” in the outcome of the action. This “sunk cost effect” manifests itself in organizations when individual actors become locked into a costly course of action by beginning a cycle of escalating commitment in an attempt to recoup their losses (Staw, 1981). When individuals become committed to failing courses of action, negative consequences will actually cause decision makers to increase their commitment of resources and undergo the risk of further negative consequences. While escalation starts because of the individual need to avoid failure, it actually can evolve into a structurally supported behavior if an individual's group, organization or institution supports their behavior (Brockner and Rubin, 1985; Ross and Staw, 1986; Staw and Ross, 1989; Whyte, 1993).

[BJ Feng]

By the way, if the above sounds suspiciously like what happened to the Bush administration, well that's because all bureaucracies face the same pressures. Most aren't asked to manage a long war. It's essential that we understand the challenges facing bureaucracies and don't allow them to take control unless it is absolutely necessary or in a situation where their positive aspects will outweigh the negatives. Or where the negatives can be mitigated.

[BJ Feng]

We had regulations and many many regulators. They failed, they failed us. Is the solution more regulation? No, we need to ask if there is need to regulate the financial system. I say yes. Therefore we must reorganize the different bureaucracies, many of them who fight each other over turf, into a better, more efficient institution. The answer is not more regulation, but more effective regulation and regulators. That sounds easy, but in reality, it's very difficult to accomplish.

Palin does not have enough time to say the above. But this is the very long answer to the original question,

"Second, Palin kept repeating that a McCain Whitehouse will get government off of the backs of businesses, but that it will also provide plenty of oversight to prevent a future repeat of the current debacle. Can government be simultaneously off the backs of business, and in its face?"

Now how is someone supposed to condense all that information in a 90 second clip? In times past, candidates had one hour each to explain their positions (uninterrupted) and then another half to rebut. The Lincoln-Douglas debates were very detailed, I'm not sure Lincoln could have won if given only 90 seconds to state why he opposed the expansion of slavery and how this wasn't a violation of States' rights.

[lonesome moderate]

This just in: Paul Krugman was not impressed by Palin's performance:Unbelievable. Sarah Palin finished her closing remarks by quoting Ronald Reagan:
It was Ronald Reagan who said that freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We don’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream; we have to fight for it and protect it, and then hand it to them so that they shall do the same, or we’re going to find ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children about a time in America, back in the day, when men and women were free.
When did he say this? It was on a recording he made for Operation Coffeecup — a campaign organized by the American Medical Association to block the passage of Medicare. Doctors’ wives were supposed to organize coffee klatches for patients, where they would play the Reagan recording, which declared that Medicare would lead us to totalitarianism.
You couldn’t make this stuff up.

[me]

> I wonder if she knows the term, "Achilles heel."

Surely she'd have answered if she'd known.
But clearly she was vending pre-memorized chunks.

Look at the global warming answer -- same exact mistake as last time in the tv interview (global warming causes human behavior).

If she'd been able to think and talk on her feet she would have at least gotten it right in the debate.

[BJ Feng]

All the previous comments prove my point. Palin won the debate by default because she was the only one of relevance there. All the blogs and TV commentary, but not a word uttered over...I forgot his name. If she gave as stunning of a performance as even the liberal commentators concede, then she did very well indeed. The point is that there's only upside for McCain as a result. It helps to be the only person debating, humm, I vaguely remember someone who kept on interrupting, maybe it was some idiot who charged the stage to get his 15 minutes of fame. Oh well, it doesn't matter, what's important is that I remember Palin's performance and so does America.

[Patricia Shannon]

JeffF says...

"In response to the question asking each of the candidates to discuss a single policy issue in which he/she was forced to change a long-held view in order to accommodate changed circumstances..."

I suspect this was a good example of how heavily canned her answers were. She wasn't coached to answer the "when did you have to change your mind" question, or forgot whatever she was supposed to say, but did have an answer to a "when did you have to compromise" question, so she gave it as the closest she could get to the actual question.

Exactly my impression.

[Patricia Shannon]

I guess Anne likes Palin because they're so much alike. If someone asks them a hard question, they just don't answer it.

[Patricia Shannon]

elementaryteacher says...

This is making the rounds: http://marcrichards.grapesoda.com/?p=190

That was hilarious, because it appears to be so true.

[anne]

"If Palin had pulled off her undies...."

"The princess-wanting-to-be-empress...."

"...global warming causes human behavior...."

"I guess Anne likes Palin because they're so much alike...."

[Wow.]

[evagrius]

Given BJ Feng's undoubted ability to turn a sow's ears into a polyester purse, I'm surprised he hasn't been asked to become an advisor to the Republican party.

[anne]

Here then we have a teacher's reference to the public shaming of a woman:

http://marcrichards.grapesoda.com/?p=190

October 3, 2008

Sarah Palin Debate Flowchart

[A pleasing sort of game going about in Korea even now is the public shaming of women to suicide; we are only at the Hester Prim level but we have been there since Hawthorne wrote and we surely need to modernize.]

[anne]

Gwen Ifill, by the way, has written a book soon to be published on Barack Obama, a book that will be far more valuable should Obama be elected President. Ifill then should of course not have been allowed to moderate a debate between Presidential or Vice Presidential candidates. But, that is just simple ethics matter and seemingly too much to understand for some.

[anne]

What was initially fascinating was reading a wildly partisan journalism professor whose only concern was not that Ifill was allowed to moderate such a debate but that she would not be rotten enough to Governor Palin. There were other professors who followed similarly, though.

[evagrius]

Anne- It was not a public shaming of a woman. Can you please grow up?

Sarah Palin couldn't hold a decent conversation with you. Why should you be defending her?

It has nothing to do with her sex. It has to do with her thinking ability, her understanding, her grasp of issues.

You could have easily bested her in a debate. Why are you going to such lengths to defend someone as incapable of thinking as Sarah Palin?

[anne]

"Anne- It was not a public shaming of a woman. Can you please grow up?

"Sarah Palin couldn't hold a decent conversation with you. Why should you be defending her?

"It has nothing to do with her sex. It has to do with her thinking ability, her understanding, her grasp of issues.

"You could have easily bested her in a debate. Why are you going to such lengths to defend someone as incapable of thinking as Sarah Palin?"

The shaming continues apace. A woman of no fortunately privileged background manages to become the only woman Governor Alaska had had, to become a wildly popular Governor, a woman who works in incisive ways for issues so many Alaskans care about such as education but a woman who must be considered incapable of thinking.

[anne]

Interesting the emphasis that governor Palin placed on education is Alaska, for a woman so treated. Not to mention the emphasis on special needs education which so many intellectuals chose to ridicule the Governor about beyond all mercy.

Imagine a person of such modest a background, having accomplished so much, to be so treated, to be so shamed, to be so publicly shamed.

http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/sarah_we_are_not_that_different_you_and_i.php

September 26, 2008

"There is a whole class of educated, working women, themselves, the children of educated working women. And this is what McCain has to say to them, 'I don't care if you know a thing about foreign policy. I don't care if you know a damn thing about the economy. Here is what you are to me--breasts, hair and a lovely smile.' "

[anne]

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hawthorne/nathaniel/h39s/chap2.html

1850

The Scarlet Letter
By Nathaniel Hawthorne

THE MARKET–PLACE

“Goodwives,” said a hard–featured dame of fifty, “I’ll tell ye a piece of my mind. It would be greatly for the public behoof if we women, being of mature age and church–members in good repute, should have the handling of such malefactresses as this Hester Prynne. What think ye, gossips? If the hussy stood up for judgment before us five, that are now here in a knot together, would she come off with such a sentence as the worshipful magistrates have awarded? Marry, I trow not”

“People say,” said another, “that the Reverend Master Dimmesdale, her godly pastor, takes it very grievously to heart that such a scandal should have come upon his congregation. ”

“The magistrates are God–fearing gentlemen, but merciful overmuch—that is a truth,” added a third autumnal matron. “At the very least, they should have put the brand of a hot iron on Hester Prynne’s forehead. Madame Hester would have winced at that, I warrant me. But she—the naughty baggage—little will she care what they put upon the bodice of her gown Why, look you, she may cover it with a brooch, or such like. heathenish adornment, and so walk the streets as brave as ever”

“Ah, but,” interposed, more softly, a young wife, holding a child by the hand, “let her cover the mark as she will, the pang of it will be always in her heart. ”

“What do we talk of marks and brands, whether on the bodice of her gown or the flesh of her forehead?” cried another female, the ugliest as well as the most pitiless of these self–constituted judges. “This woman has brought shame upon us all, and ought to die; Is there not law for it? Truly there is, both in the Scripture and the statute–book. Then let the magistrates, who have made it of no effect, thank themselves if their own wives and daughters go astray” ....

[anne]

Imagine, we are shown as we were in 1850, having never left, so far as women are concerned, when they are the wrong sort of women. Having given over burning by 1850, let the public shaming continue.

http://www.juancole.com/2008/09/palins-russian-roulette.html#comments

September 26, 2008

I am not sure if it is the witch of deceit or of inarticulateness that is afflicting her, but I don't think this guy finished the job. *

* A visiting minister from Kenya with Governor Sarah Palin - http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gh7Lk46Oz-h8mWP35QuNXGRxkbmQ

-- Juan Cole

[evagrius]

"The shaming continues apace. A woman of no fortunately privileged background manages to become the only woman Governor Alaska had had, to become a wildly popular Governor, a woman who works in incisive ways for issues so many Alaskans care about such as education but a woman who must be considered incapable of thinking."

Oh, please!

She was mayor of a very small town and is now governor of a state that has only 600k, ( that's six hundred thousand!), residents, a number far smaller than many cities and towns in the U.S.
Further, the state of Alaska's major income comes from oil royalties and federal largess.

The average Alaskan receives $2000 from the Feds and $1200 from oil royalties just to be in Alaska!,( I'd like to receive fedral funds just to live where I live).

Further, Alaskans pay no state income tax and receive far more from the Feds than they pay in taxes.

The only political problem Palin has is how to distribute the freebies.

Face it, Anne. You've got a large bee in your bonnet and it's affected your otherwise fine thinking.

Why not take some time and analyse what Palin argued. Did she really make any logical, coherent arguments?

Instead of responding with more quotes from others that you find demeaning, defend Palin's statements as the highest examples of clear thinking ever stated by a woman and show why they are.

[Patricia Shannon]

Do the Pennsylvania GOP leaders think their voters are spineless wimps who aren't very committed? More hypocrisy from the party that accuses the Democrats from liking to pass laws.
By MARTHA RAFFAELE, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 57 minutes ago

HARRISBURG, Pa. - Sue Nace thought election volunteers were joking when they told her she would have to remove her T-shirt to vote in the presidential primary last spring.

But it was no laughing matter to the poll workers-turned-fashion police, who said Nace's Obama shirt was inappropriate electioneering — and made her cover the writing before casting a ballot.

Now, a political fight over what voters can wear to the polls is headed to court in Pennsylvania — with the Republican Party favoring a dress code and Democrats opposed.

To the GOP, the lack of rules could open the door to all kinds of questionable displays — even, one Republican leader suggested, something as outlandish as a musical hat.

To the Democrats, voters should be free to express themselves. They fear a dress code could scare away some new voters.

The political showdown was triggered by a Pennsylvania Department of State memo advising counties last month that voters' attire doesn't matter as long as the "voter takes no additional action to attempt to influence other voters."

Because the memo is not legally binding, some counties have kept past restrictions on clothing and political buttons.

But two Pittsburgh-area elections officials sued to have the memo rescinded. Their lawsuit warned that if the memo stands, "nothing would prevent a partisan group from synchronizing a battalion of like-minded individuals ... to descend on a polling place, presenting a domineering, united front, certain to dissuade the average citizen who may privately hold different beliefs."

This fight over the interpretation of a state law designed to shield the polls from partisan electioneering could determine which presidential candidate's supporters might be turned away from the polls in this battleground state.

Democrats have benefited from a surge in voter registration this year, with young adults 18-24 making up the largest group of new registrants, according to statistics from March 30 to Sept. 8. A poll released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University showed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama pulling 15 percentage points ahead of Republican John McCain in the state.

State Democratic Party Chairman T.J. Rooney said GOP support for the dress code is a partisan effort to scare away new voters.

"To go (to the polls) and engage in an expression of democracy and then be accosted by the fashion police is a form of voter intimidation," he said.

The state Republican Party says Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell's administration crafted a partisan memo that would open the door to abuses.

"The first thing would be a button or a shirt, and maybe the next thing would be a musical hat," said GOP chairman Robert Gleason, who called a news conference in support of dress codes.

Douglas Hill, head of Pennsylvania's association of county commissioners, believes the state's 67 counties are now evenly split on the question. Before the memo, counties leaned toward banning politically polarizing clothing and buttons because "they didn't want to get into fine-line disputes," he said.

Nace, a 44-year-old Obama supporter, hopes the state's recommendation will stand so she can vote Nov. 4 while wearing her political leanings on her sleeve.

"Especially with this election, for some reason it feels very personal to me," she said. "Even when I see another car with a bumper sticker on it, it's like, 'Yeah, they get it.'"

During the April 22 primary, Nace was allowed into the voting booth in York County only after she rolled up her Obama T-shirt to hide the writing. After the state memo came out, York County rescinded its ban.

At least four states — Maine, Montana, Vermont and Kansas_ explicitly prohibit wearing campaign buttons, stickers and badges inside polling places, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures and state officials.

In Kentucky, elections officials last month told poll workers they should admit voters decked out in campaign apparel, after e-mails circulated warning that Obama supporters would be turned away if they wore shirts and pins.

[anne]

"Instead of responding with more quotes from others that you find demeaning, defend Palin's statements as the highest examples of clear thinking ever stated by a woman and show why they are."

I do so enjoy parody that is self-parody.

[Reality Check]

The poster Anne is a one trick pony save a couple variations in the act.

First, the poster has made it clear that they are unhappy that H. Clinton did not win the nomination and 'will never forgive, and never forget' The Clintons did their best to divide the Democratic Party during the primaries and take primary campaigning to a new low, to accomplish an end by any means (like the poster Anne). Much like the poster Anne, they 'will never forgive, and never forget'. Also much like the poster Anne they (the Clintons) are still trying to fight a battle that is already over. They will also never admit to themselves that this is why H. Clinton is so polarizing and will not be president.

Second, if the poster is not ‘name dropping’ Buffet or others, or attempting to demonstrate the little they know about the bond market, they have nothing to add to an economics discussion.

Third, when the above two strategies are of no use, there is always condescending ridicule and insults.

[anne]

"First, the poster has made it clear that they are unhappy that H. Clinton did not win the nomination and 'will never forgive, and never forget.' The Clintons did their best to divide the Democratic Party during the primaries and take primary campaigning to a new low, to accomplish an end by any means (like the poster Anne). Much like the poster Anne, they 'will never forgive, and never forget.' Also much like the poster Anne they (the Clintons) are still trying to fight a battle that is already over. They will also never admit to themselves that this is why H. Clinton is so polarizing and will not be president."

Precisely the point; the need is to publicly shame a woman at all costs. So Hillary Clinton was shamed and continues to be shamed (the lies about the Clintons are of course irrelevant since they contribute so well to the shaming).

[anne]

Interestingly enough there was no prior mention of Hillary Clinton by me in the thread. There must however be a reason why the public shaming of one of only two women ever to have run for the Presidency or Vice Presidency as a Democrat or Republican is to be excused, and the reason is the ever "so polarizing" Senator Clinton.

What battle are the Clintons still fighting by the way? I would really like to know, since they are evidently so like me.

[Reality Check]

"Here then we have a teacher's reference to the public shaming of a woman:

http://marcrichards.grapesoda.com/?p=190

October 3, 2008

Sarah Palin Debate Flowchart

[A pleasing sort of game going about in Korea even now is the public shaming of women to suicide; we are only at the Hester Prim level but we have been there since Hawthorne wrote and we surely need to modernize.]"

However this can never be construed as the 'public shaming of a women' (elementaryteacher...doubt they'll make the mistake of posting again).

[Nice!]

[Reality Check]

"Interestingly enough there was no prior mention of Hillary Clinton by me in the thread."

Your stance has been made clear in repeated posts as cited above.

You, like your approach, are transparent.

[anne]

Notice, the bullying and intimidation have begun in earnest. Notice, the cowardice that comes with the bullying and intimidation. Notice how cowed I am. Please do continue with the hating.

[anne]

Interesting the cowardice....

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hawthorne/nathaniel/h39s/chap2.html

1850

The Scarlet Letter
By Nathaniel Hawthorne

“The magistrates are God–fearing gentlemen, but merciful overmuch—that is a truth,” added a third autumnal matron. “At the very least, they should have put the brand of a hot iron on Hester Prynne’s forehead. Madame Hester would have winced at that, I warrant me. But she—the naughty baggage—little will she care what they put upon the bodice of her gown Why, look you, she may cover it with a brooch, or such like. heathenish adornment, and so walk the streets as brave as ever” ....

says...

Poor wittle Anne. My heart bleeds for you.

[KThomas]

Palin is photogenic. That's her only quality, anne. You look silly defending her.

[anne]

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hawthorne/nathaniel/h39s/chap2.html

A lane was forthwith opened through the crowd of spectators. Preceded by the beadle, and attended by an irregular procession of stern–browed men and unkindly visaged women, Hester Prynne set forth towards the place appointed for her punishment. A crowd of eager and curious schoolboys, understanding little of the matter in hand, except that it gave them a half–holiday, ran before her progress, turning their heads continually to stare into her face and at the winking baby in her arms, and at the ignominious letter on her breast. It was no great distance, in those days, from the prison door to the market–place. Measured by the prisoner’s experience, however, it might be reckoned a journey of some length; for haughty as her demeanour was, she perchance underwent an agony from every footstep of those that thronged to see her, as if her heart had been flung into the street for them all to spurn and trample upon. In our nature, however, there is a provision, alike marvellous and merciful, that the sufferer should never know the intensity of what he endures by its present torture, but chiefly by the pang that rankles after it. With almost a serene deportment, therefore, Hester Prynne passed through this portion of her ordeal, and came to a sort of scaffold, at the western extremity of the market–place. It stood nearly beneath the eaves of Boston’s earliest church, and appeared to be a fixture there.

In fact, this scaffold constituted a portion of a penal machine, which now, for two or three generations past, has been merely historical and traditionary among us, but was held, in the old time, to be as effectual an agent, in the promotion of good citizenship, as ever was the guillotine among the terrorists of France....

[Reality Check]

"Notice, the bullying and intimidation have begun in earnest. Notice, the cowardice that comes with the bullying and intimidation. Notice how cowed I am. Please do continue with the hating."

Is this a promise to take it up a notch.

"Investment idiocy, but do keep trying since I get all tingly at the advice."

I wasn't aware your bullying ever stopped. Why don't you bash elementaryteacher again, or any other women who dare not agree with you.

[anne]

a. "Poor wittle Anne. My heart bleeds for you."

b. "If Palin had pulled off her undies...Anne would still come to her defense."

"Palin is photogenic. That's her only quality, Anne. You look silly defending her."

Wow.

[anne]

"If Palin had pulled off her undies...Anne would still come to her defense."

"Palin is photogenic. That's her only quality, Anne. You look silly defending her."

Do I look silly having found a problem with such comments (notice the words not included)? Possibly, but I like silly. I like just this sort of silly noticing.

[KThomas]

;P