home

McCain-Palin: Eagleton II?

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:45:38 PM EST
Tags: John McCain (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Did John McCain just repeat George McGovern's fatal mistake? How long will she Palin stay on the ticket? Will McCain recover any better than McGovern?

Wouldn't it be great to have McCain do as poorly as McGovern in November.

Update: Commenters here aren't following the news. Palin: A Scandal We Can Believe In. More here.

Palin is under investigation in Alaska for abuse of power in Alaska. (Added: Not a federal investigation.)

< Sarah Palin Announcement | Open Thread forNon-McCain-Palin Topics >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    McCain-Palin: Eagleton II? | 198 comments (198 topical)
    Sorry Jeralyn (5.00 / 5) (#1)
    by cmugirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:50:09 PM EST
    I know you are supporting the Obama-Biden ticket, but I think you are reading this completely wrong.  McCain hit a home run today and it does not bode well for Obama.  The Obama camp has even fumbled with their initial reaction out of the gate.

    McCain wins the week with this one stroke.

    heh. (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:54:51 PM EST
    Homerun is a bad metaphor for this. I'd say this is more like a very bold and potentially brilliant chess move. There are plenty more moves to be made in the game. Only time will tell whether this was a "stroke of genius" or "a bold but fatal mistake."

    [ Parent ]
    Not chess. Craps. (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by scribe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:25 PM EST
    This is the desperaton throw of a craps player who has recognized that the game has gone against him and is now chasing his losses.  He's up against it, and figures "what the hell" and throws one more time.

    I'm setting the over-under on Palin getting off the ticket at September 30, just to get the bidding going.  But, she might not make it to September 4 (the end of the convention).

    [ Parent ]

    A calculated gamble (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:00:43 PM EST
    that will likely fail. But what Eagleton has to do with this is not clear.

    I have an understanding of the Quayle references but after seeing her today, I think that comparison inapt.

    [ Parent ]

    Worse than inapt (5.00 / 2) (#112)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:15:51 PM EST
    Comparing her to Quayle is basically calling her stupid.  I hope Dems stop putting their foot in their mouth on this one, but then again, you know my comment from earlier.

    Perhaps the Eagleton thing is a reference to the rumor that she was barely vetted prior to the pick, in other words, McCain has no idea what will come out.  But it's not clear if that's true.

    [ Parent ]

    The cop tasered his 11 year old stepson (5.00 / 4) (#159)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:27:26 PM EST
    Is this what we've come to?

    Is our position that political correctness demands defending the sensitivities of a cop who tases his own eleven year old stepson?

    Is that how stupid we've become?

    [ Parent ]

    Agree. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:03:18 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Comparison (none / 0) (#171)
    by indiependy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:37:27 PM EST
    I made it, but only in the sense of not ready for prime time and being in way over her head. Not sure how much her speech today shows us. Miscues, as Quayle can attest, often come on the trail. She's someone who's never been through anything close to the scrutiny of a Senate race or Presidential primary.

    However, I think Jeralyn was using Eagleton to point to the fact Palin may not have been fully vetted. She's under an ethics investigation, and there's a report out there that McCain's only prior contact with her has been two 5 minute phone conversations. While it's hard to imagine they'd put someone out of their league or with baggage problems in this post, we are talking about the party that tried to put Bernard Kerik and Harriet Myers into very high-profile positions.

    [ Parent ]

    Oh I'll take that bet (5.00 / 5) (#40)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:02:49 PM EST
    Palin's going to win McCain the election.  He can just stop campaigning himself, she can win it for him.

    [ Parent ]
    what you said (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:27 PM EST
    she is impressive

    [ Parent ]
    And the first thing it did (5.00 / 3) (#110)
    by Jeannie on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:15:31 PM EST
    was to take all the glory out of Obama's speech in less than 24 hours. He isn't being mentioned on TV today. Obama's 'bump' has just come to a halt. And now the week belongs to the Republicans with the emphasis off McCain and onto Palin. How very Rovian!
    McCain waited until the Dem VP was chosen, and when it wasn't Hillary, you can bet they cheered and laughed and proceded to outdo the Obama gang. If they were playing poker.......

    [ Parent ]
    again, what you said (5.00 / 2) (#117)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:16:43 PM EST
    its like the "speech" never happened


    [ Parent ]
    no Kay Bailey Hutchison is impressive (none / 0) (#146)
    by MrPope on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:22:36 PM EST
    and passed over

    [ Parent ]
    It's interesting (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:41:01 PM EST
    That you are now so focused on experience and qualifications.  If that were the only thing that mattered, than what's up with the Dem ticket?

    Posting the same thing three times about Kay Bailey is only repetitive.  Not insightful.

    [ Parent ]

    Kay Bailey Hutchison has hubby problems. (none / 0) (#187)
    by Angel on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:48:27 PM EST
    Let's just say that some of his business dealings might be a tad "shady."  

    [ Parent ]
    Who looks desperate? (none / 0) (#36)
    by Brookhaven on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:57 PM EST
    Methinks the scribe should look in the mirror with that comment. If you know something say it.  Put up or shut up.  I mean that in the nicest of ways.  :) But, please stop being coy because you are making yourself just look vindictive and silly.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't like the throw of dice metaphor (none / 0) (#65)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:07:20 PM EST
    because it implies that the response will be purely random. Not at all. Many factors are brought into play:

    How will Obama camp respond?
    How will conservative base respond?
    How will Palin perform?
    How will women swing voters respond to the choice and how will the respond to the responses?
    How will the media frame this? What narrative will they devlop?

    Many moves to be made. It's not just a throw of the dice, as there will be many ways to influence and direct the flow of events to follow.

    A great deal of this depends on Palin herself. How will SHE perform? She seems articulate to me so in that sense at least she is NOT a Quayle.

    [ Parent ]

    It wasn't a metaphor - (none / 0) (#209)
    by scribe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:08:23 PM EST
    McCain is heavily into craps.  Time even wrote it up:

    The casino craps player is a social animal, a thrill seeker who wants not just to win but to win with a crowd. Unlike cards or a roulette wheel, well-thrown dice reward most everyone on the rail, yielding a collective yawp that drowns out the slots. It is a game for showmen, Hollywood stars and basketball legends with girls on their arms. It is also a favorite pastime of the presumptive Republican nominee for President, John McCain.

    Over time he gave up the drinking bouts, but he never quite kicked the periodic yen for dice. In the past decade, he has played on Mississippi riverboats, on Indian land, in Caribbean craps pits and along the length of the Las Vegas Strip. Back in 2005 he joined a group of journalists at a magazine-industry conference in Puerto Rico, offering betting strategy on request. "Enjoying craps opens up a window on a central thread constant in John's life," says John Weaver, McCain's former chief strategist, who followed him to many a casino. "Taking a chance, playing against the odds." Aides say McCain tends to play for a few thousand dollars at a time and avoids taking markers, or loans, from the casinos, which he has helped regulate in Congress. "He never, ever plays on the house," says Mark Salter, a McCain adviser. The goal, say several people familiar with his habit, is never financial. He loves the thrill of winning and the camaraderie at the table.

    Only recently have McCain's aides urged him to pull back from the pastime. In the heat of the G.O.P. primary fight last spring, he announced on a visit to the Vegas Strip that he was going to the casino floor. When his aides stopped him, fearing a public relations disaster, McCain suggested that they ask the casino to take a craps table to a private room, a high-roller privilege McCain had indulged in before. His aides, with alarm bells ringing, refused again, according to two accounts of the discussion.

    "He clearly knows that this is on the borderline of what is acceptable for him to be doing," says a Republican who has watched McCain play. "And he just sort of revels in it."



    [ Parent ]
    Well it's brilliant I guess if (5.00 / 2) (#51)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:04:55 PM EST
    one believes that the only reason most women were for Hillary was because of gender.  In my circle, the women who supported Hillary were about the issues and thrilled that the one who most supported our issues happened to be a woman.

    This woman Palin is not someone I could ever identify with.  She is not pro choice; her party has never supported the ERA; she is pro  voucher, a darling of the Home Schooling religious right; a creationist.

    I cannot believe women who voted with Hillary because of Hillary's beliefs, Hillary's stand on the issues, Hillary's work for women and the poor would ever look at Palin as a choice.

    [ Parent ]

    Tell that to Gerry Ferraro (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by lmv on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:09:19 PM EST
    She's all but come out and endorsed the Mc-P ticket.

    I'm sorry but the feminist threats aren't working on lots of women voters - because the party of feminism let them down.

     

    [ Parent ]

    Hate to admit it but you're right (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by ChuckieTomato on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:29:25 PM EST
    I don't think dems expected McCain to nominate a woman.

    Hillary's voters will have to be earned because they now have another option.

    [ Parent ]

    Clyburn (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by daria g on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:46:22 PM EST
    Just insulted Ferraro today as well, when attacking Palin.  He's all class all the time.

    [ Parent ]
    GOP supported the ERA before Dems did. (5.00 / 4) (#113)
    by Cream City on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:16:29 PM EST
    Research, then write.

    The distinction must be made between the Old GOP and the Neocon GOP.  Just like the distinction now between the old Dems and the New Dems.

    The New Dems opened their convention this week with an invocation by a minister who denounced another Dem platform plank for women.  See if the GOP opens its convention with an attack on its own platform.

    I can't vote for Palin, either.  But I also can't figure out what the Dems think they're doing.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm going to keep posting this (3.50 / 2) (#69)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:08:24 PM EST
    Because I think it is crucial and deserves it's OWN thread.

    Palin was asked about Clinton and said she was a whiner. How can any Hillary supporter vote for her?

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/156190

    [ Parent ]

    Please stop (5.00 / 3) (#136)
    by americanincanada on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:20:48 PM EST
    that is not exactly what she said. Go beyond what the biased reported wrote and watch the video. She was talking about 'perceived whining'.

    Now I may disagree with what Sarah said here but I do not like people taking anything out of context.

    [ Parent ]

    Far as I can recall (none / 0) (#100)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:13:03 PM EST
    Obama has always said positive things about Hillary, at least just as many positive things as Hillary said about him.

    If Obama called her a whiner, it would be an absolute uproar.

    But ok for the pro-life, gun toting Republican?

    I don't see it. McCain does not have MY vote.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sorry (none / 0) (#160)
    by Jjc2008 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:29:06 PM EST
    I never saw Obama disrespect Hillary. I saw him play hard ball with her.
    My disrespect for Axlerod and his campaign for Obama had more to do with their blatant use of race to trash the Clintons.
    Most of my anger is with Howard Dean, Brazille and their unfair silence when our candidate was being trashed because of gender; and their own version of CDS.

    But in the end I want things to be better for ALL women.  I believe that is what Hillary wants too.  And in my heart I know the McCain/Palin choice would not benefit women.

    [ Parent ]

    Not sure about the creationist (none / 0) (#92)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:11:56 PM EST
    thing. I read that she was open to having it discussed in school, which I have heard from some scientists. The question is does she want it taught as part of the science curriculum or just in a class covering social issues or comparative religions, which is perfectly legal.

    [ Parent ]
    Waht scientists? (none / 0) (#145)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:22:09 PM EST
    Creationism, Intelligent Design is nothing but religion and belongs in church, not in the classroom. Anyone advocating it is trying to foist their religious views into the secular schools.

    [ Parent ]
    What scientists? (none / 0) (#151)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:23:17 PM EST
    Creationism, Intelligent Design is nothing but religion and belongs in church, not in the classroom. Anyone advocating it is trying to foist their religious views into the secular schools.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually (none / 0) (#208)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:05:05 PM EST
    it can be (and is) taught in philosophy class. It's considered a (bad) proof of the existence of God.

    [ Parent ]
    Hillary supporters (none / 0) (#132)
    by MrPope on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:20:40 PM EST
    Hillary supporters here at work are p'd off....  and people wanna know was  Kay Bailey Hutchison, the most qualified woman in the repub party  was even Vetted?

    [ Parent ]
    She didn't want it... (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by kredwyn on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:35:25 PM EST
    The Hill from back in Feb.

    [ Parent ]
    The timing of this announcments (none / 0) (#202)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:00:51 PM EST
    coupled with the SUPRISE! factor is very good. And look at the responses to your comment. No, this could go well for McCain. We'll know in a couple weeks what the likely verdict on this will be.

    [ Parent ]
    Wins the week??? (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by NWC80 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:45 PM EST
    McCain looks like he might be coming slightly unglued.

    His first big moment in the campaign and he rolls the dice and undercuts all his arguments at the same time?

    Just after Obama does his best to put to rest the notion that he is the risky candidate and questions McCain's judgment?

    Hail Mary, indeed. Were they really that concerned with the possibility of losing Alaska ;oP

    [ Parent ]

    Excuse me? That's just insulting. (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:51:54 PM EST
    I would like just one of you to tell me in detail how Romney, Pawlenty or Lieberman would have been a better pick.  The sexism this morning reeks.

    they would be a crappy pick too. (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:55:07 PM EST
    As in, also.

    [ Parent ]
    He's running as you know, a Republican. (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:08 PM EST
    I think Palin is an excellent pick for a Republican ticket.  

    [ Parent ]
    Not for Hillary Voters (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by elonepb on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:16 PM EST
    She called Hillary a WHINER.

    Not sure McCain had her fully vetted... I'm sure there are plenty more issues to come.

    You can read it here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/156190

    [ Parent ]

    newsweek, great (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:06:54 PM EST
    the publication that said if Obama loses we are a racist country.
    try harder.

    [ Parent ]
    The publisher is irrelevant if (none / 0) (#97)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:12:34 PM EST
    the statement was actually made. If the Devil tells you 2+2=4 it doesn't make it false.

    I don't know this is the kind of thing that will have any effect on anything but saying that all things published by Newseek are irrelevant because they say idiot things a good percentage of the time is an absurd statement.

    [ Parent ]

    newsweek, like its partner (none / 0) (#111)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:15:34 PM EST
    MSNBC is so deeply in the tank for Obama nothing they say can about politics be taken seriously.

    [ Parent ]
    It's a quote (none / 0) (#126)
    by Faust on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:19:15 PM EST
    IF the quote is true AND there is video of the quote THEN it could be used against Palin.

    Newsweek is just a source of a possible fact. I guess when Newsweek publishes a story about how a square has four sides you will protest and suggest that it in fact has 5.

    [ Parent ]

    I hate to rain on your parade, (none / 0) (#153)
    by independent voter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:24:01 PM EST
    but there is VIDEO of her saying this at a Newsweek forum

    [ Parent ]
    A possible concern here has been mentioned (none / 0) (#206)
    by Christy1947 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 03:01:42 PM EST
    in that apparently Gov. Palin's personality is very aggressive and she was called "Sarah Barracuda" for it in her earlier years. A lot of how this plays out may be determined by that, for if she is as forceful as the nickname suggests, the 'courteous to the female candidate' meme which we have just watched danced and danced in public because the female candidate so far was usually fairly subtle in how she did what she did, may not play so well as to Gov. Palin by reason of her own style and conduct. Or lower 48 women may view it less favorably than the relatively suave and diplomatic HrC. Certainly the two have to be treated as distinct individuals and judged independently of one another. It remains to be seen.

    [ Parent ]
    depends on which Hillary voters (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by TimNCGuy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:17:59 PM EST
    you are talking about.  Many of the dems who voted for Hillary in places like PA and Ohio are CONSERVATIVE dems.  And by that I mean socially conservative.  They are the old Reagan dems.  Palin's stance on abortion will not bother them one bit.

    McCain is going after conservative dems, indies and any female republicans who may have been suppoting Obama.

    McCain isn't going after liberal females who supported Hillary.  The best he is hoping for with them is that they stay home or don't vote top of the ballot.

    [ Parent ]

    I think this is accurate. (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by chel2551 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:23:07 PM EST
    McCain is going after conservative dems, indies and any female republicans who may have been suppoting Obama.

    McCain isn't going after liberal females who supported Hillary.  The best he is hoping for with them is that they stay home or don't vote top of the ballot.

    I have to say that some Obama supporters around here are definitely opening old wounds.  Absolutely clueless.

    [ Parent ]

    Hubris. (none / 0) (#181)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:43:48 PM EST
    It's not too hard to see why

    that simple word,

    hubris,

    has endured for thousands of years.

    [ Parent ]

    I have to agree (none / 0) (#44)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:03:36 PM EST
    She has a strong record standing up to the old boys network in the Alaskan Repubublican Party and is wildly popular with Democrats and Republicans at a time when the Republican party there is very unpopular.
    As for experience, she has more experience dealing with corruption than Obama does and her executive experience as a governor will outweigh Obama's total lack of it coupled with a very thin resume in foreign affairs.
    I think by this pick McCain is putting the corrupt cronyism of today's party on notice.

    [ Parent ]
    Which Democrats (none / 0) (#55)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:35 PM EST
    is she popular with? Blue dogs?

    [ Parent ]
    No. She is not. (none / 0) (#91)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:11:47 PM EST
    Actually there are many more qualified women in the GOP.

    She is a "Clarence Thomas" pick.

    [ Parent ]

    this is a rather clueless comment (3.66 / 3) (#104)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:14:07 PM EST
    it manages to be both sexist and racist in one fell swoop.

    [ Parent ]
    That statment is in no way racist. (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by jtaylorr on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:29:14 PM EST
    Thomas is the only current Justice to have received "Not Qualified" votes from the ABA.

    [ Parent ]
    so you think Thomas was well-qualified? (none / 0) (#129)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:19:36 PM EST
    Even in retrospect?

    ....and you think Palin is as qualified as they get in the GOP?

    That's rather sexist and racist, IMO.

    But I would not really expect anything else from you.

    [ Parent ]

    The sexism this morning reeks. (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:01 PM EST
    How so?

    [ Parent ]
    Because there seems to be this mantra that Palin (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:02:21 PM EST
    is somehow this incredibly bad pick...as bad as a guy who underwent shock therapy.  That's seems absurd to me.  She has the highest approval rating of any sitting Governor in the country right now.  She's been in elective office four years longer than Obama.  How on earth is she some horrible pick?

    [ Parent ]
    Uh (none / 0) (#83)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:10:18 PM EST
    How is that sexism? You mean democrats are saying bad things about a republican because she's a woman?

    Come on.

    And comparing Obama's experience to Palin's being on the PTA, and a mayor of town of 8,000, and Gov on one of our least populated states is silly.

    She represents 670,000 people, Obama represents 12,000,00. No contest.

    [ Parent ]

    I am upset about the comparison to (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:10:58 PM EST
    Eagleton, whose acknowledgement he had treatment for depression is to be commended.  Also, this comparison quickly leads me to the subject of Gov. Palin and her husband choosing to go ahead with her last pregancy with the knowedge they would be raising a child with Down syndrome.  

    [ Parent ]
    And she got that approval rating (none / 0) (#133)
    by nycstray on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:20:44 PM EST
    while pregnant with her 5th child, lol!~

    [ Parent ]
    The worst thing the Obama campaign (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by Cards In 4 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:03:18 PM EST
    can do is to demean or trivialize Palin.  It would make the 1972 election look close.

    [ Parent ]
    The Obama campaign has already (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by oculus on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:12:20 PM EST
    done so, but now the man at the top congratulates McCain on his VP choice.  Sound familiar?

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, it does reek (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by Upstart Crow on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:08:58 PM EST
    but we got rather used to it during this election cycle, didn't we?

    I think everyone is underestimating how much the invidious sexism running through the Democratic Party and the media this year REALLY IS a political issue.

    Looks like the Dems are going to respond with ... surprise! ... more sexism.

    [ Parent ]

    Umm.... (none / 0) (#32)
    by Jim J on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:16 PM EST
    because they have some experience?

    Sexism again, I guess....

    [ Parent ]

    Experience (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:04:00 PM EST
    is not an argument that Dems can make since we don't have any on the top of the ticket. Perhaps we should switch Biden and Obama and then we can start making those kinds of statements.

    [ Parent ]
    I was responding to masslib's inane (none / 0) (#73)
    by Jim J on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:09:16 PM EST
    complaint about sexism.

    [ Parent ]
    Romney was Governor for four years, and (none / 0) (#41)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:03:14 PM EST
    he wasn't popular.  He has less public service experience than Palin.

    [ Parent ]
    You cannot be serious (none / 0) (#80)
    by Jim J on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:10:04 PM EST
    Romney's resume is a mile longer than hers. Not a fan of Mitt's, but at some point you gotta put down this Hillary cross and move on.

    [ Parent ]
    I am not supporting the ticket but I think (none / 0) (#137)
    by masslib on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:20:54 PM EST
    Palin is an excellent choice for the Repubs.  Romney was my Governor and he was a fricken nightmere.  His resume as a public servant is poor.

    [ Parent ]
    Um, Eagelton? (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:53:12 PM EST
    I am not following you at all on this one Jeralyn. What does Eagleton have to do with Palin?

    You lost me. Is there some news  that broke that I am unaware of?

    I totally agree (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by dissenter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:09 PM EST
    I don't agree with a single position of Sarah Palin but listening to the Obama Campaign's response this morning made me sick. They are going to piss off women again all over the country....Obama in fact, doesn't get it!

    Their response will hurt them specifically in Colorado, NM, NV (who like Annie Oakley types), Ohio and PA.

    I swear these people just don't learn.

    [ Parent ]

    You disagree with her anti-corruption (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by BernieO on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:07:09 PM EST
    position? Or her refusing the money for the bridge to nowhere?
    I certainly disagree with some of her positions but not all. I really admire the fact that this young woman stood up to the party of Ted Stevens and successfully took them on. That takes guts.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm already seeing red. I disagree (5.00 / 5) (#172)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:38:41 PM EST
    with her on many issues, but after witnessing what happened in the primary, I absolutely will not stay silent on this.

    This announcement is hours old and already I have been bombarded with screeds from the (male) turnip truck brigade telling me how offended I should be by this "cynical" pick. As a woman, I can decide when to be offended, thank you.

    Is this a political play? Sure. But I am not going to be offended because McCain is playing politics and, ya know, trying to earn votes.

    What I do find offensive, however, is the sudden "interest" some so-called progressive men have taken in defending women and women's issues. The people that fall into this category are despicable.

    [ Parent ]

    Nobody gives you power... (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:50:31 PM EST
    You have to seize it.

    Sarah Palin seized it and so far hasn't abused it.

    That's real change.

    [ Parent ]

    I am not referencing Obama camp's response (none / 0) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:18 PM EST
    Which I think was prblematic for a different reason.

    I am trying to figure out what Eagelton has to do with Palin.

    [ Parent ]

    you think she has mental problems? (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:53:33 PM EST
    and will cry in public?
    wow

    Romney cried in public (none / 0) (#15)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:13 PM EST
    maybe thst's why he was passed over for VP

    [ Parent ]
    do you even know who Eagleton is? (1.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:02:12 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yes. (none / 0) (#72)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:09:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Waiting... (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by DET103 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:55:39 PM EST
    ..for elaboration on this I guess, currently lost.

    I don't understand (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:55:43 PM EST
    The analogy at all.

    Tried to.  I didn't get it.

    My answer, at this point, would be "no."

    O-B'08 needs a better response (3.00 / 1) (#57)
    by lmv on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:39 PM EST
    I don't care if Palin cried.  I almost did.  And, I still might when I tell my daughters.  

    I think this could be a knockout for Mc-P.  

    [ Parent ]

    Perhaps... (none / 0) (#19)
    by DET103 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:28 PM EST
    ...Jeralyn will follow up with the scoop she has gotten on Palin being institutionalized? Didn't Eagleton accept when everyone else said no? Perhaps she means Romney, et all said no?

    [ Parent ]
    et (none / 0) (#25)
    by DET103 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:41 PM EST
    al, sorry

    [ Parent ]
    No (none / 0) (#37)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:02:04 PM EST
    Eagelton was McGovern's choice. It was after Eagleton stepped down that McGovern could not find anyone to run with him.

    [ Parent ]
    ah (none / 0) (#101)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:13:18 PM EST
    That's a reasonable scenario.

    McGovern was the disaster though. Eagleton was just syptomatic of the wider pathological dysfunction of the party in the 70s.

    [ Parent ]

    Is that snark?? (none / 0) (#141)
    by Edgar08 on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:21:20 PM EST
    Has Palin been institutionalized?


    [ Parent ]
    Hmmm. That is all. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:57:02 PM EST


    Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by facta non verba on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:57:24 PM EST
    I think the world of you but I respectfully disagree. This woman cleaned up Alaska politics. She took on the Stevens-Young-Murkowski machine and won. She took on the monied oil interests and won.

    This post is an embarrassment for you and for Talk Left.

    Hm (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:00:42 PM EST
    If Palin is such a determined enemy of the Stevens machine, why am I seeing all these videos of Stevens campaigning for her?  Why do you suppose Palin just scrubbed one of those videos from her website, if she's so proud of taking on the corrupt Stevens machine?  Maybe you could clear these things up for me.

    [ Parent ]
    I should add (5.00 / 0) (#31)
    by facta non verba on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:07 PM EST
    Jeralyn you have always taken the highroad and this post is the lowroad and you are better than this. I am truly sadden that you would compare her to Thomas Eagleton. You are alledging mental illness.

    [ Parent ]
    Wasn't Stevens one of her backers (none / 0) (#26)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:47 PM EST
    making commercials for her?

    [ Parent ]
    What? (none / 0) (#164)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:31:59 PM EST
    Stevens was one of her primary supporters.  

    She supported the Bridge to Nowhere until it became a political land mine and then dropped it.  Of course she kept the money.  She simply directed to something else.

    Here is corruption fighter's comments on the Bridge to Nowhere in 2006...

       5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

        Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.

    Let the myth building begin!

    [ Parent ]

    I'm not following ... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Robot Porter on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:13 PM EST
    Eagleton was dropped from the McGovern ticket because of a history of mental illness, and the fact that he'd undergone shock treatments.

    What does this have to do with Palin?

    She's got that scandal brewing over (5.00 / 2) (#56)
    by scribe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:36 PM EST
    trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from his job as a state trooper, apparently as retribution for a difficult divorce from her sister and a custody fight.  It blew up when a senior official would not go along and she had him sacked.  At first, she said she had nothing to do with that and then (about August 13) she doubled-back and said she had.

    Worse, there are tapes.

    How bad?  Prior to today's announcement the "TIPS" line (where you call in anonymous tips) had been open since about August 13 for people to call in with tips about this firing scandal.

    And, last I checked, the extent of her cleaning up was, well, pretty insignificant - Stevens, Young and most of the rest of the "Corrupt Bast*rds Club" have yet to go to trial.  It takes a good year or more to make a corruption case and, well, she's only been on the job a little over a year.  IIRC, all the investigations and charges in these corruption scandals in Alaska were brought by the feds, not the State.  

    As for Stevens, he is getting an accelerated trial date (at his request), for before the election.  And his case was run out of D.C., not Juneau.  

    [ Parent ]

    If the trooper chap was beating his kids... (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:18:46 PM EST
    ...and punching his wife, that will have no impact.

    It'll have the same impact as the travel offcie "scandal" methinks.  

    [ Parent ]

    That's it? (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by lmv on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:24:55 PM EST
    You think this about a VP pick will derail her?

    But it's OK for Biden's son to be paid $100k a year to lobby for MBNA.

    This is not a fight you want to have, in my opinion.  

    It's not McCain's fault he may pick up the third of Hillary voters who won't back Obama.  

    [ Parent ]

    Lobbying is a business. (none / 0) (#189)
    by scribe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:51:26 PM EST
    Not always a nice one, but a legal one - when done properly.  And, to all lights, Biden's son's work has been all above-board.

    And, FWIW, we can bring him back from Iraq to testify.  Army greens look good on TV - they're made to be that way.

    Maybe playing up the 750k pages of documentation on Abramoff and the Indian tribes, which McCain has been sitting on to keep from coming out, would be just the tonic to keep the Convention (Jack's sentencing is Tuesday, I think) lively.

    And we can talk about McCain and his indian casino visits, too.

    Should get tasty.

    [ Parent ]

    Three points (none / 0) (#99)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:12:58 PM EST
    1. I understand Palin claims her ex-brother-in-law was physically abusive. A double edged sword at best there for Dems.

    2. Her image at the least has been on of fighting corruption by Republicans in Alaska. How much time will be spent tearing that down by Dems? I expect not that much. Better to ignore her imo.

    3. On Stevens, see 2.


    [ Parent ]
    And I still do not see what (5.00 / 2) (#103)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:14:04 PM EST
    Eagelton has to do with it.

    [ Parent ]
    I think she thinks that Palin will have to quit (none / 0) (#124)
    by BarnBabe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:19:00 PM EST
    Because he had to get off the ticket for depression treatments, she thinks Palin will have to get off the ticket for the B-I-Law thing. Although, that has been mentioned a lot before so they must think they can skate around it. Maybe because she has a 80% approval rate there. Should be interesting.

    [ Parent ]
    As to your 3 points (none / 0) (#179)
    by scribe on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:42:10 PM EST
    1.  Whether or not the B-i-L was physically abusive or not is not the issue.  The issue is that she apparently caused (or tried to cause) to have him fired from his job as a state trooper, using the power of her office to do so.  When the official she leaned on to get this done balked, she had that official fired.  And, then, from the reports thus far, she was less-than-honest about the whole episode.
    So, we have:
        (a) abuse of office to effect either
          (i) personal gain (i.e., a more favorable litigational posture between her sister and b-i-l) or
          (ii) retribution for private conduct, followed by
        (b) firing a government employee who balked at participating in (a), followed by
        (c) dishonesty about it, all compounded by
        (d)(i) there are tapes and
           (ii) very inept handling of the whole episode.

    Properly done, B-i-L would have been on the street with no one ever noticing.  

    She ought to be a darling of Rove and Cheney, since (a)(ii) is congruent with the handling of Siegelman, Plame, and many more, (b) is congruent with Plame, among others, (c) dishonesty is a Republican art form.

    And, in the retribution category, there are the recent allegations by fmr. Congressman Ney, that his prosecution (for which he's just completed his sentence) came about in part because he had provided information to the Admin that the Iranians wanted to talk and disarm (and Deadeye & Co. wanted another war), and the Nacchio prosecution - which I've long thought a payback for not going along with warrantless wiretapping.

    As to the corruption - maybe she tried.  But - big but - no one we've seen or heard of has gone to prison or lost their jobs as a result of her efforts.  It's been the feds doing the Alaska cases.

    And she did not call on Stevens to resign when he was indicted.

    So, we can disagree on the strength or lack thereof of her position, but I don't think much of her chances.

    [ Parent ]

    The trooper has not been fired (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by americanincanada on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:54:04 PM EST
    Once again research is your friend. It is the trooper's boss, who served in Sarah's cabinet, who was fired. the issue is whether she let him go for NOT firing the trooper.

    She is fully cooprative with the investigation and so far nothing has come up to indicate she did anything wrong.

    [ Parent ]

    Among other things (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Molly Bloom on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:58:40 PM EST
    Newsweek reports that she called Hillary a whiner

    Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's "whining.")

    There now seem to be two ethic issues involving Palin and off the top of my, Kay Bailey Hutchinson would be more qualified.

    I don't see this a home run and I think this one might just back fire.

    However, tt will not result in an Eagleton (asked to leave the ticket) unless she is indicted.

    Yep, I was posting the same thing down below. (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by IndiDemGirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:57 PM EST
    She is also on record as being against abortion even in the case of rape or incest.

    [ Parent ]
    She's anti-stem cell research, pro creationism... (none / 0) (#193)
    by Berkshireblue on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:54:31 PM EST
    a true right wing nut case who dissed HRC and today had the nerve to praise her as though HRC supporters, like me, would somehow flock to McInsane because of HER! Give me a break!

    [ Parent ]
    I expected KBH (none / 0) (#33)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:01:31 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Saw KBH (none / 0) (#61)
    by IndiDemGirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:06:39 PM EST
    earlier talking about the pick.  She seemed a bit miffed.  

    [ Parent ]
    Or Christie Todd Whitman (none / 0) (#82)
    by indy in sc on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:10:15 PM EST
    who has the added bonus of a public falling out with Bush and being more moderate and therefore more palatable to undecided HRC supporters (if the Palin pick is meant to help push the "fence-sitters" over the line for McCain).

    [ Parent ]
    CTW was never a choice (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:11:57 PM EST
    there was no way McCain was going to pick a pro choice running mate. Full stop.

    [ Parent ]
    there are other talking point sites (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by AlSmith on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 01:59:38 PM EST

    the the Democrats just repeat their mistake and nominate McGovern?

    I mean as long as I am believing in change anyway why cant I believe in a small town hockey mom?

    Because Small Town Mayor (none / 0) (#201)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:59:07 PM EST
    I mean as long as I am believing in change anyway why cant I believe in a small town hockey mom?

    Because small town mayor Harry S. Truman was such a colossal failure as a Democratic President.

    Not.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, it would be great. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by IndiDemGirl on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:00:05 PM EST
    and it doesn't help that Palin accused Hillary Clinton of "whining."

    Palin just paid tribute in her speech to (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by Valhalla on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:06:18 PM EST
    both Clinton and Ferraro, and the anniversary of women's suffrage.  Things Obama couldn't bring himself to do.

    Insults from the other side do not mean nearly as much as vitriolic misogyny from your own side.

    On topic:  Yeah, I'm totally lost on the Eagleton reference.  Is that the DNC tpm?  Trying to connect to their own party's abysmal failure 35 years ago?  Really?

    [ Parent ]

    Give 'em credit... (none / 0) (#194)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:54:38 PM EST
    Is that the DNC tpm?  Trying to connect to their own party's abysmal failure 35 years ago?

    They're actually doing a pretty good job connecting to our abysmal failure of 35 years ago.

    What a waste of a perfectly dreadful republican presidency...

    [ Parent ]

    So did (none / 0) (#63)
    by janarchy on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:06:55 PM EST
    all the fauxgressives and Left wing blogs and Obama supporters. Big deal.

    [ Parent ]
    Are you OK? (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by theybannedmeinboston on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:03:43 PM EST
    I know that some Democrats have been caught off guard by this choice, but some of your commenters have been predicting this choice for weeks. She has been on McCain's shortlist all summer, has submitted multitudes of paper for his vetting committee, and has been visited by his team multiple times. There has been a right wing blog site called, "Draft Sarah Palin for VP" online for weeks. Why would you think she is Eagleton re-visited? Or is it wishful?

    The way the scandel looks (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by TomStewart on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:04:19 PM EST
    is, well, she looks guilty as hell. She's had to 'backtrack' a few statements already, and the Alaskan media is all over it, but with all the crud that going on in Alaska these days, they must be getting stretched thin.

    TPM is coving it.

    wha .. wha ... what? (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by ccpup on Fri Aug 29, 2008 at 02:05:49 PM EST
    As much as I respect what you do here on TL, Jeralyn, I'm beginning to seriously doubt your political acumen.  

    Do you know anything about Sarah Palin's history in Alaskan politics?  Fighting against her own Party when it came to corruption?  I thought you, of all people, would be able to even quietly support THAT even if you won't by any stretch of the imagination support that ticket.  This Post just seems shockingly petty of you.

    But your response seems to be so indicative of what we're hearing from Obama Supporters (well, some, anyway) in response to McCain's pick.

    It's obviously caught them flat-footed and they're lashing out with a minimum of fact and a whole lot of assumption.

    This was a good day for McCain when it should have been a fantastic day for Obama.  And Palin on the campaign trail shaking hands and selling the McCain-Palin ticket is a very powerful weapon indeed.

    The Obama Camp needs to get on top of their message and on top of how they're running things.  Where's the Palin ad which would have echoed the Biden ad?  McCain had something out the DAY of announcing Biden!  

    Where's Obama on this?

    Making fun of small town America, that's where he is.