I'd LOL if it weren't so pathetic

In what can only really be described as a pathetic oversight that, nevertheless, you have to laugh at, the Walter Reed Middle School/Walter Reed Medical Center story has another odd twist:

It was used as the backdrop on The West Wing for Matt Santos announcement that he was running for President! Check it out:



TPM and TPM Election central have been all over this all day.

Wow! Somebody is going to be in trouble for this one methinks!

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Political Darwinism

I was so hoping someone got this shot because I did see this last night at the convention!

Well I got me my wish! 'Mavrick' is right up the with the people who are 'Untiers not Dividurs'!

Cheap shot? Maybe. Funny? Hell yeah!

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

So, If You Can't Find The Wounded Vets.....

you must be....A WITCH! (Sorry for the Monty Python humor there.)

This is truly classic, and a highly unusual blunder that the Republicans aren't expected to make at a convention.

You know that fancy 'mansion' like looking picture with the big green lawn that was behind John McCain during part of his speech last night? Made him look like he had a 'green screen' behind him on the close ups? Well a number of people were wondering what it was.

To your right you see first a picture off the RNC's own website last night. Following it is a picture of Walter Reed Middle School in North Hollywood, California. Yup, that's definitely Walter Reed Middle School.

If you are wondering why they would show Walter Reed Middle School, you are not alone. You also no longer have to wonder.

They meant to show Walter Reed Medical Center. Yup. That's right. Now that's trying to say "We won't screw up like the last guy!" by screwing up. They are, apparently, already pointing fingers at one another. Even Andrew Sullivan has picked this one up.

Seriously, you really can't make this stuff up!

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Nancy Wilson's pissed

Ann and Nancy Wilson, the sister's who formed the core of the rock band Heart, issued a statement yesterday afternoon angrily denouncing the use of their song Barracuda on Wednesday night for Governor Sarah PalinEW has this story.

Well, the Republicans used it again last night after Governor Palin joined Senator John McCain after the completion of his speech. Boy was Nancy pissed. She and Ann issued another joint statement:

"Sarah Palin's views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song 'Barracuda' no longer be used to promote her image......"

I'd print more of the statement, but EW is saying that the statement is 'exclusive', which, though it strikes me as vaguely absurd, I will avoid any issues there.

I had known about the Wilsons displeasure with the use of Barracuda before last nights speech. There were even rumors of a cease and desist letter being sent but that does not appear to be the case. I did, therefore find it odd that they would continue to use it.

Isn't Sarah Palin getting enough bad press? Does she have to go and steal a song from Heart?

Why can't politicians use songs from people who like them? Ronald Reagan used Born in the USA for his 1984 campaign despite the fact that a)Bruce Springsteen hated him and b) if you ever listened to the lyrics beyond the "Born in the USA" part, it was a completely inappropriate song for his candidacy anyway!

It's amusing that Republicans, in particular, like to use songs that have lyrics that denigrate many of the same things that they stand for. It's like they can't be bothered to listen. Hey, wait a minute, there might be a theme there.....

Can we please get permission for this stuff people! Everyone else has to do it. You aren't above everyone else.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

First Thoughts - McCain Speech

My real first thought here is that I finally heard a little bit of the guy I kind of liked eight years ago.

My second thought: I didn't hear enough of that guy.

This speech was pretty good, but, again it mostly pandered to his base. It was a rehash of 2004 with the emphasis on national security, safety, and who do you trust to be commander in chief. That makes a lot of sense for him. He is a war hero with what most people would consider great national security credentials.

Problem is, this is 2008. That stuff still flies with the base. It rather farther down on the food chain with most of the electorate.

---

Education is the civil rights issue of this century.

What the heck does that mean? One doesn't anyone in the Republican party get that using weak analogues like this denigrate the original issue? Or maybe they do?

---

I know some of you have been left behind in the changing economy and it often seems your government hasn't even noticed. Government assistance for unemployed workers was designed for the economy of the 1950s. That's going to change on my watch.

Josh Marshall at TPM seems to think John McCain is calling for the abolition of unemployment insurance with this line. I didn't quite get that here but a) I can see where you might and b) I may not be reading this right. I thought it was a bit more about expanding job retraining, but, given the lack of specifics throughout this speech, how would I know?

---

They really need to reteach the man to smile. It seems forced every damn time he does it. At then he puts it away real quick. Not an asset on TV.

---

I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it.

My tax cuts will create jobs. His tax increases will eliminate them. My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor.

A brief bit of the large swaths of debunked boilerplate that made up the vast majority of this speech. Every one of these points has been debunked as either made up or grossly exaggerated over the last week multiple times.

The Republicans think they have become masters of repeating the lie until it becomes truth. Problem is, they don't repeat enough. Now, George W. Bush, well, if you asked him what he had for breakfast four years ago he would have replied "9/11". He figured out how to work the talking points into every single paragraph he uttered.

The McCain people just aren't as driven with their message. Thus, they will get called on the lie. People will recognize it for a lie. It won't get repeated enough.

Plus, after eight years, people have gotten pretty used to, and sick of, Republican political operatives creating their own reality by repeating whatever it is they want the public to believe over and over until it finally is truth.

---

I will conceded these points:

John McCain has a great finish to that speech. Classic and will definitely fire up his base.

John McCain will get some kind of bump from that speech. I don't think he catches up to Obama in the next week though.

---

The 'uniter' McCain is showing up too late to this party. He may even destroy and remaining chance he's got if he tries to do that. I thought things like this were real dangerous for him given how much he's cozied to the right:

Instead of rejecting good ideas because we didn't think of them first, let's use the best ideas from both sides. Instead of fighting over who gets the credit, let's try sharing it. This amazing country can do anything we put our minds to. I will ask Democrats and Independents to serve with me. And my administration will set a new standard for transparency and accountability.

The right doesn't care for that stuff. The right wants partisan. That's some dangerous stuff to try to woo back the middle! You might just lose the right along with the middle if you keep that up!

---

Bottom line: we heard nothing new here. He is a war hero. He deserves our respect and admiration for his service to our country. There were no specifics in this speech. He paid lip service, barely, to helping the middle class. Again, absolutely no specifics.

At least Barack Obama put some numbers on things and had better fleshed out proposals in his speech.

I think he gets a little bump, but they better have some much better specifics ready for the debate or he's in trouble. Obama won't even have to call him on it. The moderators will.

UPDATE: In case you didn't see the speech, and you still want too despite my comments ;-), here is the full video of Senator John S McCain III acceptance speech:


(Note: I orginally posted the official RNC video of the speech. But since UStream, what they use instead of YouTube, likes to behave funny, like play automatically instead of having to be manually started, I have replaced it. I apologize for any annoyance. I will never trust the Republicans to use modern technology again.)

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Palin Video

The Sarah Palin Introductory video that didn't get to air last night:


(Note: I orginally posted the official RNC video of the speech. But since UStream, what they use instead of YouTube, likes to behave funny, like play automatically instead of having to be manually started, I have replaced it. I apologize for any annoyance. I will never trust the Republicans to use modern technology again.)

My first thought is that this looks like a spoof. Part of the problem is the production values. It's a glorified slide show/powerpoint presentation.

My second thought is, this isn't getting any better.

Third thought, maybe having to drop this 'video' from the prime network slot of 10-11 EDT wasn't any accident last night. If it was, I think that John McCain and Sarah Palin benefited from it not airing.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

The Rebuttals and Debunks

I said last night:

She attacked on a lot of fronts with a lot of inconsistencies and inaccuracies. I wonder if the McCain camp is hoping to swamp the Obama-Biden camp, the media and the blogs so much with refuting and debunking her speech that they take some time off from digging in her past.

For those of you interested in the details of the numerous inconsistencies and inaccuracies in Governor Sarah Palin's speech, Hilzoy has one very good post at Political Animal and Mark Kleiman has an even more complete post over at The Reality Based Community.

Heres a little taste on a subject I have not yet touched upon:

PALIN: “Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.”

REALITY: UNDER PALIN, WASILLA GOVERNMENT SPENDING & DEBT SKYROCKETED.

Total Government Expenditures Increased 63 Percent Under Palin. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the total government expenditures of Wasilla, excluding capital outlays, were $7,046,325. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the
budget—the expenditures were $4,317,947. The increase was 63 percent. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 1]

Palin Supported Increasing Wasilla Sales Tax From 2 to 2.5 Percent to Build $14.7 Million Sports Center. “Wasilla residents have given the go ahead to building a new multiuse sports center in town and to raising the city sales tax to pay for it. With the final votes counted
Friday, residents voted 306 to 286 in favor of a measure to raise the city sales tax from 2 percent to 2.5 percent to pay the estimated $14.7 million cost of building the center…Mayor Sarah Palin, who supported the measure, said the tight vote will motivate city officials to keep a close eye on the budget for the center.” [Anchorage Daily News, 3/9/02]

Palin Left Behind Almost $19 Million In Long-Term Debt, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt was $18,635,000. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 10]

Have fun reading if you wish. I will not waste too much time detailing it here. After all, we have a whole new fish to fry tonight!

If you would like a taste of the consistency of John McCain please, avail yourself of this link to The Carpetbagger Report.

A tiny taste of that one:

Foreign Policy

7. McCain was for kicking Russia out of the G8 before he was against it. Now, he’s for it again.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Which Party Is Sexist?

Jae C. Hong/AP Photo
The Hottest VP from the Coolest State.

That is not sexist? You want to level generic charges at Barack Obama's campaign, which has not challenged you on any sexist level, saying they have challenged whether you can raise a family and run for and serve as VP.

Meanwhile your minions are wearing these buttons on the convention floor?

Who is really the sexist here?

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

First Impressions

Governor Sarah Palin was much stronger than I thought she'd be. Problem: I had my bar set pretty low.

• She attacked on a lot of fronts with a lot of inconsistencies and inaccuracies. I wonder if the McCain camp is hoping to swamp the Obama-Biden camp, the media and the blogs so much with refuting and debunking her speech that they take some time off from digging in her past.
  


• What the heck is with the Harry Truman reference? Do you want to remind us that McCain could croak and you might be behind that desk in the Oval Office? Doesn't strike me as a great image to bring up for you, yet.
  


• What is this about Russia's objective in Georgia being the pipeline? Yes, that is a valid point if you are a pundit or if you are a politician not in the White House or running for President/Vice President. It is a very dangerous thing for the official nominee of a major American political party, to one of those offices, to publicly state in a very public speech. Tread carefully here.
  


• Overall, came across well. Style was well suited for the base that they are aiming for. Chris Matthews said it well when he said that he was not reminded once during the speech of Hillary Clinton. She will not attract those voters. That the McCain camp seems to understand that is all well and good for them.
  


• I thought the loss of the mini-movie intro might have been bad but she acquitted herself well.
  

Some others thoughts:

• Talking Points Memo - Josh Marshall
  
• David Schraub: Sarah Palin: Can You Feel The Energy?
  
• You absolutely have to read Andrew Sullivan's live Blog on the speech: Live-Blogging Palin
  
• Over at Donklephant: Game on.
  

I'll will, I am sure I will have more thoughts over the next day or sixty.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

I Love Them Earmarks!

The Washington Independent via TPM:

Every once in awhile, though, something pops up and grabs your attention. Take, for example, Wasilla City Council Informational Memorandum 99-62, prepared on June 14, 1999. This little gem outlines some of the state-funded projects that Wasilla City secured that year, including $1.2 million for storm water treatment and $605,000 for pedestrian pathways.
Then, slapped in the margin, former Mayor Sarah Palin — reformer extraordinaire — scribbled the following message:

FYI This does not include our nearly one million Dollars from the Feds for our Airport Paving Project.

We did well!!!

Yes they have evidence.

Great reformer credentials? No doubt more evidence of her zeal for earmarks, when she was Governor of Alaska, before she was against them, will turn up. Obviously, she didn't greatly dislike them as mayor. Great work.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Pawlenty: Not just a "base" pick

I am rather amused by the tag line for this video clip on MSNBC. Their line? "Pawlenty: Palin was a base choice" Why is this amusing? Listen to the first twenty seconds of the video:



"I challenge the premise that this was a base pick." Seems a little counter to what the headline was. Yes, he does, properly, acknowledge that it is a good pick regarding the base. But, much like a lot of Republicans, he then tries to recast Palin as someone who will appeal to masses.

This is what is getting the Republicans in trouble. She isn't a pick that will appeal to the masses. This is exactly why she excites the base. She is an extreme right wing pick. Trying to recast her will damage everyone's credibility. Scratch that, is damaging everyone's credibility.

Republican's are really good at sticking to the talking points. So good, it is starting to scare me. I am now convinced that they will say anything that you put in front of them, over and over and over.

It makes no sense that Tim Pawlenty can defend her as a pick from an intellectually honest point of view. All he is doing is repeating talking points.

Speaking of just blathering the same talking points. Here's Rudy Giuliani on the Today show:



It simply does not get more ideologically different within the Republican party than Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani folks. Nevertheless, here he is defending her as a selection at every turn. Do you, yes YOU, honestly think Rudy Giuliani privately thinks that she has the national security credentials to be President? Now...be honest. Of course not!

Yet, here we are. And every, I mean EVERY, point that Pawlently, Giuliani, Tucker Bounds et al. are defending and/or saying are off limits are EXACTLY what they would be attacking if the roles were reversed.

The idea that 1 year and nine months as Governor of Alaska and six years as mayor of a small city, that has a population of just over half of what any ward in my own small city of 60 odd thousand people has, makes you more experienced than either Barack Obama or Joe Biden, is insulting the intelligence of the American people.

Haven't we let the Republican party and their unprincipled talking points insult our intelligence enough over the last eight years. Do we really need this too?

---

BTW, Bristol Palin's pregnancy is fair game because of her mother's staunch pro-life position on abortion, abstinence only teaching in school, and general opposition to contraceptives. All of this has some bearing on Bristol's current condition.

Also, and I will revisit this at greater length at some point, but who puts their kid through this? You are really going to blame the media? You have some seriously flawed judgement if you think that the media is to blame here.

• Sarah Palin should have seen this coming from the media. If she didn't, she isn't fit to be running for Vice-President. If she did, what kind of mother is she that she did this knowing full well what her 17 year old would have to go through?
  
• John McCain should have seen this coming from the media. If he didn't see this coming or if he didn't know about this before asking her to run, he isn't fit to be running for President. If he did, what does it say about him that he would willingly allow a woman to put their child through this by asking her to be his running mate.
  

I cannot imagine putting my child through this. I would have had to refuse the offer. I would have expected this to happen if I were in Sarah Palin's situation, even being a man. Does that make me more cynical or more realistic? Either way, I think that my decision would have been the mark of a better parent.

Who knows. Maybe I have this all screwed up. I think not though.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Define "masculine"

I have a feeling tonight will not go as well with independents and wobbly Dems as John McCain and Sarah Palin might hope. One reason? Well, how about this from MSNBC:

Not anticipating that McCain would choose a woman as his running mate, the speech that was prepared in advance was "very masculine," according to campaign manager Rick Davis, and "we had to start from scratch."

Is was so masculine that you had to start from scratch? I still don't think these people get it. When you have to completely rewrite a speech because the gender giving it is not the same gender you wrote it for originally, then you haven't gotten past your own gender issues.

Exactly how much would you have to rewrite a generic, assumed to be for a male, Democratic stump speech for Hillary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Dianne Feinstein? Usually not much. What? Was it peppered with references to football playing and wrestling and such, I suppose?

So why do the Republicans need to completely rewrite a speech that ostensibly was written for a Tim Pawlenty or Mitt Romney? How masculine was this speech?

Within the answer to that lies the difference between a Democratic female and this Republican female. I say this because I cannot imagine that it would have to be changed extensively for an Elizabeth Dole or Christine Todd Whitman either.

I would love to get my hands on the original speech. I am not sure that will be necessary because I think we will be able to tell a lot about that speech from the one given tonight.

The Republican leadership does not know how a strong female political leader should act. They didn't watch the Margaret Thatcher that Reagan so admired. They will screw this up.

Democratic, and even most Republican, women politicians are not a whole lot different than their male counterparts. The article says:

Palin is likely to emphasize her areas of policy expertise -- particularly energy and political reform -- rather than focusing on her biography or gender

.

That would be good, except that if you have to rewrite a speech because it is too "masculine" it tends to undermine that concept.

I have privately commented that Sarah Palin gave me the distinct feel of Dolores Umbridge of Harry Potter fame when I watched her give her introductory speech. If I get that feeling again tonight, well, the conservative, particularly the religious right, base may get excited, but I have a feeling it will turn off a whole big chunk of the middle that John McCain needs to win this.

There has also been some speculation that maybe McCain is throwing this. I don't think so, but he may have done so accidentally. There are a number of sources that seem to indicate that McCain wanted Joe Lieberman or, failing that, Tom Ridge as his VP. The right wing said 'no' to any pro-choice pick, which both of them represent. McCain said 'no' to the plain vanilla/supposedly safe picks of Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney. So, instead McCain said, "Hey Right! You wanted a rabid social conservative? Here you go! Let's see how this dog hunts!"

Judging from what appeared to many to be pained expressions during Sarah Palin's speech last Friday, he may have been regretting his decision even last Friday. He has a history of making quick decisions, not necessarily right, but quick. McCain on decisions from his book, Worth the Fighting For:

I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.

This is the John McCain we're going to have America. Expect a whole lot more of this in the future. If that's what you want from your commander in chief, by all means elect this guy. I, personally, might feel safer with GW. At least the advisors to tell him to do stupid things think for a moment before acting.

He didn't intentionally sabotage his own candidacy. He may, nevertheless, have sabotaged it.

Sarah Palin may recover some from the last week. Tonight's speech could go real well. But, no matter what, she has views, opinions and a record that is very far to the right of your average American. If everything else goes well, the McCain campaign still has to make the working class and independents and disaffected Hillary voters swallow that record. We won't even touch the experience thing.

I don't see it happening.

Of course, I didn't forsee the American people electing a over aged frat boy who couldn't even pronounce 'nuclear' in 2000. Nor did I forsee them reelecting a guy who, very obviously, misled them into a war that costs us $120 BILLION dollars a year to this day, and still can't pronounce nuclear, in 2004.

So, of course, maybe I'm way off base. I hope not. Please, God, I hope not!

The fact the the Republicans had to rework a speech for it's masculinity? Well, that gives me hope that I'm not off base.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

McCain v CNN

Apparently, John McCain has cancelled an appearance on Larry King tonight. It apparently has something to do with spokesperson Tucker Bounds' inability to hold his own with Campbell Brown on CNN last night:



Fun stuff! She kept pushing for exactly what it is that Sarah Palin does in her role as commander of the state National Guard that actually qualifies as foreign policy/national security experience. It was actually fun watching a reporter do their job and not just swallowing the line of BS with a smile.

Of course, as was reported by AP via TPM, just to make it more official:

Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, considers Palin "extremely responsive and smart" and says she is in charge when it comes to in-state services, such as emergencies and natural disasters where the National Guard is the first responder.

But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, he said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.

This is something that is generally well known. It is, however, ignored when you are trying to dig up credentials for your unqualified yet 'ready to step in on day 1' Vice-Presidential choice.

Still going with the just Wow! reaction.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

OMG WTF?!

Most of you will get what the headline means and, yes, it does have to do with Sarah Palin, her pregnant seventeen year old daughter and John McCain.

(For those who dont: OMG=Oh My God! WTF=What the F&*%!)

Yes, you read that right. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin confirmed that her seventeen year old unwed daughter is pregnant. See here, here, here, here and here.

John McCain knew about about this before he selected her!

From MSNBC:

Senior McCain campaign officials said McCain knew of the daughter's pregnancy when he selected Palin last week as his vice presidential running mate, deciding that it did not disqualify the 44-year-old governor in any way.

Let's keep going with the confess to the press on Labor Day fest, shall we?

Fox News/AP:

News also broke Monday about Todd Palin being arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol in 1986 when he was 22. Sarah and Todd Palin were high school sweethearts so they were dating at the time.

Now, I'm not big on punishing anyone for what they did in their youth. So the last part doesn't really get me all that much. There are, however, people to whom that will matter some.

The same, all around, largely goes for the first part as well.

Now, onto the bigger problem.

This is not about Sarah Palin or her family. I am sure they are good people. I do not blame her for accepting when John McCain asked. When the gold presents itself you should grab it!

John McCain has nominated a person who:

• was mayor of a town of 8,471 (2005, although the 2000 census total of 5,470 is probably more accurate for her term) for six years from 1996-2002
• was Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, a pretty powerful appointment, for about a year from 2003 until she resigned in protest in Jan. 2004
• has been Governor of the State of Alaska for 1 year 8 months and 29 days, counting today
• had a scandal upon becoming mayor of Wasila because she fired the Chief of Police who claimed she did so because he supported her opponent, and subsequently sued her. The court ruled in her favor but only because it said she did not have to have a reason to fire the Chief.
• is involved in a scandal involving the firing of Alaska's Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan which, he claims, was due to his failure to bow to pressure to fire Gov. Palin's ex-brother in law who is a state trooper
• has a daughther who is seventeen, unwed, and five months pregnant (so much for abstinence only)
• well...we just won't touch the husband thing, there is more than enough other stuff

Sen. John McCain would have us believe that he believes the person above is qualified to step in and be commander in cheif should anything happen to him. He is not a spring chicken, having just turned 72, is a cancer survivor, and both his father and grandfather, good admirals that they were, never made it past 70. (To be fair, his great-grandfather made it to 83.)

John McCain has made, to many people, an obvious error in judgement with this pick for his running mate. He either did know about all of this and still thought this was the most qualified person to serve as backup commander in chief of the most powerful country in the world. Or..his campaign didn't thoroughly vet this candidate for vice-president and Sen. McCain picked her without knowing a whole lot about her.

Either way, this is a tremendous failure in judgement. Sen. George S. McGovern got ripped apart for picking Thomas Eagleton. Sen. John McCain is, from what it appears, just beginning to get ripped apart for his pick.

Again, this isn't about Sarah Palin and her family. It is about the judgement and competence of a Senator who wants the American people to elect him President of the United States.

Thus far, his judgment seems to have landed him in the middle of a three ring circus. If he can change that perception, he is a magician.

I don't think John McCain is all that magical.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

P.S. - McCain spokesman Steve Schmidt:

"warned Democrats not to try to use the revelations to their political advantage: "If anyone tries to politicize this, there will be a backlash. One thing I think everyone agrees on is let the kids alone."

In case Mr. Schmidt has forgotten, Karl Rove changed politics. Before 2000, maybe, but this will get politicized. Does Mr. Schmidt expect us to believe that he would not politicize this if it were a 17 year old daughter of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Edwards, Al Gore or Joe Lieberman (2000 version)? I think not. I am not saying it's fair but gimme a break. Nice try though.

This is yet another reason that McCain should not have selected Palin if he knew. It is also a reason that she should not have accepted the offer. Both of them were willing to put the child through this? They had to know they would get pounded on this. If they didn't, that tells you yet more about their collective judgement. (I won't even get into what their morals are if they anticipated a firestorm and decided to put a seventeen year old through it.)

Sphere: Related Content

Wonder what these numbers will mean for the bump?

You have to wonder what these ratings will mean for the 'convention bounce?' From Reuters:

Over 38 million Americans tuned in for television coverage of Barack Obama accepting the Democratic nomination for U.S. president on Thursday in what is believed to be the most watched convention speech ever.

and

By comparison, 24.4 million viewers saw the 2004 Democratic nominee, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, give his acceptance speech, and fewer still, 21.8 million, tuned in for the final night of the 2000 convention when then-Vice President Al Gore was nominated as the party's standard bearer.

Makes you kind of go WOW! The average Gallup bounce is 5 points. One wonders if for reasons of both quality and quantity Obama's might be bigger?

We'll find out for sure Monday with the release of the regular Gallup Poll.

So far Rasmussen has Obama up 46-43 in their daily tracking poll which does not yet include the speech. It's 49-45 when 'leaners' are included.

Gallup's daily has Obama up 49-41! It also was conducted almost entirely pre-speech.

Those seem to indicate a pretty sizable bounce. One has to wonder what, if anything, Sen. John McCain's selection of Governor Sarah Palin as a running mate will do to affect those numbers.

Wait and see. Wait and see.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Why Sarah Palin, John?

Something John McCain will have to answer is - why Sarah Palin? Walter Mondale was also challenged on this in 1984. He never really adequately answered it.

It hamstrung the campaign somewhat in that Democratic women who were much higher in the pecking order than the three term congresswoman had to defend the choice. Even if they thought they might have been the better choice but they had not been considered.

Lets look at current female office holders who McCain skipped over, shall we?

Female Republican House Members:

• Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
• Deborah Pryce
• Sue Myrick
• Barbara Cubin
• Jo Ann Emerson
• Kay Granger
• Mary Bono
• Heather Wilson
• Judith Borg Biggert
• Shelley Moore Capito
• Marsha Blackburn
• Ginny Brown-Waite
• Candice Miller
• Marilyn Musgrave
• Thelma Drake
• Virginia Foxx
• Cathy McMorris Rodgers
• Jean Schmidt
• Shelley Sekula-Gibbs
• Michele Bachmann
• Mary Fallin

Now there are some very obvious no-goes here. Jean Schmidt, as controversial as she's been, is about as likely to have been picked as Glen Beck. Same goes for Heather Wilson. Some are too inexperienced, such as Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. (I didn't pick Mary Fallin for that role because she was a Lt. Governor for 12 years. Arguably, she is at least as experienced as the presumptive nominee.) Some are not eligible for the presidency like Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who was born in Havana but otherwise would be a serious candidate.

There are also a bunch of people who can claim to be more experienced and better prepared to assume the role of the presidency.

Female Republican Senators:

• Lisa Murkowski
• Olympia Snowe
• Susan Collins
• Elizabeth Dole
• Kay Bailey Hutchison

Alright, Lisa Murkowski is out. There is way too much potential scandal going on there. She's also from a sparsely populated state that has three electoral votes. OH! WAIT! Sorry about that last part, I almost forgot that Sarah Palin is from Alaska.

No Kay Bailey Hutchison? Elizabeth Dole? You want 'ready to step in', these two have some serious gravitas. Certainly more than the nominee presumptive. Heck both Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have Palin beat here as well! I can understand if you're worried about their occasional 'maverickish' stances though.

Female Republican Governors:

• Linda Lingle
• Jodi Rell

Here we are on the final leg! I get it! You want someone with executive experience.

Well, here the choice was easy. Linda Lingle is blatantly pro-choice and Jodi Rell actually has signed legislation allowing same sex civil unions. Either would have alienated the conservative base that you, John, seem so desperate to hold on to.

So, apparently, you needed a pro-life woman with some executive experience. I can find better female options in both the house and the senate. Therefore my conclusion is you wanted a female and a governor and only one acceptable one was available.

Not that there weren't several viable options other than governors for you here.

Candice Miller was Secretary of State of Michigan before going to the House.

The aforementioned Mary Fallin was Lt. Governor of Oklahoma for 12 years. Sounds like some solid executive experience there.

Kay Granger is a former mayor of Fort Worth! But maybe she isn't as young as what you were looking for considering your own age.

I am just trying to understand. You see, for months John, I, and everyone else, have heard you repeat, over and over, the same pat answer when asked about your VP. "They will be ready to serve."

I am not seeing that in this choice. You and Sarah Palin have 67 days to convince us that Sarah Palin is ready to serve. You just turned 72 today. (Happy Birthday, BTW!) Whether you're choice is ready to succeed you is a very legitimate question for you, just as it was for Ronald Reagan in 1980.

I don't see that person next to you, yet. I can't believe the American people do either. You have 67 days to change that perception.

VP choices don't usually make or break a race. Congratulations on making history John. I think this time, it just might.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Some more Palin reactions

Kare Rove gave the pick a thumbs up:



It is interesting to note from the interview that:

He basically said this is win-win for the next five days and the following sixty two would involve some work.
He said the Obama campaign would be crazy for attacking inexperience. I have yet to hear a conservative talking head who doesn't bring up her inexperience. I have yet to hear a major Obama official do so. Like I said: Everyone else will do the dirty work. Obama, Biden and the liberals can sit back and watch.

---

HuffPo has re-featured a Chris Kelly article from May about Sarah Palin.

Over the weekend, the Anchorage Daily News discovered a whole new reason Governor Palin is the perfect person to be the next Dick Cheney:

She can look you in eye and tell you black is white.

Especially when there's oil involved.

Interesting read. Highly recommend.

---

Campaign Money Watch:

Palin Pick Underscores McCain’s Loss of Maverick Reformer Credentials

Washington, D.C. – Campaign Money Watch, a nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog, released the following statement today from its director, David Donnelly, regarding Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) selection of Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) to be his vice presidential running mate:



“In choosing Governor Palin, Senator McCain is clearly trying to shore up his past maverick reformer image – an image that is now in tatters due to the type of campaign he’s run and the big money lobbyists he depends on every day of the week,” Donnelly said.



“This selection raises plenty of questions,” Donnelly continued. “She bills herself as a reformer, but has been silent on whether she supports public financing of elections in her own state. As governor of an oil-producing state, she’s been a friend to Big Oil. Given John McCain’s extensive fundraising from Big Oil, her selection raises concerns of whether the McCain-Palin ticket will promise the same access for oil companies and their lobbyists that we’ve seen for nearly eight years from the Bush-Cheney administration.”



Gov. Palin recently told a reporter, “When I look every day, the big oil company's building is right out there next to me, and it's quite a reminder that we should have mutually beneficial relationships with the oil industry.” For John McCain, that mutually beneficial relationship includes millions in campaign donations.

---

Tony Campbell at The Moderate Voice

I am still scratching my head over this one because there were much better picks ideologically (Romney), geographically (Pawlenty), and for winning the election through the Electoral College (Ridge). Heck, if the decision was focused on winning disaffected Clinton voters, Senator Elizabeth Dole would have been a much better pick.

He also has some questions about McCain's age and judgement related to this pick.

---

There's a wide array of opinion here. I will have more.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

The Veepstakes Nearing End

So who will McCain pick? Keep in mind, as you read through, that McCain has consistently said that he will pick someone ready to lead the country themselves as his pick.

---

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty? He seems to have been everyones front runner despite the "who?" factor he will generate as a pick. Personally, I think there is the experience factor here as well. President Pawlenty? Is he ready?

Problem is, he says he will be attending the Minnesota State Fair today. That is not in Dayton, Ohio where John McCain will be announcing his pick.

---

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney? He has been a front runner. He has the experience. He is also a potentially disastrous pick.

Conservatives don't trust McCain any further than they can throw him. They can, however, throw him farther than Romney. This would be a good experience pick but I think that it would be at the expense of totally alienating the conservative base that he has been working so hard to court for the last two years.

---

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin? Her name has resurfaced in the last 24 hours.

I wonder, as Powerline does, if this would not be universally viewed as a desperation pick.

I think she seems like a nice person but exactly how does John McCain explain to the American people that she is ready to be president, if need be, on day one? Barack Obama had more experience on his first day in the senate.

If you're looking to swing for the fences but willing to swing and miss she might not be a bad bet. She has more upside than Mitt. I guess that is saying something.

I am not willing to guess here. Unlike the Democratic hopefuls, I do not see a logical pick here. I honestly think it would be better for McCain if he could get away with not having to select anyone. None of these people seem to actually help him.

If I am a Republic(an), I am depressed. It will probably be Palin or Romney as they are both reportedly in Dayton. Oops. Update: Romney will supposedly NOT be at the rally. Of course, Palin's spokesperson says she will be at the Alaska State Fair but a Gulfstream did fly from Anchorage to Cincinnati last night.

Who knows. I suppose it could still be my former Senator Joe Lieberman (?-CT). Boy! Wouldn't that guarantee there would be no such thing as McCain Democrats! I am not going to get too worked up about this. I don't see a 'good' pick from McCain's perspective. I don't envy him his choice. We shall soon see who it is.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Now THAT was a crescendo!

What can you say about Barack Obama's speech. Even Pat Buchanan had to be cut off in the middle of effusive praise on MSNBC because he was using too much time to praise the speech!



The only reaction initially out of the McCain camp was this:

"Tonight, Americans witnessed a misleading speech that was so fundamentally at odds with the meager record of Barack Obama. When the temple comes down, the fireworks end, and the words are over, the facts remain: Senator Obama still has no record of bipartisanship, still opposes offshore drilling, still voted to raise taxes on those making just $42,000 per year, and still voted against funds for American troops in harm's way. The fact remains: Barack Obama is still not ready to be President."

This prompted Chuck Todd to say on MSNBC that the speech had left the McCain camp "speechless". How else to you describe a reaction like that to a speech like that?

Liberal bloggers and pundits heaped on the praise and wondered at the response.

My God! Pat Buchanan was saying that this was one of the greatest convention speeches of all time!

Josh Marshall's explanation over at TPM?

My own take was that the tone of the statement from the McCain campaign was like someone who'd had the wind knocked out of them.

That's probably the best take. The McCain camp could have put that release out before the speech it is so knee-jerk. They knew something big might be coming but I think they were taken aback by the scope and breadth of this speech.

Conservative bloggers tried to make light of and discredit the speech:

Powerline:

Obama outlined, in the vaguest terms possible, countless billions or trillions of new federal spending.

Hmm, vague? I think he was pretty specific. Countless billions or trillions? Hmm, I think that was also fairly specific.

Sister Toldjah:

Actually, there were several statements Obama made in his speech tonight that Team McCain should be able to use against him. Their ads to date have been excellent on using Obama’s words, and those of his fellow Democrats, against him. Let’s hope it continues.

Specifically, Sister Toldjah wants McCain to use the, “If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.” line against Barack Obama. Ok. Sure.

Dan Riehl at Riehl World View seems to think that he heard Obama's acceptance speech in 1960 Democratic National Convention. I think there is not an unusual amount of similarity other than the fact that were both given by great speechmakers in similar situations. But is that really a bad thing anyway? (Link to Kennedy audio and transcript here.)

They are grasping at straws. They do so love to criticize Olbermann and Matthews when they have nothing else to say.

I am sure, as every Republic(an) has said this week, that the Republic(an)s will be 'on message' next week. They always are. Problem for them right now is that they might need to change that message for it to work.

Even if they do, can John McCain close out his convention on as much of high note as Barack Obama closed his? I don't know that the John McCain I know is a good enough speech maker even if he did have the message. He can't compete with that delivery.

I asked in an earlier post whether the Democrats were trying to build a crescendo to the finish. I got my answer, big time.

The Republic(an)s have a massive challenge to meet next week. Chuck Todd said last night that normally, you prefer to follow the other party with your convention, but that, after that convention and speech, following the Democrats might be problematic for the Republic(an)s.

We'll see soon enough.

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content

Joe Biden Acceptance Speech

It is remarkable how the Democrats almost seem like they have a coherent theme this year. Joe Biden gave a great acceptance speech:



I liked how he attacked in this speech. Some haven't liked the common theme amongst some of the senators speaking that refer to John McCain as their "friend." I am quite sure it is true of all of those who used it. Joe Biden used his 'close friendship' better than any of them as he contrasted his radically different view of the problems and solutions for the country with John McCain. I thought that was great.

I am hoping that the attacking trend continues. They almost seem as if they have a rising crescendo of attacking McCain which will hopefully culminate with Barack Obama's acceptance speech. If that was the strategy, I hope it works. If there is a drop off, I will be very disappointed.

Joe Biden may be the designated attack dog but Barack Obama needs to do some attacking tonight himself.

Great speech. Loved the family at the end. The grand kids are cute.

I have mixed feelings about the special guest appearance. I suppose it had to be done, otherwise he would never have made an appearance in the facility in which the bulk of the convention was held. Still, it was Joe's night to shine. He took a tiny bit away from Joe by stopping by.

Can't wait for tonight!

Comments welcome,

Pat McGovern

Sphere: Related Content