I could never make this stuff up. I'm not creative enough.
I rarely remember my dreams, but for the past week, GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin has been haunting me. Night after night, she appears in my dreams, always as a scolding, ominous figure. You must be a Democrat.
When I mentioned my Palin dreams to Slate colleagues, they volunteered their own. One Obama-supporting colleague dreamed she had urged her young son to kill Palin with a string bean. Sarah deftly disarmed the little tyke and sent him off to play with Piper and Willow, then made the mother do sacramental penance by going on a string-bean-only diet from now to election day.
Another dreamed she was at a fashion show and Palin served her crème fraîche on little scooped corn chips. The next course was moose liver patè with a garnish of opilio crab legs.
A third says, "In the Sarah Palin dream I keep having, she has superhuman powers but is not really a person at all. In fact, she is more like the weather with glasses and an up-do, pushing clouds around and pitching lightning bolts." Sarah can actually do that. Be afraid, Obama. Be very afraid.
Posted by: Mike ||
09/09/2008 16:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sarah is the real deal. I used to take my kids out caribou hunting when they were 5 years old. When I gutted the caribou, we had an anatomy lesson. The kids helped. Now they do it themselves. Both my sons and my daughter. They know that meat does not start from a package in the store.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
09/09/2008 19:10 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Another dreamed she was at a fashion show and Palin served her crème fraîche on little scooped corn chips."
creme fraiche? Us avg Americans don't know what that is and wouldn't be caught at a fashion show.
#1
in the world of Barack Obama, community organisers are a key strategy in a different game altogether; and the name of that game is revolutionary Marxism.
And what else could we expected from Obamessiah? He's already annointed himself as the next President, already believes in his "divine right", and his followers have certainly bought into his being the embodiment of the Second Coming of Christ.
The more I hear the more I fear and loathe the man.
#2
ION FREEREPUBLIC > THERE ARE 57 STATES [IN ISLAM]; + CNBC > JIM ROGERS - THE US IS MORE COMMUNISTIC/COMMUNIST THAN CHINA [State Regulat = Welfarism for the Rich, espec vee Govt. Bailouts}???
Expect Obama/Biden to get a little desperate and resort to more and more negative campaigning.
There are three reasons for McCain's sudden surge apart from a successful convention. (In this regard, I think the effectiveness of Giuliani's comically savage attack on Obama have not been fully appreciated.) Had Sarah Palin not spoken that night or not been as effective a speaker we might still be talking about Rudy's speech.
First, the ramifications of not choosing Hillary are now clear: Obama lost a savvy experienced campaigner, who had successfully wooed the white-working class, cemented the Democratic woman's vote, and would have hit the tarmac running, incorporating the entire Clintonian negative-campaigning mob. Biden brings no upside; he's not a fresh "change" face, and is the sort of veteran that isn't popular this year. While the press waits for the first Palin's slips, it is as just as likely that Biden will return to form and out-gaffe her in the short term.
Second, Palin deflated the Democratic convention bounce. Her charisma and youth sort of out-hoped and hyper-changed Obama. More importantly, she energized and redefined McCain's stale maverick image into a new "change" tandem--as both he and Palin were now seen as fellow outsiders who bucked the party establishment and would do the same together in Washington. That was a brilliant reconfiguration that was worth at least 1 or 2 points in the polls. She also brought a Zen sort of irony: the more Team Obama talked of her inexperience as a Vice Presidential nominee, the more renewed attention turned to whether Obama himself was any more experienced for the top spot on the ticket. And the more elite feminists attacked her as unqualified, the more we wondered whether they had made it, as did Palin, without patriarchal jumpstarting or matrimonial insider assistance; the more they go berserk over Palin, the more Biden is marginalized.
Third, the liberal media's attack on Palin was an unforeseen gift and ripped the scab off the old cultural-war wound that usually favors conservatives. Liberal hypocrisy and hysteria were such that the more the likes of a Sally Quinn, Gloria Steinem, Chris Matthews, or Gail Collins went after Sarah, in ways not commensurate with the examination of Biden or other liberal women politicians of the past, the more the public sympathized with a fellow blue-collar victim of predictable elite disdain. There is a deer-in-the-headlights look to CNN/MSNBC reporters in the field as they try to report their Sarah hit pieces--sort of like "I know I look hopelessly biased, and am--but what else am I supposed to do?"
What's next? The Obama campaign will have to figure out how to deal with a growing paradox. Their natural, and now emotional urge is to go after Palin even more, and hope that the media is ever more relentless in search of a meltdown--even as they accept that in doing so they only further garner sympathy for her ordeal, and lose sight that the race is ultimately between Obama and McCain.
Obama also would like to fall back on his stump riff of "they are going to scare you with (fill in the blanks about his race, religion, or name)"--even though resort yet again to the victim card will only turn off tired voters even more. And the problem with the return to Lord Hope and Master Change is that the airways are crowded with those cliches, as McCain/Palin are not only expropriating that message, but energizing it with the maverick label--something Hillary was never quite able to do.
In this cycle of the see-saw race, expect Obama to take a risk and go really negative as he falls into a gripey, cranky mode.
So now we await the Palin interviews, and, depending on her performances, whether all these short-term trends will either revert or accentuate even more. But don't count on a Palin implosion: if one examines Obama's failed House race, and the weird pull-outs of both his primary and general election Illinois Senatorial opponents, then we sense that he has never really waged a knock-out campaign fight until this past year--and that may not be true of Palin's past scrappy and contested rise to the top.
Posted by: Mike ||
09/09/2008 14:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I agree with Mr. Hanson's opinion of Rudy on this one, that set the evening for me. They could have had a pair of dancing chickens on after him and I still would have considered the evening 'successful'.
Mrs. Palin then took it over the top.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
09/09/2008 14:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You know, I'm continually amazed at folks who say ZerObama should have picked HRC as his VP.
Yes, that would have probably given him the election, but who in his right mind would want to spend 4 years watching his back for the development "sudden knife" syndrome. She'd have eaten him alive from within... it puts one in mind of wasp larvae and their hosts...
#3
Evan Bayh would have been a better choice for Obama. He is young, experienced and appeals to independents. Biden is old, annoying and pisses everyone off.
#4
I think that VDH, and many others, underestimate the loathing that Hillary invokes in the majority of people. Add Bill in to the mix and I don't think it would have helped all that much after the bounce wore off.
They would have had a total of two terms of Senate experience between them and no executive experience. What? First Lady counts? Not to mention all the skelatons in the closet.
I expected him to pick Richardson. I'm wondering if the vet found an infestation of worms.
#5
Who would want Bill around all the time trying to look up your wife's dress? Hillary would have been a miserable choice but certainly there was a Democratic woman Obama could have chosen.
Biden cancelled much of the inexperience attacks but then he also nullified the change angle for Obama allowing McCain to take up that angle (which as a REpublican right now he desperately needed).
#8
I think that VDH, and many others, underestimate the loathing that Hillary invokes in the majority of people. Add Bill in to the mix and I don't think it would have helped all that much after the bounce wore off.
Loathing is no match for a ruthless political machine that could arm-twist funding. Up until the end of the primary campaign, the Clintons had the reins of the Democrat Party. Obama won partly due to a coup by other Democrats to get rid of the 'dynamic duo'.
#9
"Obama won partly due to a coup by other Democrats to get rid of the 'dynamic duo.'"
Heh heh.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
And it looks like the Dems just got reaped. By themselves.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/09/2008 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
#10
True enough, Barb, but I am thankful to Obama for one thing: he got rid of the Hildebeast.
Remember, last year at this time we were thinking Hilde versus Rudy.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/09/2008 18:41 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Don't count Hillary out just yet. The Phoenix could rise in 2012.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
09/09/2008 18:51 Comments ||
Top||
#12
But don't count on a Palin implosion:
I said it before, I'll say it again. The MSM is going to scramble to make as much noise as they can over whatever little gaffe they think they found. Because Gov Palin has caracter they're not going to find much.
I'd love to see them break out the magnifying glass on Sen Obama though. If they subjected HIM to as much scrutiny as they will her, he'd sink like the Titanic.
#13
The MSM & Obama camp (I know: that's redundant) have partly and perhaps mostly immunized Palin from criticism, at least for a while. Even if something with a grain of truth turns up they already appear so desperate to smear her that it'll likely be dismissed by most voters.
#14
Mercutio I completely agree. I think Obama and Michelle made a personal decision that it was not worth it to put Hillary on the ticket. It would increase his chances of winning, but he would be unable to lead with her undermining him every step of the way, feeding his missteps to the press and her working hard to keep herself in the public mind as The One Who Should Be The President.
I think at that point in time they believed they could do it on their own and she just wasn't worth the trouble she would bring once the election was over.
Abe Greenwald - 09.08.2008 - 3:22 PM
Yesterday on Meet the Press, Tom Brokaw asked Joe Biden if the troop surge in Iraq had made possible the increased security and reconciliation we now see in that country. Here is Biden's answer:
SEN. BIDEN: No. The surge helped make that--what made is possible in Anbar province is they did what I'd suggested two and a half years ago: gave local control. They turned over and they said to the Sunnis in Anbar province, "We promise you, don't worry, you're not going to have any Shia in here. There's going to be no national forces in here. We're going to train your forces to help you fight al-Qaeda." And that you--what you had was the awakening. The awakening was not an awakening by us, it was an awakening of the Sunnis in Anbar province willing to fight.
So according to Joe Biden, the troop surge played a bit part in the turnaround of the Iraq War. The real catalyst? Joe Biden (with some help from the Sunnis). Let's revisit Biden's war plan and give the great military sage his due, shall we?
On May 1, 2006 Biden and Leslie H. Gelb wrote an op-ed for the New York Times entitled, "Unity Through Autonomy in Iraq," in which the authors proposed to
establish three largely autonomous regions with a viable central government in Baghdad. The Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security. The central government would control border defense, foreign affairs and oil revenues. Baghdad would become a federal zone, while densely populated areas of mixed populations would receive both multisectarian and international police protection.
Three segregated regions with their own laws? Sure, that sounds exactly like what we see in Iraq today. It's not as if success in Iraq has come from Sunnis turning on Sunnis in al Qaeda, Shias turning on Shias in the Mahdi Army, and Kurds keeping Kurdish PKK terrorists in line. You're right, Senator. We haven't witnessed the Petraeus plan in action; it's the Biden plan. To think, some people still believe Iraq is one whole country with some Sunni neighborhoods, some Shi'ite neighborhoods, and some mixed neighborhoods, and that security forces are increasingly mixed affairs with both Sunnis and Shias fighting Sunnis and Shias, and that one set of laws apply to all citizens. Like Barack Obama recently said, "They must think you're stupid." But not me. I know we owe it all to Joe Biden. Thanks, Senator!
Posted by: Fred ||
09/09/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Um, excuse me, wasn't Biden one of the dorks who wanted to cut and run on the Iraqis?
#3
well he sure can't take credit for the strategy that worked but...he was calling for increased troop levels as far back as 2005...if we went large in 2003 this would of been such a yesterday issue
Posted by: dan ||
09/09/2008 10:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
if we went large in 2003 this would of been such a yesterday issue
I don't necessarily think that's true, Dan. For that to be a tenable argument we'd have to believe that more troops would have prevented the insurgency in the first place, or would have tamped it down quickly before it got a toehold. But I think the Iraq insurgency's ideological energy would have been there regardless of how many troops we had on the ground in 03 and beyond, and, irrespective of which insurgency you look at throughout history, that ideological energy requires a certain amount of time to dissipate no matter what type of tactics you use against it.
What Iâve continued to hear from the counterinsurgency experts is that it normally takes about 10 years to successfully quell an insurgency. If thatâs the case, then could it be that it would have only meant more US casualties had we âwent largeâ? Just sayin...
After a week when Sarah Palin was mercilessly mocked and pilloried in sections of the American media, a more pragmatic, less dismissive assessment of her impact on the presidential race is underway. For the Democrats and Barack Obama's cheerleaders in the east coast newspapers, the initial auguries are not terribly encouraging. In short, what they see is not what middle America sees.
The insults thrown at John McCain's Republican running mate may not be soon forgotten by white middle class people like her, in places such as southern Ohio, who could decide a tight race. "Cosmetics saleswoman in Macy's", "Veep in go-go boots", "Shrill moose-hunting Mom" and many similar comments revealed a surprising degree of gender and class prejudice lurking under liberal carpets. And they reinforced the "elitist" charge levelled at the Obama camp.
The extraordinary depth of instant media intrusion into Palin's personal life recalled the calumnies suffered by Bill Clinton before and after his 1992 election, which Democrats then angrily condemned. Likewise much of what has been alleged so far about Palin turns out to be untrue.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
09/09/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Wal-Mart moms" -- white, working, non-college educated women ..."
And here is the problem. They don't understand that everyone except the effete, elite, sophisticates with lots of money shops at Walmart sometimes.
Everyone I know (all college educated and middle or upper-middle class) shops there at one time or another. Oh BTW we're speaking of a suburb in bright blue MA 30 mi. from Boston. In speaking as they do the media are pretty much insulting everyone. Not good for your business or your Boyomba.
#3
Though not much a fan of Mccain's policies I've definitely grown to respect his tactics....choosing Palin has driven the dems nuts - it was ballsy (npi), out of the box thinking and pulls in some hillary voters along w/the conservative base. In contrast, Obama's choice of Biden has given him nothing, really. The man of hope & change chooses a careerist senator - hypocritical and at the same time kinda boring.
All the focus and pressure is still on obomba while Palin is helping McCain look more like a maverick. She's taking the brunt of attacks which are making the dems look petty & mean spirited while Mccain is free to campaign & sell his message - brilliant. In contrast obama is still getting the same heat, biden was an ineffective choice as a wingman imho. Should've went w/richardson.
#5
So, that would be two machine politicians on the ticket then. Richardson might have more exposure on beyond the state lines, but its a machine back home just like Chicago, abet without the amount of juice that is commensurate with the city by the lakes. Then, again, the cost of living is significantly lower in the Land of Enchantment. Two previous state Treasurers [name that party] are serving federal time for corruption. That's just the tip of the iceberg of patronage and corruption at is endemic to the local political culture.
#7
It's no-win to attack Palin because many people identify with her and want her to do well. Even if they succeed in tearing her down many will be upset at Obama.
Note the lingering bitterness of the Hillary crowd.
Barack Obama was seated next to a little girl on an airplane He turned to her and said, 'Let's talk. I've heard that flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger.'
The little girl, who had just opened her book, closed it slowly and said to Obama, 'What would you like to talk about?'
'Oh, I don't know,' said Obama. 'How about What Changes I Should Make To America ?' and he smiles.
'OK, ' she said. 'That could be an interesting topic. But let me ask you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same stuff - grass - . Yet a deer excretes little pellets, while a cow turns out a flat patty, and a horse produces clumps of dried grass. Why do you suppose that is?'
Obama, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, 'Hmmm, I have no idea.'
To which the little girl replies, 'Do you really feel qualified to change America when you don't know shit ?
#4
He's just rehashing the viet nam era Phoenix Program blood libel/ smear from his glory days.
Bob, give it up. We Won. Nobody cares as long as the tangos wind up dead. Bush =/= Nixon.
Posted by: N guard ||
09/09/2008 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#5
One of the things about Woodward that I notice when seeing him on tv is that he talks painfully slow. I do too, and it drives people around me nuts at times. It seems like he has the idea that if he talks slower than anyone else, he'll be seen as smarter than anyone else. 'Taint so. When I finally get through parsing his sluggish prose, he still sounds dumb. The Edward R. Murrow bit only works if you have cigarettes, lots and lots of them.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
09/09/2008 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
#6
WaPo article on Woodward's book. President Bush told Casey: "We are not playing for a tie."
The Strategy Page escribes what really fuels the Jihad: it isnt religion, it isnt belief, its money. The Taliban in Pakistan (TTP, or Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) has an economy based on crime. There isnt all much of a difference between the Taliban and bank robbers, except maybe bank robbers are nicer. What is the Taliban into? Rackets.
The TTP have long been involved in criminal enterprises (smuggling, extortion and other crimes not explicitly condemned by the Koran). Tracking down these funds has always been difficult, because criminals have to be good at hiding their cash The ISI knows how to hide money, and passed a lot of that knowledge onto the Taliban.
Because TTP groups have long been involved in criminal activities, they have developed ties with major gangsters in the region. These guys want to maintain some contacts with the Islamic radicals, just in case, and help out by sharing their smuggling and money laundering contacts in the Persian Gulf. So for the government to really hurt the TTP financially, they will have to go after the criminal infrastructure the Taliban is allied with. That wont happen, because the widespread corruption in Pakistan includes a lot of connections, and cooperation, between government officials and major gangsters.
Crooked politics and terrorism have long clothed themselves in sanctimony. In fact, a cynic might argue that a good rule of thumb for judging movements is to conclude that the more high minded a cause pretends to be, the more sordid are its actual motives. The FARC, for example, presents itself as the champion of the poor and downtrodden in Latin America. But its principal business is drugs. Yet the FARC is simply the norm. All kinds of creepy movements and dictators style themselves in the most magniloquent manner. The Times Online recently compiled a list of the 10 most decadent dictators in recent history; vicious men who literally wallowed in wealth and luxury often while their populations starved...
...Sison wrote this fulsome birthday greeting to the Dear Leader, beginning with this disgusting paragraph.
The Communist Party of the Philippines extends its warmest greetings to Comrade Kim Jong Il, General Secretary of the Workers Party of Korea, chairman of the National Defense Commission of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea and respected leader of the Korean people on his birthday on 16 February.
The toadying goes downhill from there. Of course Sison pretended to be outraged at Ferdinand Marcos, who occupies number 2 spot in the Times Online rogues gallery of decadent leaders. Pretended is the operative word for revolutionary con-artists whose real motive in storming castles isnt to topple the throne but to occupy it themselves. The decadence of the previous occupants only inspires them to greater heights of megalomania. The rest of the Times list is given below. One common characteristic of these frauds is their penchant for bombastic titles, grandiose settings and fantastic heraldry...
One of the reasons why community organizing guru Saul Alinsky was so obsessed with direct accountability is that he didnt trust leaders. His goal was to empower the small man and direct their efforts towards tangible goals. The process might be slower than entrusting the future to a charismatic leader; but Alinksky wasnt into the vision thing because he knew how easily a vision could become a nightmare.
Today we live in a world where the Filipinos who died in the Bataan Death March can be be dismissed as colonial dupes while the memory of Indonesian nationalists, Korean Dear Leaders and Soviet Uncle Joes can be artfully preserved and their crimes very carefully excused. And why? Because as the first paragraph showed, theres money in bilking useful fools. Always has been, always will be.
TMQ liked "Iron Man," which was a well-done movie with a nice sense of humor until a formulaic final reel. . . . Actor Robert Downey Jr., who starred in the movie, was named to the most recent "Time 100," purporting to present the world's 100 most influential people. Note to Time editors -- Downey cannot actually fly or fire repulsor beams at terrorists. That was a movie! Hollywood types are paid huge amounts of money, and like to imagine the money is proof of their importance; newsmags go along with this pretense in order to win access to celebrities. I would argue that no one from the entertainment realm who was listed among the globe's 100 most influential people by Time -- Downey, Miley Cyrus, Mariah Carey, the Coen brothers -- has any influence on world events. What has any entertainment figure in the 2008 Time 100 actually accomplished, other than personal self-promotion?
Posted by: Mike ||
09/09/2008 12:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think Easterbrook misses the point. The massive success of Iron Man means millions of people were exposed to the themes of the movie and the trickle down economic effects from movie tickets to Happy Meal tie-ins and toys put the effect far above anybody other than a world leader of a major country. The catch is that influence is fleeting and barely controllable for political purposes.
#5
Influential could mean influencing minds, not actions. If one convinced all the hippies that war was bad you are influential (literally influencing their opinions) even if you never stopped the war in the process (never influenced the right opinions).
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
David Plotz, Slate
Abe Greenwald - 09.08.2008 - 3:22 PM 
After a week when Sarah Palin was mercilessly mocked and pilloried in sections of the American media, a more pragmatic, less dismissive assessment of her impact on the presidential race is underway. For the Democrats and Barack Obama's cheerleaders in the east coast newspapers, the initial auguries are not terribly encouraging. In short, what they see is not what middle America sees.
