Author Topic: Kathleen Parker, George Will suggest Palin step down (Read 17101 times)

Monkeyleg · « **on:** September 26, 2008, 01:04:38 PM »

This is pretty scary stuff, but not surprising. Republicans are legendary for eating their own.

Article here

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #1 on:** September 26, 2008, 01:08:25 PM »

Oh, please. Who is paying them to help Obama?

Pb · « **Reply #2 on:** September 26, 2008, 01:10:11 PM »

I recent column, this woman said she "loved" Obama, and thought he could bring "healing" to our country.

Monkeyleg · « **Reply #3 on:** September 26, 2008, 01:55:24 PM »

Seems to me I remember columnists using terms such as "brilliant" to describe McCain's choice of Palin. Even Parker seemed hot about Palin in this column.

I watched parts of the Couric/Palin interview and didn't think Palin did particularly well. But I also watched Obama on O'Reilly and thought the guy lied and squirmed his way through the entire interview.

All of this is giving me a really bad feeling about November.

ArmedBear · « **Reply #4 on:** September 26, 2008, 02:27:43 PM »

Uh, Kathleen Parker and George Will are who, again?

Yes, I do know who they are. But they haven't had much, if any, relevance in this century.

They may be right, or they may be wrong, about Palin. But what part does either of them play in the conservative movement of 1994-present?

I mean, suggesting Palin step down in a liberal paper? What, exactly, gives them standing? I can think of nothing -- and it seems like they want to draw attention to themselves no matter what the consequences.

When was the last time you uttered "Kathleen Parker" or "George Will said..." when talking to a friend about politics?

longeyes · « **Reply #5 on:** September 26, 2008, 03:57:36 PM »

George Will needs to loosen his bowtie--and his shorts.

First he tells us McCain is a loose cannon, then he wants to replace Palin. Whose payroll is he on now?

SteveS · « **Reply #6 on:** September 26, 2008, 05:36:03 PM »

Quote from: longeyes on September 26, 2008, 02:57:36 PM

George Will needs to loosen his bowtie--and his shorts.

First he tells us McCain is a loose cannon, then he wants to replace Palin. Whose payroll is he on now?

I think he has been trying to say that the Republicans should have gone with someone else. Palin hasnt done all that great in interviews and it is not as if Gibson and Couric are hard hitters. If she can't stand up to those two, then who can she stand up to?

As for McCain, was he the best choice? Should criticism be withheld just because he is the nominee?

Modifiedbrowning · « **Reply #7 on:** September 26, 2008, 05:38:03 PM »

Quote

when the Alaska governor was unable to provide an example of when John McCain had pushed for more regulation of Wall Street during his Senate career.

Why would he push for more regulation when .gov regulation was the cause of the problem?

Quote

"If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman"

That's why she is my woman.

Waitone · « **Reply #8 on:** September 26, 2008, 06:44:16 PM »

Quote

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/26/palin-should-step-down-conservative-commentator-says/
"Sarah Palin has many virtues," Brooks wrote in a recent column. "If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."

Brooks just made a valid point but for some reason I think he is unaware of it. The one thing the last two weeks has demonstrated is the need for a freakin' wrecking ball to be swung through the politico-financial system in this country. We need some serious damage done to the establishment. McCain is establishment regardless of his maverick schtik. It is evident from Brooks comment that his priority is "constructive governance". Maybe we're looking at a time where a little (no, maybe a lot) of constructive destruction is in order. Maybe what we need for the immediate future is someone tasked to simply raise hell with corrupt people and institutions. Maybe what we need is someone who will root out corruption regardless of where is was found. We have plenteous evidence of political corruption. We are seeing evidence of galactic scale corruption in the world of finance. Is it possible a wrecking ball pulled through Washington would expose corruption by our precious media? Is that what Brooks is concerned with?

ronnyreagan · « **Reply #9 on:** September 26, 2008, 07:09:05 PM »

Quote from: Modifiedbrowning on September 26, 2008, 04:38:03 PM

Why would he push for more regulation when .gov regulation was the cause of the problem?

If she would have said that, it would have been the right answer. Instead she stuttered incoherently for a few minutes and then said "I'll get back to you." She may be on the right side, but she's still a dunce.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #10 on:** September 26, 2008, 07:55:32 PM »

Palin's not quite ready for prime-time, but Obama wasn't ready either at first.

When I say prime-time, I refer to national media attention, not the office. Obama will never be ready for that, Palin already is.

agricola · « **Reply #11 on:** September 27, 2008, 03:11:34 AM »

Quote from: fistful on September 26, 2008, 06:55:32 PM

Palin's not quite ready for prime-time, but Obama wasn't ready either at first.

When I say prime-time, I refer to national media attention, not the office. Obama will never be ready for that, Palin already is.

One wonders whether people as machiavellian as Rove and his cohorts are alleged to be is not exactly discouraging these reasonably poor Palin interviews, in the hope that expectation will be so low come Oct 2nd that she puts in a far-above-expectation performance and kicks Biden's ass.

Waitone · « **Reply #12 on:** September 27, 2008, 03:51:38 AM »

Billy Clinton was the master of lowering expectation. Seems to me lowered expectations is a standard play by both parties.

SteveS · « **Reply #13 on:** September 27, 2008, 04:14:47 AM »

Quote from: fistful on September 26, 2008, 06:55:32 PM

Palin's not quite ready for prime-time, but Obama wasn't ready either at first.

When I say prime-time, I refer to national media attention, not the office. Obama will never be ready for that, Palin already is.

That is the truth!

Quote

Billy Clinton was the master of lowering expectation. Seems to me lowered expectations is a standard play by both parties.

I can't believe I am going to say this, but Billy was (and is) a far more polished speaker and politician than any of the candidates.

seeker_two · « **Reply #14 on:** September 27, 2008, 06:25:52 AM »

Will is afraid that Palin will revive the Reagan conservatives and flush the neo-cons/Rockefeller Republicans out of power....and he's right...they NEED to be flushed...

Will makes a better Dem, anyway....

Intune · « **Reply #15 on:** September 27, 2008, 06:39:46 AM »

Palin is dense and McCain is even more stupid. They are terrible public speakers that have boogers in their noses. One of Palin's legs is shorter than the other and McCain can't scratch his ear. Blah, blah and blah. Insert anything negative about their personalities, policies or families that you can think of here. Anything and everything. Fill the barrel, load the scales.

Nov. 4, 2008
Now all of the campaigning, debating, spinning, slathering and slandering is done.

You are alone in a booth.

This is the time to be brutally honest with yourself. Notice the string attached to the carrot. The very existence of our republic could potentially be at your fingertips.

Think of your country, your safety, your family and your future.

Pull the lever.

Go home, take a shower and wash off. You did the right thing.

3.2 lbs of plutonium was just detonated over New York City.

wquay · « **Reply #16 on:** September 27, 2008, 06:59:30 AM »

Good for them. Nothing in Palin's interviews (thus far) and resume make her a worthy candidate for president IMO.

Which is what she is, considering McCain's health and age.

agricola · « **Reply #17 on:** September 27, 2008, 07:11:38 AM »

Quote from: wquay on September 27, 2008, 05:59:30 AM

Good for them. Nothing in Palin's interviews (thus far) and resume make her a worthy candidate for president IMO.

Which is what she is, considering McCain's health and age.

She is the Republican Presidential candidate, now?

ilbob · « **Reply #18 on:** September 27, 2008, 07:13:05 AM »

Quote from: wquay on September 27, 2008, 05:59:30 AM

Good for them. Nothing in Palin's interviews (thus far) and resume make her a worthy candidate for president IMO.

Which is what she is, considering McCain's health and age.

And BHO or Biden is?

There are two choices in this election. McCain/Palin or BHO/Biden. One is less than ideal, the other is an unmitigated disaster. Thats all you need to know to make your choice.

ArmedBear · « **Reply #19 on:** September 27, 2008, 07:34:06 AM »

Quote

3.2 lbs of plutonium was just detonated over New York City.

In the big picture, and with the understanding that I surely don't wish harm on innocent people, I can come up with a list of upsides to that scenario. sad

...which is more than I can do with an Obama/Biden administration... shocked

Poper · « **Reply #20 on:** September 27, 2008, 09:05:23 AM »

Quote

3.2 lbs of plutonium was just detonated over New York City.

Wishful thinking.
Could it happen over San Francisco, too? shocked

Poper

ArmedBear · « **Reply #21 on:** September 27, 2008, 09:36:41 AM »

With New York, I was thinking it could save the taxpayer at least 700 Billion Dollars right now...

MechAg94 · « **Reply #22 on:** September 27, 2008, 12:52:34 PM »

I find it hard to fault Palin's experience without bringing Obama's experience in as a meter stick. I don't see where Palin comes out looking bad in that comparison. The only "experience" Obama has over Palin is he has been campaigning for President for a 18 months where she has only been on the circuit for a month. Obama himself cited that as a big part of his experience.

Monkeyleg · « **Reply #23 on:** September 27, 2008, 01:17:55 PM »

George Will isn't a Democrat, he's just part of the old Republican guard. It was only in recent years that he embraced the Second Amendment. He does have a keen mind, though, so his writings are worth following.

Obama has a talent for great oratory, provided he has the proper scripting. Palin has a similar ability to engage an audience, but needs coaching. If, at the outset, Katie Couric and the rest had asked the same types of questions of Obama as they're now asking of Palin, he would have imploded.

Sindawe · « **Reply #24 on:** September 27, 2008, 01:30:23 PM »

Quote

Palin's not quite ready for prime-time,...

We've had 40+ years of those who are "ready for prime-time", and look what it has wrought upon the republic. At this point Palin is the closest thing running to "leadership by the common folk" in the offering.

News:

Author Topic: Kathleen Parker, George Will suggest Palin step down (Read 17101 times)