What Palin Means

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

She wasn't McCain's first pick. He wanted Joe Lieberman because Joe was safe and would burnish his "reputation" for being bi-partisan -- who better to do that than an Independent and Former Democrat. There's some logic to that; as much as we despise Lieberman around here, he would have been a formidable running mate and sent a message to swing voters.

But there's an alternate logic. That being the McCain can overcome attempts by the Democrats to paint him as the Bush Administration cabana boy, and that his "maverick" label will resonate with enough voters to get by -- particularly after they unleash a torrent of scurrilous attacks on Barak Obama. Between raising enough questions about Obama's fitness for office and pushing their reliable, albeit tarnished, brand, Republicans think they can win.

Except.

Fundamentalists hate McCain. Really, really hate him. Forget that McCain has repudiated every centrist position he's ever taken -- they're not foolish enough to think that the leopard has changed his spots. In order to avoid having the religious right stay on the sidelines, McCain needed something to get them into the game.

That something would be picking a hard-core right-wing conservative fundamentalist to be his running mate. Given the opportunity to put one of their own a failing heartbeat away from the Presidency, fundamentalists will come out in droves to support her. And then pray that McCain dies on January 22, 2009.

Now we know the strategy of the Republican ticket. McCain is going to be pushing his non-partisan, maverick image while Palin will be doing church meetings all around the country. They're going to keep Palin away from the mainstream media to prevent her from speaking in tongues and scaring the hell out of moderate voters. And they're going to get ugly as hell in their attacks on Obama. Screw the big tent and ever getting the black vote -- they want to keep power.

What do we do?

Push back on Palin's religious extremism. Don't worry too much about offending the values voters -- I go to church every Sunday and I can tell you that this woman is a nut who I wouldn't want anywhere near the nuclear button. Even religious voters recognize a headcase when they see one.

Push back on Palin's inexperience. Those all-important swing voters tend to be practical and pragmatic; they know that McCain is old that there's a good chance he won't survive his first term (statistically speaking, a 72-year-old has a 30% chance of dying before reaching the age of 76). Do you want the former mayor of Wasilla, AK to be in charge of national security?

Push back on Palin's political corruption and lying. Using her powers to conduct personal vendetta's against her enemies; lying about being opposed to pork-barrel spending; leaving her town $20 million in debt. Draw parallels between Palin and the Bush Administration.

And, of course Tie McCain to the Bush Administration. McCain felt it necessary to denounce the last eight years in his acceptance speech. We need to constantly remind people that McCain supported every disastrous policy of the Bush Administration and, to this date, has NEVER said what he would have done, or will do, differently.

We can beat this guy, but it's not going to be as easy as many people thought.

[speedoo]

1. Recommended.

Excellent post. And I'm happy to report that the MSM is actually going after Palin. In today's NY Daily News, pages 4-5 was all negative on Palin, including the poll that shows half the country believes she's not qualified, and the lies being told by her and McCain about the sale of the jet.

The sharks are circling Palin.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

2. That woman cost me $50

I made a bet here on DU that she would drop out by 6:00 p.m. yesterday. She didn't, so I'm out $50.

Of course, the bet stipulated that the $50 take the form of a campaign contribution to Obama -- so it's all good.

I'm getting more interested in this missing $35 million from the state fund and the fact that the ex-husband of the woman in charge (and a friend of Sarah) hurriedly tried to have his divorce record sealed. These people bought a lot of properties with the Palins -- did they use somebody else's money to do that? And are there smoking guns hidden in that divorce file?

We'll see.

I don't care about her affairs or her knocked-up kid. Official corruption is the key to undoing her.

[Boz]

5. Its all In Vegas July 26-30th 2008, The money, The Oil, The Choice, The Ebay Plane The Failed Bank,

The Drilling stance change in McCain, The trips to Russia with easy guns, the Georgian uprising, its all tied into the weekend of July 26-31st in Las Vegas, Im trying to put it all together in a cohesive narative, you can see all the pieces I have uncovered inclding the land deals the "hunting" charters to russia the Ebay plane and its pilot and much more in my post over the last 48 hours.

Its in there, its just so many details to put in the timeline and explain.

[speedoo]

8. Missing $35 million?

That's a new one to me. Got any links?

[Boz]

9. Its not "Missing" The details of who the payouts went to were destroyed in a data loss

So a 35 Billion with a B fund that was over seen by Sarah Palins campaign finance person who she placed in charge of the fund when she became governor

Paid out moneys to Alskans as the fund was set up to do, BUT THERE IS NO RECORD OF WHO GOT PAID WHAT THEY GOT PAID AND WHEN THEY GOT PAID.

This is the same woman who is at the heart of the Divorce that been swirling around.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

11. Thanks for the correction...

But if they can't prove who got paid and how much they received, I would say that constitutes the definition of "missing." I mean, with $35 billion (and that's a big correction on your part - thanks again), even a small amount of that falling into the couch cushions is going to be a lot of money to account for.

1% of $35 billion = $350 million

[speedoo]

14. Thanks. I had seen that, very troubling. nt

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

10. Look in the Richter threads in this forum

Basic Story:

The Richters are friends and business partners of the Palins. Together they bought a lot of undeveloped real estate in Alaska.

An old friend and political aide of Sarah Palin's started dating Mrs. Richter at a time when her marriage was starting to unravel. Mrs. Richter, who was Palin's campaign treasurer, was put in charge of a fund that gets paid out to Alaskans every year (oil money).

The Richter's divorced and Palin's longtime friend and aide found himself fired because Scott Palin was pissed that he was messing around with his buddy's wife.

Meanwhile, $35 million in the Alaska fund goes missing and nobody seems to be able to locate it.

Meanwhile, Richter goes to a judge early this week, desperately trying to get his divorce papers sealed.

Evidence of illegal activity in the firing of Sarah's friend? Evidence of illegal activity regarding the fund? Shady real estate deals (ironic, no?)

We'll see...

[speedoo]

15. Thanks. Good summary, except for the missing $35 million.

As you have noted, that's incorrect. But the missing documentation on the payouts is very troubling.

[CrispyQ]

3. Great post.

K&R

[Frank Cannon]

4. She reminds me of the Martin Sheen character in "The Dead Zone"

in high heels.

I never believed for a minute that GWB was a "born-again Christian". I think he laughs at the fundies behind closed doors. But I have no doubt that she really believes their horseshit.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

6. She's Creepy...

If we can get Swing Voters to feel that way about her, then the McCain Campaign is toast.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. Yes, I completely agree. I just sent this email response to...

a typical right-wing FUNDIE email bashing Obama:

I think for many on this list, moral character outweighs issues. When it comes to issues, once in office -- because the system itself needs to be drastically reformed at its core before those in office can DO anything differently -- there isn't a whole lot of difference (if you ignore what some view as starting a war of choice based on false pretenses and pesky things like that).

So, if we're going to be honest -- and, please, let's be brutally honest here rather than gloss over the truth with distractions and innuendo -- it comes down to how you feel about candidates, how you "relate" to them, what type of moral fiber he/she may have.


One of the reasons I won't be voting for McCain-Palin is because neither shares MY idea of family values. Like most who put themselves on a moral pedestal (and, come on, that's largely the territory of the right; other than Edwards, most on the left don't put themselves on a moral pedestal because they know that, like their brothers and sisters on the right, they'll likely be knocked off. It's the hypocrisy, Stupid), I think their family values are a sham.

McCain-Palin have knowingly and strategically thrown their own children under the campaign bus.

We know Palin threw Bristol under the bus by surprising her with a place on the national stage, with no advance notice (the children were told they were attending a surprise anniversary party for their parents), as she copes with a personal drama. There was no reason to do that to Bristol, not in that way, at that time. As a mother, I can't conceive of putting my child through that. I am certainly not judging Bristol nor her parents with regard to her pregnancy -- I'm not judging it one way or another, as it is a personal family matter. I will suggest that you imagine the response by moral conservatives if this were Chelsea Clinton at 17, even if she planned to marry the father of the baby. Be honest.

Some of us may have forgotten that McCain has thrown his daughter, Bridget, under the Straight Talk Express by pandering to those who were afraid of his "black child" back in 2000. He is courting these same people as his base. He is pandering to them by keeping her as invisible as possible. How often has anyone seen Bridget, the adopted daughter from Bangladesh, for the last eight years? Not much; granted, it's probably for her sanity as much as anything, but still....

What kind of father or mother "makes nice" with the very people who destroyed them back in 2000 (The Bush crowd led by Rove) and, more importantly, ATTACKED THEIR CHILD, all for the sake of politics, and now is seeking support from the people who were frightened or repulsed by this same child in 2000.

That is unforgivable.

If that is the new brand of "conservative" Republicans, that is pitiful, especially since they are far from conservative (both Bushes were the least fiscally conservative presidents once in office, away from the campaign stump).

For those of you who were turned off by the idea of McCain having a "black child" back in 2000 -- and perhaps still today -- I urge you to be honest about it. Don't disguise your hatred and fear of Obama in all the other BS going around. Aren't you the type of people who have always been proud of "calling a spade a spade," "call 'em like you see 'em" and all that? Hey, I applaud honesty and transparency, and I don't think we'll get far as a country if we keep pussyfooting around what's really going on. Isn't it the "wuss liberals" you have always chastised as being "politically correct"? Why are you being politically correct now? I grew up around people who are proud to be known as a racist, yet suddenly they're silent, and they saying, "Oh, it's his name, " or "oh, I think he's a closet muslim." What???? Just say you don't want him in the White House because he's BLACK and you're afraid he will "get back at white people" in some way. Be honest for cryin' out loud. Geesh.

Not that many are interested in facts nowadays, as this is more an emotional choice as noted above, but just FYI with regard to the initial email comparing the candidates:

First, Obama's name is spelled "Barack." It lends more credibility to the neutrality of information if the candidates names are all spelled correctly. ;) You should have just inserted "Obama Bin Laden" as you really wanted to.

[Honeycombe8]

12. I think you're wrong about the religious voters. They're ecstatic & will vote for her no matterwhat

Maybe your church is different; I'm talking about the far right group. They are glad to FINALLY have their grip back on the Repub Party, and they looooove that gun-totin', Bible-thumpin', insult-givin, pit bull more than they can say.

They're the ONLY ones who seem to love her. But they are important to the Repubs.

The other Repubs will fall in line, like they always do. Like they did the last 2 elections when the evangelicals were running the show. They will go along with any social issue stance as long as they get their tax cuts.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

13. Not all religious voters are the same...

Mainline Protestant and most Catholic voters are not going to be swayed by Palin. When I talk about conservative evangelicals, I'm talking about 15-20% of the voting public. And you're right, they're in love with Palin and nothing you say to them will change their minds.

But for moderate and liberal religious voters, people like Palin give them the creeps. Don't worry about offending them if you attack Palin as an extremist. In fact the Matthew 25 PAC -- a group of liberal religious voters, has already attacked Palin for lying in her acceptance speech.

[Honeycombe8]

16. Cool. Glad to hear that. nt

[terrya]

17. Excellent post. Number 3 ties directly in with the message of change.

What have the past 8 years been? Nothing but corruption and lying elevated to an art form. Sarah Palin is exactly, exactly more of the same.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

18. She's a fake reformer

Overturned the old corrupt political regime and established a new corrupt political regime.