Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Reports: McCain camp only starting to fully vet Palin now? Update: 25 people vetted her, says Team McCain

posted at 8:05 pm on September 1, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

True or not? I’ll give you the “facts” as I’ve collected them and let you decide for yourself.

1. A guy named Andrew Halcro claimed this morning that eight people from Team McCain are checked into the local hotel in Wasilla and are poring through records. Who’s Halcro? He’s the independent who lost the gubernatorial race to her two years ago, and who was quoted sneering at her inability to articulate coherent policies in this weekend’s NYT. Not worth believing, right?

2. Wrong. ABC and NBC are also reporting that McCain’s people are on their way up there to try to beat the press to any hidden dirt.

3. Marc Ambinder claims to know from sources inside the McCain campaign that they’ve already been blindsided by the fact that she requested earmarks as mayor of Wasilla, that she supports a windfall profits tax, and that she doesn’t believe in man-made global warming. I’m skeptical about the last two; her positions are easily researchable on Google, as is the fact that she initially supported the bridge to nowhere. But like I asked this morning, if they knew about the bridge reversal, why’d they let her tout it on Friday knowing that it’d end up being gotcha’d?

4. Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, told WaPo this weekend that none of the final VP contenders were vetted more or less than the others and that all of them were subjected to a records review and FBI background check. Minor problem: The FBI says it didn’t do a background check on Palin (or on any other candidate, for that matter). Maybe Davis meant a background check equivalent to what the FBI routinely does for government employees?

5. Mark Halperin’s asking a lot of unanswered questions here that make it sound like he already knows, or has reason to know, the answer to each one is “no.”

Maybe McCain does know all the dirt already, like he apparently knew about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy, and simply decided the upside was worth the risk. Or maybe he decided that since he was gambling the election by picking someone so inexperienced anyway, they might as well cut corners on the vetting on the assumption that there’s only so much trouble a hockey mom could have gotten herself into. I don’t think the public is so process-oriented that they’ll draw any sharp conclusions about his judgment in not fully vetting her; I think the risk is that she’ll die a death of a thousand cuts as the media exposes and then inflates a bunch of exceedingly venial sins (the Troopergate investigation being a notable exception), incorporating them into a larger narrative about how America can’t take a chance on a VP who might have outstanding parking tickets that no one even knows about. The point, in other words, isn’t to prove that she’s evil or corrupt, which she almost certainly isn’t; it’s simply to grasp at all available straws, no matter how short, and bundle them together in an “unknown quantity” narrative so that she’s perpetually on the defensive about such important matters as why she didn’t oppose the bridge to nowhere early enough. It’s the best possible contrast for Biden, too. Love him or loathe him, he’s been in D.C. since the Mesozoic Era. WYSIWYG. But Sarah Palin — did you know she served on the board of a 527 for Ted Stevens three years ago? Why, I’ll bet Joe Biden’s never even spoken to Ted Stevens.

Here’s the newest tidbit, straight out of the chute from ABC about a party Palin quit 12 years ago. Expect to hear the name “Robert Byrd” invoked tomorrow in the context of youthful political indiscretions subsequently forgiven by our progressive superiors. Exit question: Assuming, hypothetically, that I wanted to stop sniffing glue, this would be the wrong week for it, no?

Update: Politico puts it in perspective. The “ordinary gal” forcefield is a powerful shield indeed:

“Authenticity is the most important characteristic for someone seeking public office,” said Nick Ayers, executive director of the Republican Governors Association. “Any news that comes out about her is not going to hurt her because it reinforces the point that she is authentically one of us.”…

Even the governor’s own Troopergate scandal, in which Palin is alleged to have exerted undue pressure to fire a state trooper, is suffused with an element that many families can identify with: one sister stepping in on behalf of another in an acrimonious dispute with a brother-in-law.

Powerful media organizations are beginning to pour resources into this story, so much more damaging twists and turns may await. But assuming the accusations don’t grow more serious, it is of a considerably different nature as an abuse of power than the last Troopergate scandal to rock the political world — the one in which Bill Clinton was alleged to use his state troopers in Arkansas to procure women as sex partners. That wouldn’t excuse Palin’s actions, of course, but it would frame them in such a way that could limit the political damage.

Update: Team Maverick tries to soothe a jumpy blogger’s fraying nerves.

Steve Schmidt, a senior adviser, said the campaign always planned to send a “jump team” to the eventual running mate’s home state to work with the nominee’s staff, help with information requests from local and national reporters, and answer questions about documents that were part of the review.

Culvahouse said Palin’s review, like others, began with a team of two dozen people culling information from public sources. The team reviewed speeches, financial records, tax information, litigation, investigations, ethical charges, marriages and divorces, for a number of potential running mates.

For Palin specifically, the team studied online archives of the state’s largest newspapers, including the Anchorage Daily News, but didn’t request paper archives for Palin’s hometown newspaper for fear the secret review would become public…

Palin then was sent a personal data questionnaire with 70 “very intrusive” questions, Culvahouse said. She also was asked to submit a number of years of federal and state tax returns. The campaign also checked her credit.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10

Yeah, it does add up. I’m an independent thinker (actually a conservative libertarian, philosphically) and I believe in God.

I do NOT follow the party line. Never have, never will.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Which God?

FiveWays on September 1, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Yeah, it does add up. I’m an independent thinker (actually a conservative libertarian, philosphically) and I believe in God.

I do NOT follow the party line. Never have, never will.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Thought you were a deist Enos.

Deists are not evangelical so far as I understand the doctrine….

or is in your case deism code for “I don’t go to Church”?

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Yeah, it does add up. I’m an independent thinker (actually a conservative libertarian, philosphically) and I believe in God.

I do NOT follow the party line. Never have, never will.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Which Party?

FiveWays on September 1, 2008 at 10:54 PM

flush…

redrock on September 1, 2008 at 10:54 PM

Very obtuse of you William. I’d beg for an explanation, but I don’t have the brain cells or patience to watch you take twenty posts to make your point.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:52 PM

An eexplaination of what your trolling ? Your inability to accept someone simply because they are of a different gender ? Your ceaseless attacks with no facts and amatuer posturing ?

I dont debate someone who never intends to honestly debate.

William Amos on September 1, 2008 at 10:54 PM

young people getting knocked up and really screwing up their lives — not to mention the lives of those children.

But that’s the catch isn’t it? Some of us here aren’t willing to say Bristol and Levi have screwed up their lives. Or the life of their child. You’ve clearly plotted out a perfect plan for your daughters, one that you think will ensure their future happiness and doesn’t involve teenage pregnancy or teenage marriage. And good luck to you in keeping them on that path. You will probably find, however, that they have minds of their own. If you ever allow them to exercise any independence I suppose.

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Y’know, I was hard on AP for his statements. But thinking about it, he’s being cautious and he actually has made me think. Not necessarily about the issues or about McCain’s vetting process, but just that we are going to be experiencing more of this stuff.

If we have the information now, we’ll be fine, but even if we don’t, we’ll still be able to weather the storm.

I’ll admit, I was gaga on Palin, and even though the luster is off, I still think she was a really good pick. And the fact that all of this stuff is coming out, and that the left is really not handling this stuff in the expert way that the Clinton strategists would, encourages me.

Sakaki on September 1, 2008 at 10:55 PM

The only way to solve this is to replace the candidate at the top of the ticket.

If people weren’t worried that Mccain might die in office, this wouldn’t be an issue.

SaintOlaf on September 1, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM

Dude, you’re cool. Take your time – there’s plenty of it, and after this weeks convention we’ll all know more.

Some of the people you are bantering with have shown willful ignorance in the past, so don’t let that bug you. Just sayin’

Spirit of 1776 on September 1, 2008 at 10:56 PM

Exit question: Assuming, hypothetically, that I wanted to stop sniffing glue, this would be the wrong week for it, no?

hypothetically, it would be a bad week to quick amphetamines..

DaveC on September 1, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Very obtuse of you William. I’d beg for an explanation, but I don’t have the brain cells or patience to watch you take twenty posts to make your point.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:52 PM

An eexplaination of what your trolling ? Your inability to accept someone simply because they are of a different gender ? Your ceaseless attacks with no facts and amatuer posturing ?

I dont debate someone who never intends to honestly debate.

William Amos on September 1, 2008 at 10:54 PM

Now we’re projecting WAmos? How exactly is name calling honest debate? I’m sorry I’m not a professional poster like you.
As an aside, I never said anything about gender. You may infer or project it but last time I checked, you weren’t one of the voices in my head.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Personally, I do not take the level of outrage and upset that some, especially here at Hot Air, have taken over Gov Palin’s daughter. It isn’t so much that I’ve given up some fundamental part of me by any perceived dismissing of any bad behavior or lack of moral behavior.

Ok, she screwed up. But so what? What is she doing now to put it right? In my view, she, the daughter, is making it right. I sympathize with her because she has a long many years ahead of her in responsibility to raising her child. She’s made the first steps in that long road ahead of her.

If those of you who wish to remain completely, red-faced, teeth-grinding angry over any perceived hypocrisy on Palin’s part, fine. The rest of us have made out thoughts and decisions about it and moved on. In time, and maybe that time is shorter than you think, you’re prolonged contempt will be looked at quite a curious light. People may begin to wonder why you remain so upset and may think you have something to hide. I make no direct accusation at anyone, but we’ll see.

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Now we’re projecting WAmos? How exactly is name calling honest debate? I’m sorry I’m not a professional poster like you.
As an aside, I never said anything about gender. You may infer or project it but last time I checked, you weren’t one of the voices in my head.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Im sure there are many voices inside your head.

William Amos on September 1, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 10:55 PM

On topic and right on target.

myamphibian on September 1, 2008 at 11:00 PM

The only way to solve this is to replace the candidate at the top of the ticket.

If people weren’t worried that Mccain might die in office, this wouldn’t be an issue.

SaintOlaf on September 1, 2008 at 10:55 PM

Eanx, Terrye, et. al…
see what you freaks have done? You’ve tripped the DingBat Signal and the Four Horseman of the Apacalypse are now going to moderate all discussion on this thread. The social cons are now on high alert, thank you very much.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:00 PM

Eanx, Terrye, et. al…
see what you freaks have done? You’ve tripped the DingBat Signal and the Four Horseman of the Apacalypse are now going to moderate all discussion on this thread. The social cons are now on high alert, thank you very much.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:00 PM

there are social cons and there are social CONS….Huckadoodle to the rescue….

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:02 PM

What’s wrong with the AIP?

They’re sick of their state being mismanaged by the Feds and being denied access to their own huge resources – aka ANWR.
It’s like New York State watching the Federal Government draining New York Harbor to protect a species of clam.

Sounds like a reasonable argument to me…

TexasJew on September 1, 2008 at 11:04 PM

So seeing as you and the other liberals look the other way for men playing around on their wives, just what are you “suggesting”?

In your wonderful warm generous spirit, can you LOOK me in the eye and tell me you haven’t made mistakes no matter what wiser people than you told you to do?

I’m not a “liberal,” little shrew. Getting pregnant, or getting someone pregnant, is MORE than a mere mistake. If that wasn’t made clear to the child, then I guess I would have to question the parenting. What’s funny is you’re not. You’re giving them a free pass. What gives?

I find YOUR hypocrisy so blatant it takes my breath away.

What hypocrisy would that be?

Where is your much vaunted understanding of the human condition?

What a bunch of crap. What are you, a bleeding-heart?

Bristol Palin is 17 years old.

Cop out. She doesn’t understand that if she engages in sexual intercourse that she could end up pregnant?

What is the Latest Liberal Adulterer Edwards excuse and tell me how many lashes have you given him, since stoning this family seems to be the only thing good enough for the likes of you?

Noelie on September 1, 2008 at 10:50 PM

I make ZERO exuses for Edwards. He’s a schmuck and will reap what he sows. Nice Red Herring, by the way…

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:04 PM

DaveC on September 1, 2008 at 10:57 PM

LOL — or the wrong week to stop sniffing glue?

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Spirit of 1776 on September 1, 2008 at 10:56 PM
Appreciate the shout out, Sancho. There’s more Hot Air than usual from these T-Boone windmills.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Oh, damn… The person who Dave quoted already used glue! Phooey!

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

Enos you forgot a bracket or three….yeah you are the first “evangelical desit” I have ever seen.

It is your contention that somehow a young mother getting married and having a child is an affront to natural order?

A true desit would hardly think good men should take their direction on moral matters from the Federal government anyway….you seem more like a person who opts out of church rather than an adherent to the constructed universe by God the creator of creativity type to me….

I’m certain you’ll ignore a discussion on the finer points of Deism to keep evangelizing however.

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

Which Party?

FiveWays on September 1, 2008 at 10:54 PM

I’m speaking to you guys following the party line. I will never follow a party, hence never follow a party line.

You guys are defending the behavior that you would ridicule if the topic were simply about teen pregnancy in America…

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

If we can forgive Ronald Reagan for Patti Davis….

TexasJew on September 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

The Mighty AP asked that above..

DaveC on September 1, 2008 at 11:11 PM

eanax, it seems to me you are whining. The teen pregnancy horse is waaaaay out of the barn in 2008. If you can’t understand that, you need to get out more. We get it, it isn’t up to your highfalutin’ moral standards. But most of us live in the real world.

For what it’s worth, I am not too happy that this situation has come to light, because I have a 15 year old son and I DO preach abstinence with him. But you know, I told him about the Palins today and he said, ‘eh, what can you do? She’s 17.” Then he reminded me that I was a sophomore in college at 17.

By the way, the age of consent in Alaska is 16. So according to the laws of that state, she is NOT a child.

rockmom on September 1, 2008 at 11:13 PM

Allah..

this helps.. it’s not a Bible verse.. just for you to get through the week without resorting to glue or amphetamines..

[IF]

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream–and not make dreams your master,
If you can think–and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ‘em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on!”

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings–nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And–which is more–you’ll be a Man, my son!

–Rudyard Kipling

DaveC on September 1, 2008 at 11:13 PM

Enos you forgot a bracket or three….yeah you are the first “evangelical desit” I have ever seen.

It is your contention that somehow a young mother getting married and having a child is an affront to natural order?

A true desit would hardly think good men should take their direction on moral matters from the Federal government anyway….you seem more like a person who opts out of church rather than an adherent to the constructed universe by God the creator of creativity type to me….

I’m certain you’ll ignore a discussion on the finer points of Deism to keep evangelizing however.

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

How am I an “evangelical Deist”? Because I raised with moral parents who expected me to engage in behavior and conduct of a young adult. Someone who was to respect their rules, their house, and their reputations, and taught to have some self-respect for myself.

God forbid…

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:14 PM

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:10 PM

eanax,
I can see your point, although I wouldn’t touch it with a 10′ pole. To the others in the dogpile, make sure you’ve never cracked on Silky, Billy Jeff, the Other Spears, etc, etc. If you deride declining public morals, then debate the issue, don’t just pile on eanax because he’s making a point on one of our own.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:15 PM

eanax, it seems to me you are whining. The teen pregnancy horse is waaaaay out of the barn in 2008. If you can’t understand that, you need to get out more. We get it, it isn’t up to your highfalutin’ moral standards. But most of us live in the real world.

For what it’s worth, I am not too happy that this situation has come to light, because I have a 15 year old son and I DO preach abstinence with him. But you know, I told him about the Palins today and he said, ‘eh, what can you do? She’s 17.” Then he reminded me that I was a sophomore in college at 17.

By the way, the age of consent in Alaska is 16. So according to the laws of that state, she is NOT a child.

rockmom on September 1, 2008 at 11:13 PM

More excuses and lazy parenting. She is legally a child until the age of 18 years old. Her parents are responsible for her conduct and behavior until she reaches the age of 18. If she were to hurt someone in some fashion, say a car wreck, her parents could be sued as well because they are legally responsible for her behavior.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Your point is true. What are they all sweating a baby? One that gets to be born. This is a human interest story, a lifetime for women, we, oxygen channel story, that women love. This isn’t a negative…this is human life and that life is going to make it’s way into the world. Obama’s mother had him when she was 18 years old, and married Obama’s father, he was born 6 months later. Who is holding this 17 year old up to perfect standards? Is this a Disney story? No it is real life. We are all fallible human beings, I am beginning to wonder at the ages of some of the people posting on this topic, how much life experience they have?

Dr Evil on September 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

This is easily the most disjointed comment section I have seen in all my natural born days.

SlimyBill on September 1, 2008 at 11:18 PM

More excuses and lazy parenting. She is legally a child until the age of 18 years old. Her parents are responsible for her conduct and behavior until she reaches the age of 18.

Are you a parent?

Slublog on September 1, 2008 at 11:20 PM

Dr Evil on September 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

Should we write a script to include our life-experience bio? Maybe we could up load to HA and they can rank us on how much crap we’ve done, how much crap we’ve experienced, or how much crap we’ve dished out. Then would it be appropriate to voice an opinion?

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:20 PM

To the others in the dogpile, make sure you’ve never cracked on Silky, Billy Jeff, the Other Spears, etc, etc. If you deride declining public morals, then debate the issue, don’t just pile on…

Someone will have to explain how a 17 and 18 year old’s pregnancy/marriage is an example of “public morals”.

John Edwards (Silky) ran for President while concealing an affair and playing on the public’s sympathy with his sick wife. Clinton lied under oath about his affair while President. It’s completely fair to criticize the behavior of elected officials or those seeking office. And many on the right have had plenty to say negatively about Larry Craig and David Vitter and Mark Foley and a host of other Republicans. What does that have to do with a 17 year old girl and her 18 year old boyfriend?

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:21 PM

Dr Evil on September 1, 2008 at 11:17 PM

I’ve taken the Bill Cosby approach to parenting. Before you have kids, you have the ability to be intellectual about children and how they are raised. When you actually have kids, you stop being intellectual!

That is one way I look at this whole discussion.

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 11:22 PM

He mentioned DailyKos, which, according to O’R is the worst, most vile website out there. (I happen to agree that it is among the most vile on the left, in equal par with racial hate groups.) He tore into the D.K. for permitting the advancement of the Preggo-Gate garbage. He laid into all those Democratic polticians who went to the Kos convention last year and how the Dems need to stop placating to the likes of Kos.

In essence, he thought the whole story over Palin hiding her daughter’s pregnancy is among the lowest things that have ever happened in a presidential race in history. I understand what he means, but I’m sure it’s been the worst. I would agree it is among the worst.

He did, however, think that the related story of her 17 year old daughter actually being pregnant was news worthy, but not related to the above at all.

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 10:33 PM

thanks! I’m glad to hear he covered it. I hope lots of folks listened while they were driving to barbques etc.

funky chicken on September 1, 2008 at 11:24 PM

Someone will have to explain how a 17 and 18 year old’s pregnancy/marriage is an example of “public morals”.

John Edwards (Silky) ran for President while concealing an affair and playing on the public’s sympathy with his sick wife. Clinton lied under oath about his affair while President. It’s completely fair to criticize the behavior of elected officials or those seeking office. And many on the right have had plenty to say negatively about Larry Craig and David Vitter and Mark Foley and a host of other Republicans. What does that have to do with a 17 year old girl and her 18 year old boyfriend?

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:21 PM

It should be self evident. Also, as such, why did McCain et. al. feel the need to get in front of it? Everyone should have kept it a non-issue. By projecting this family out there, it’s become public indeed.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:24 PM

How am I an “evangelical Deist”? Because I raised with moral parents who expected me to engage in behavior and conduct of a young adult. Someone who was to respect their rules, their house, and their reputations, and taught to have some self-respect for myself.

God forbid…

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:14 PM

No Enos the mistake you are making as a “deist” is the desire to inflict your personal morality on your fellow man when it does not hurt the natural law. The natural law would be broken if the community were burdened with a parentless child, the natural law would be broken if this were a rape, the natural law is not broken however if this remains an internal family matter. Historical desits did their best to lead and live an example for their fellow man but were not in the business of castigating people for not meeting their own values…at least not in public.

That is what leads me to believe you are maybe a baptist or [ossibly a pentecostal who has decided you don’t need Church. Deism is based upon the supremacy of reason vis a vis doctrinal spiritualism and I can find no logical flaw in the bahvior of SARAH PALIN though her daughter and will/would be son-in-law may well be another issue. Sarah has faced the reality “God” has confronted her with applied her mind to task arrived at a solution that meets natural law and continues on with her toil on this mortal coil.

I applaud your personal moral perfection, and am in awe of your ability to love the Palins lives for them if you are truly what you claim. Morality to classical deists was a private matter between God and man God not being a doctrinal being but a force. This force is reason, but by its very nature reason is a personal matter.

The desim I have read, and have heard tell of would have you refusing to interact with them, possibly speaking ill of their decisions in public, arguably consoling them to use better judgement but not castigating them in public.

Happily await a reply,
sven

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Before I get burned at the stake, let me explain my position. I think the media and left are way off base. With that said, now that this is public, the RNC has two options. Define it or bury it. In defining it they must apply consistency or the left and some within our party will scream rank hypocrisy. If they bury it and do a Move-on, they better shore up their flanks and change the subject quick.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:30 PM

t should be self evident. Also, as such, why did McCain et. al. feel the need to get in front of it? Everyone should have kept it a non-issue. By projecting this family out there, it’s become public indeed.

But that isn’t what you said. You said that public morals were at issue and implied that if we criticized Bill Clinton or John Edwards we had no business defending Bristol Palin. So how is her behavior an example of public morals? What office are we entrusting her with?

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

What does that have to do with a 17 year old girl and her 18 year old boyfriend?

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:21 PM

Nothing at all. Those politicians you named were just a sorry collection of slimy middle-aged pervs.

TexasJew on September 1, 2008 at 11:33 PM

What office are we entrusting her with?

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

+1 because from what I am looking at I am getting a decided “get Palin by hook or by crook or by inconsistent standards” vibe….

Ted Kennedy had a nephew he did some personally repulsive things with eh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Kennedy_Smith

or is the demand for “surrounded by moral paragons and perfection” a one way street?

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:35 PM

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

I didn’t say defining her, I’m referring to piling on eanax for his point. Some on the right have made great hay with declining morals vis. the younger Spears, Hannah Montana, etc. etc. Although I don’t think it’s called for, he seems to be making a point on republican consistency. Like I said, I would not go there, but I can see and appreciate the point. Also, that is the rub about politics….. character assassination occurs on both sides.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:40 PM

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM

I didn’t say defining her, I’m referring to piling on eanax for his point. Some on the right have made great hay with declining morals vis. the younger Spears, Hannah Montana, etc. etc. Although I don’t think it’s called for, he seems to be making a point on republican consistency. Like I said, I would not go there, but I can see and appreciate the point. Also, that is the rub about politics….. character assassination occurs on both sides.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:40 PM

Enos can believe as he will I am just curious as to why he is seemingly mislabeling his beliefs.

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:41 PM

Allah, the ready, fire, aim of this post is causing more harm than helping. You appear to stoke the rumor fires, and the downer tone of the posts reflecting it. What’s up with your ax on Palin? Take a breath and get your facts straight the first time or get Ed back at the helm.

EyesOpen on September 1, 2008 at 11:44 PM

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:41 PM

I obviously can’t help you out cause we Mormons are too myopic for other’s views on deity.

Joking aside, I don’t want to project for eanax, I was just trying to throw him a preserver. I thought he might have more to say is all.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:46 PM

Allah, the ready, fire, aim of this post is causing more harm than helping. You appear to stoke the rumor fires, and the downer tone of the posts reflecting it. What’s up with your ax on Palin? Take a breath and get your facts straight the first time or get Ed back at the helm.

EyesOpen on September 1, 2008 at 11:44 PM

I was just thinking the same thing. His pessimism is affecting him professionally.

Where’s Ed? We need a pick-me-up!

fossten on September 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

I obviously can’t help you out cause we Mormons are too myopic for other’s views on deity.

Joking aside, I don’t want to project for eanax, I was just trying to throw him a preserver. I thought he might have more to say is all.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:46 PM

heh….

I like Mormons joined the army with a good friend of mine back in HS who was a mormon combat engineer….good hard man.

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:52 PM

Now we’re projecting WAmos? How exactly is name calling honest debate? I’m sorry I’m not a professional poster like you.
As an aside, I never said anything about gender. You may infer or project it but last time I checked, you weren’t one of the voices in my head.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 10:57 PM

Im sure there are many voices inside your head.

William Amos on September 1, 2008 at 10:59 PM

We love you too Willie.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:53 PM

Some on the right have made great hay with declining morals vis. the younger Spears, Hannah Montana, etc. etc. Although I don’t think it’s called for, he seems to be making a point on republican consistency.

Well it might be all of a piece, I agree. Maybe the sexualization of children, the anything goes culture, etc., all has something to do with supposedly declining moral standards. I’m not really qualified to say.

I don’t even know who Hannah Montana is and as far as I know the Spears girl married the father of her child and to the extent there was a lot of commenting on her it probably had more to do with her being in the public eye and could be seen as some kind of role model. That can hardly be said of Bristol Palin at the time she got pregnant. She is a role model now though, I suppose, about what to do when you’re 17 and do get pregnant. And I don’t see anything to criticize there.

Governor Palin needs to get out in front of the news media, she needs to get the focus on her, on her positions, on what she intends to do to help the ticket get elected. Forget the hurricane, we’re all one country hooplah. Start running and running hard. And the McCain people definitely need to get somebody better than that yahoo Tucker Bounds to front these stories. He was horrible on CNN tonight.

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:54 PM

heh….

I like Mormons joined the army with a good friend of mine back in HS who was a mormon combat engineer….good hard man.

sven10077 on September 1, 2008 at 11:52 PM

I hope I haven’t detracted from his example too much. Thanks for the discussing. Have to get up early and go work like a good little evil-Republican. Have a good one.

Cold Steel on September 1, 2008 at 11:57 PM

Ed, if he’s smart, is sleeping. He needs to rest for the fun packed day ahead with a (hopefully) regular convention day. So you’ll have to wait for your uplifting tomorrow! :)

Weebork on September 1, 2008 at 11:57 PM

EyesOpen on September 1, 2008 at 11:44 PM

Thanks for the accurate observation. This has nothing to do with not reporting on this news, as some are trying to rephrase the original observation.

wise_man on September 1, 2008 at 11:57 PM

Bennett on September 1, 2008 at 11:54 PM
I agree with your points. This is just another scorched earth initiative by the left. We shouldn’t be the least bit surprised, I’m assuming McCain and Palin aren’t. McCain needs to let it be known that when he reaches across the aisle in January, it’s going to be with a hammer. What will help them is a consistent message based on Palin’s life-experience. Honest and real people, compassionate and caring people will see this for what it’s worth.

Cold Steel on September 2, 2008 at 12:01 AM

More excuses and lazy parenting. She is legally a child until the age of 18 years old.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:16 PM

I have 2 teenage daughters (13,15)and though they have been informed on the perils of teenage pregnancy and my views on the subject as a whole,the best case is that my grandpa years are sometime in the future,but I’m not blind to the facts of raging hormones…seems I was once a teenager.I can assure at this minute that their virtue is intact…but damned if that thing called dating,phoning,blushing doesn’t soon raise its ugly head.I would hope that they will make the right decisions.I for one has hoped for the return of the petticoat but it aint happening.
The calling out of the Palins as moral hypocrites based on a teenage pregnancy in their family is the stupidityof someone who either has no children,never will have children or has children that will never live up to his(her)expectations….either way still makes you a miserable person.

raceroh on September 2, 2008 at 12:03 AM

Will you support efforts to raise or lower the mandatory age of education? Why or why not?
JB: No.
SPalin: No, again, parents know better than government what is best for their children.

http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:06 AM

Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?
JB: We should always encourage parents to participate in the curricula decisions of our school.
SP: Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.

same link

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:07 AM

Will you support an effort to expand hate-crime laws?
JB: No.
SPalin: No, as I believe all heinous crime is based on hate.
same link

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:07 AM

Do you support the expansion of gambling in Alaska?
JB: No.
SP: No, in so many cases, gambling has shown ill effects on families and as Governor I would not propose expansion legislation.

same link

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:08 AM

7. Do you support statewide restrictions on the use of eminent domain to transfer property from one private owner to another?
JB: Yes.
SP: Yes.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:08 AM

Do you support parental choice in the spending of state educational dollars?
JB: As it relates to home schooling, we should give parents options in program spending.
SP: Within Alaska law, I support parents deciding what is the best education venue for their child.

http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/2006/07/2006-gubernatorial-candidate.html

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:09 AM

It keeps getting better and better:

9. Do you support legislation requiring labor unions to obtain permission from their members before using dues for political purposes?
JB: No Response
SP: Yes, unions represent their workers and as such, should be accountable to them

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:10 AM

12. In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?
JB: I will always support and work to strengthen families.
SP: 1. Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children.
2. Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our constitution.
3. Cracking down on the things that harm family life: gangs, drug use, and infringement of our liberties including attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:10 AM

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
JB: No.
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:11 AM

More excuses and lazy parenting. She is legally a child until the age of 18 years old.

eanax on September 1, 2008 at 11:16 PM

In Alaska the age of consent is 16 thus she can marry at 16

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:12 AM

11. Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
JB: No.
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:11 AM

Ouch. She doesn’t know…?

In 1954, Congress added the words ‘under God’ to the Pledge.

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:18 AM

And 25 people agreed that she should accept a position on a national campaign while her 17 year old daughter was five months pregnant?

Some vetting!

skylark on September 2, 2008 at 12:20 AM

And 25 people agreed that she should accept a position on a national campaign while her 17 year old daughter was five months pregnant?

Some vetting!

skylark on September 2, 2008 at 12:20 AM

Exactly!

barry norris on September 2, 2008 at 12:21 AM

Ouch. She doesn’t know…?

In 1954, Congress added the words ‘under God’ to the Pledge.

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:18 AM

Ouch…We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness……

…And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Now do you understand why we added Under God in 1954?

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:23 AM

No, John McCain made that decision, as he has said already.

And the thing about the Pledge of Allegiance came out already.

rockmom on September 2, 2008 at 12:24 AM

And 25 people agreed that she should accept a position on a national campaign while her 17 year old daughter was five months pregnant?

Some vetting!

skylark on September 2, 2008 at 12:20 AM

What does a 17 year old adult’s decsion to have sex and carry a baby to term and get married have to do with the VP?

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:25 AM

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:18 AM

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

God was a very important part of the lives of the Founding Fathers

Loxodonta on September 2, 2008 at 12:26 AM

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:23 AM

Sorry to step on your post. I’m an old man and slow at keyboarding.

Loxodonta on September 2, 2008 at 12:28 AM

Everyone just needs to relax…they said they did a credit check!!

120pages on September 2, 2008 at 12:30 AM

Everyone just needs to relax…they said they did a credit check!!

More proof she’s evil! She could have afforded condoms! /nutroots off

Spirit of 1776 on September 2, 2008 at 12:34 AM

Sorry to step on your post. I’m an old man and slow at keyboarding.

Loxodonta on September 2, 2008 at 12:28 AM

no problem….All my spelling mistakes and grammer just means I type to fast and don’t take the time to proofread. But it was nice to see that others get what Palin was trying to say also.

Also Alaska is only 50 years into a statehood s(1959) so she could be 100% factually correct with her statement. The founding fathers of her state most likely voted for the statement to be included…

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:35 AM

More proof she’s evil! She could have afforded condoms! /nutroots off

Spirit of 1776 on September 2, 2008 at 12:34 AM

who says the daughter wasn’t on birth control? condems break,The Pill is 92-99.7% effective as birth control.(http://www.fwhc.org/birth-control/thepill.htm) Other methods of birth control can fail also. People are assuming that Bristol did not use birth control we do not know. Hell maybe she planned to getwith child, maybe the couple wanted children. We have no idea. this lurch to think it was an unplanned, accident because of not using the proper controls speaks of the fallacy of the LEFT.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:39 AM

….We have no idea…unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:39 AM

I know. This is a topic best left to the family.

this lurch to think it was an unplanned, accident because of not using the proper controls speaks of the fallacy of the LEFT.

Yes

Spirit of 1776 on September 2, 2008 at 12:41 AM

Everyone just needs to relax…they said they did a credit check!!

120pages on September 2, 2008 at 12:30 AM

Good thing too, before Chuck Schumer illegally accesses her credit report.

rockmom on September 2, 2008 at 12:44 AM

Ouch…We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness……

…And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Now do you understand why we added Under God in 1954?

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:23 AM

I don’t have a problem with your explanation. I guess Allah’s pessimism was starting to affect me. I am now back on track.

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:48 AM

I am a little disturbed about her involvement with the AIP.

I don’t feel comfortable with Loons within States, like the Far Left in Vermont and The Far Right in Alaska, who want to succeed from The Union.

Call me crazy but….it’s disturbing and if someone on The Left did that we’d be all over them.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:50 AM

I don’t have a problem with your explanation. I guess Allah’s pessimism was starting to affect me. I am now back on track.

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:48 AM

Allah’s in the tank for BHO. why i don’t know but you can see it in his writings. I take anything Allah says anymore with a grain of salt.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:52 AM

I was just thinking the same thing. His pessimism is affecting him professionally.

Where’s Ed? We need a pick-me-up!

fossten on September 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM

You guys need to stop only wanting to hear the yeses, sometimes there are some nos and no thank yous. Allah isn’t a partisan hack, Thank God.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:55 AM

fossten on September 2, 2008 at 12:48 AM

more on this from Redstate

Andrew, again, has not done his homework. The question was about the “under God” phrase, which, as historians of the American founding note, was added to the Pledge by Congress in 1954 precisely because it was uttered on several occasions by none other than George Washington, including this historically important moment:

The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of brave resistance, or the most abject submission. We have, therefore, to resolve to conquer or die.

Address to the Continental Army before the Battle of Long Island (27 August 1776)

So, the journalism B.A. from the University of Idaho beats the Harvard Ph.D. (in political philosophy) yet again.

http://www.redstate.com/

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:55 AM

Allah’s in the tank for BHO. why i don’t know but you can see it in his writings. I take anything Allah says anymore with a grain of salt.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:52 AM

Oh God please not that tired explanation…LOL.

Get a new line, please.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:56 AM

great article from the TImes of London:

At the age of 10, Sarah Palin got her very own bunny rabbit. Which means to say that she crouched down in the grass outside her family home, aimed her shotgun and blew its furry little head off. That’s how things work in Alaska. You kill stuff. You freeze it. You turn it into stew.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4656243.ece

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:57 AM

great article from the TImes of London:

At the age of 10, Sarah Palin got her very own bunny rabbit. Which means to say that she crouched down in the grass outside her family home, aimed her shotgun and blew its furry little head off. That’s how things work in Alaska. You kill stuff. You freeze it. You turn it into stew.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4656243.ece

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:57 AM

And into a nice fur muff. Like the fur better than the stew….

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:59 AM

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:50 AM

I don’t know that Alaska independence was their goal when Palin was involved, and she left the organization a long time ago.

Loxodonta on September 2, 2008 at 12:59 AM

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:56 AM

You may not see it and it may not be there and you may be correct.

However, I see a basis in favor of BHO. It could be just a urban vs country thing but I have noticed over the last couple of months more often. Esp. when McCain starts to pick up in the polls.

unseen on September 2, 2008 at 12:59 AM

unseen,

That’s why a PhD is affectionately referred to as standing for “Piled higher and Deeper”

:)

Weebork on September 2, 2008 at 1:00 AM

Personally, Scarlet, I don’t give a damn.
I’m voting for McCain/Palin.
This whole thread makes me want to take a shower.
It’s voyeuristic, to say the least.

And Allah, I’ve been a fan of your since your allahpundit-is-in-the-house days, but this is really mierda.
We have over 2 months to sort this all out, and lots of Joe Biden Tourette’s outbursts to enjoy.

Goodnight.

TexasJew on September 2, 2008 at 1:00 AM

Call me crazy but….it’s disturbing and if someone on The Left did that we’d be all over them.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:50 AM

Jim Jeffords and Bernie Sanders get a pass and they get their support.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:02 AM

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:50 AM

Down here in Texas, folks who want to secede from the US are called…. Texans. Before the Civil War botched it all up, nullifying the original agreement, Texas’ original agreement to enter the USA as a state was that if the lege down here agreed to it, we could split into 5 states.

Believe me, if the Feds did down here what they’ve done to the poor people in Alaska, we’d be seceding like crazy.

TexasJew on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 AM

Jim Jeffords and Bernie Sanders get a pass and they get their support.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:02 AM

Not me, I never gave any of them a pass. Those who choose to succeed from this country can succeed right into hell as far as I’m concerned.

Bastards.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 1:06 AM

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 12:50 AM

Down here in Texas, folks who want to secede from the US are called…. Texans. Before the Civil War botched it all up, nullifying the original agreement, Texas’ original agreement to enter the USA as a state was that if the lege down here agreed to it, we could split into 5 states.

Believe me, if the Feds did down here what they’ve done to the poor people in Alaska, we’d be seceding like crazy.

TexasJew on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 AM

And what’s Vermont’s excuse?

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 1:07 AM

TexasJew on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 AM

Sorry – I disagree with you on succession, united we stand divided we fall is still good enough for me.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 1:09 AM

McCain made his first big decision as president, so to speak, and it was a huge HUGE error. If this nice lady was watching her kids the way my wife watches MY teenage daughters, there would be no little suprises. Children, including teenagers, need full-time mothers. Somebody has to say it.

And he had some real winners to choose from starting with Mitt Romney. What a mistake. I always knew this guy, from his long sordid past, would be a lousy president. This proves it.

Obama’s judgement isnt any worse than this. I think I am voting for Obama.

Roger Waters on September 2, 2008 at 1:09 AM

I’m still voting for McCain becuase I suspect by the end of the week Palin will be off the ticket.

AprilOrit on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 AM

Comment pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10


You must be logged in to post a comment.