Report: McCain, Palin at odds over how hard to hit Obama
posted at 6:13 pm on October 11, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s too thinly sourced to be taken very seriously, but since our readership revels in the idea of the ‘Cuda being the scrapper to McCain’s squish, I figured you’d dig it.
The bit about Mark Salter does strike me as plausible.
With his electoral prospects fading by the day, Senator John McCain has fallen out with his vice-presidential running mate about the direction of his White House campaign…
Mark Salter, McCain’s long-serving chief of staff, is understood to have told campaign insiders that he would prefer his boss, a former Vietnam prisoner of war, to suffer an “honourable defeat” rather than conduct a campaign that would be out of character – and likely to lose him the election.
Palin, 44, has led the character attacks on Obama in the belief that McCain may be throwing away the election and her chance of becoming vice-president. Her supporters think that if the Republican ticket loses on November 4, she should run for president in 2012…
A McCain official confirmed that there was dissension in the campaign. “There is always going to be a debate about the costs and benefits of any strategy,” he said.
“After November 4, the feelings of individuals will come to light. It is only natural and will be expected.”…
A spokesman for McCain denied he and Palin had fallen out over her aggressive attacks. “Vice-presidential candidates are typically the tip of the spear and further out in front than the candidate for president. This is pretty standard fare,” he said.
Quoth an unnamed Republican consultant: “Sarah Palin is no fool. She sees the same thing [i.e. a likely defeat] and wants to salvage what she can. She is positioning herself for the future. Her best days could be in front of her. She wants to look as though she was the fighter, the person with the spunk who was out there taking it to the Democrats.” Any reason to believe that she and McCain really are at loggerheads? Well, (a) as the Times reminds us, she’s publicly questioned the campaign’s strategy in pulling out of Michigan as well as McCain’s decision not to go after Obama on Wright, (b) while Maverick’s begun inching away from the brass knuckles approach, she’s still telling people how eager the base is to see them take the gloves off, and (c) she’s famous in Alaska for not deferring to her political patrons when she thinks there’s something to be gained from opposing them. She’s built her career on it. If she wants to go out there and take it to Obama, there’s not much McCain can do except scream at her on the phone and hope she listens.
Exit question one: Is McCain’s attempt at calming the crowd yesterday the first inkling of the Salter “strategy” being put into effect? It’s worth noting that Palin herself eased off the Ayers stuff, but only in order to hammer Obama with one of the most red-meat social con speeches I’ve ever read. Exit question two: If they do lose, just how bad will the fingerpointing within the campaign be? I have visions of anonymous quotes starting to appear in the NYT circa mid-November about Palin’s Couric interview and McCain not being “tough enough”…
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
Your opinion is understandable, but exaggerated and without merit. He votes with us 80% of the time and his reasonings for being non-partisan are very clear if you would ever watch a serious program that looked at his political career. He has a good heart, and makes mistakes more often that he should. His decision to work with democrats is paved with good intentions, but ultimately is the wrong thing to do, as most democrats now a days shouldn’t be treated as friends. It’s his flaw. He’s a person who would be a good president for all of America, even if Obama wasn’t his opponent. And now, Obama is his opponent and one of them is guaranteed to be the next presdient.
wise_man on October 11, 2008 at 11:23 PM
from Ace’s comments
funky chicken on October 11, 2008 at 11:25 PM
Not quite, old chap…the problem is that we have never fought back before. We’ve been just sitting here nodding our heads..tsk tsking..while the left has become ever more violent and deranged in their tactics…and now we are afraid of offending them? That’s their game. You have to draw the line somewhere, even if our chosen political representatives won’t. The started it and now we are on the mat. The countdown began 8 years ago and we have yet to stand on our feet…maybe it’s time to stand up a little…and if the call us ‘unpolite’ or accuse of of ‘bad behavior’…then so be it…they’ve been accusing us of that for the 8 years we’ve been on the floor.
AUINSC on October 11, 2008 at 11:26 PM
I agree and I think he has the balance that will cut across party politics. But John can’t do that if he doesn’t win. He can always apologize for being a weenie after the election.
csdeven on October 11, 2008 at 11:27 PM
Thanks for the repost, funky chicken. I wouldn’t have seen that otherwise.
wise_man on October 11, 2008 at 11:28 PM
Yes sir.
wise_man on October 11, 2008 at 11:29 PM
The problem is that Obama is tactically more where Regan was and McCain is tactically more where Carter was. Other than that … … …
Murphy9 on October 11, 2008 at 11:33 PM
He’ll get my vote. But it looks like he’s shaping his campaign to the whims of the media.
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:33 PM
Reagan!
Murphy9 on October 11, 2008 at 11:34 PM
I’m not saying we shouldn’t fight back. I’m saying we need to do it in a way that doesn’t smack of moonbat mentality.
And I didn’t finish my thought on the KKK remark. I am concerned that those in the middle might look at the KKK’s behavior over the last 8 years and then look at us and wonder what the difference is. Now I do have some ideas, and I think most of them come natural to conservatives. But i was hoping to generate some conversation on the subject.
1st, we don’t pray for the death of others. That separates us from them.
2nd, we don’t make outrageous claims that cannot be substantiated by facts.
I’ll listen to other suggestions.
csdeven on October 11, 2008 at 11:34 PM
Your entire premise is wrong…yes, he’s fighting his own party…but to his own detriment. Every indication (and this goes back many years before this campaign) is that the considers the Democrats to be serious and honest in their intentions…and that he rather prefers them to the ‘Republican Conservative Fire-breathers’ in his own party…who make the very pleasant and congenial life he has lived in the Senate, all of these years, less pleasant than it could be if only they would SHUT THE F**K up! If he loses…then he really won’t be screwed..you will, but who cares about you…many years of happy, happy, honorable bipartisanship and Senate collegiality and commeraderie await him in his waning years…and you a**holes (or Palin) aren’t going to ruin it for him.
AUINSC on October 11, 2008 at 11:36 PM
If you dont drink, start drinking, if you already drink, drink more.
Murphy9 on October 11, 2008 at 11:36 PM
I think McCain handled the whole “suspending the campaign” thing very badly. Why not just say he won’t be attending any rallies or giving any interviews while dealing with the bailout?
Speedwagon82 on October 11, 2008 at 11:37 PM
hahaha
csdeven on October 11, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Only the people who have pissed him off. Not the entire republican party. unsourced rumors, supposedly unnamed sources and named sources from democrats such as Tom Daschle don’t count.
wise_man on October 11, 2008 at 11:39 PM
+1
csdeven on October 11, 2008 at 11:42 PM
The KKK?!?! Are you concerned we are in danger of looking like the KKK? Is that what keeps you up at night? Good God! We have stalinist thugs from the Democratic party shouting anti-semetic slurs, intimidating voters left and right, smearing everyone who doesn’t exactly toe the line with them as racist…a president who isn’t sure if Ayers is a terrorist or not, a left (i.e., Democratic Party) that has vocally dreamed, non-stop about assinating Bush…and you are worried that we my be percieved as members of the KKK because we may think McCain isn’t being to light in pointing these issues out? Would you like to explain, or just leave my observations un-responded to?
AUINSC on October 11, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Thank you. I thought I was alone in that sentiment. Win or lose he’ll be fine. As for the rest of us????????? Not so much.
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Who said anything about Dashcle…and I’m not talking so much about rumors as I am his observed behavior…may all be just rumor..but then again, it correlates very well with his squishy approach to Obama–whose (now imminent) presidency we should not fear…
AUINSC on October 11, 2008 at 11:45 PM
I think McCain handled the whole “suspending the campaign” thing very badly. Why not just say he won’t be attending any rallies or giving any interviews while dealing with the bailout?
Speedwagon82 on October 11, 2008 at 11:37 PM
That was a tremendous mistake. Just made him look erratic and ineffectual – a enervating old drama queen. Running back to the Senate, with Congress at a 9% rating, he looked like he didn’t really want the White House job. His ratings started to plummet the next day. Then he did that pathetic hehheheh my friends creepy-old-man-with-a comb-over routine at the last debate, and sayonara McCain.
I’m voting for the old bastard, but its really for Palin and all of the abused yet stalwartly conservative Republicans left in the Congress and Senate. They have my utmost respect for both their patriotism and clear thinking.
TexasJew on October 11, 2008 at 11:48 PM
You nailed it again. Some old lady at his rally tells him she’s afraid of what an Obama Presidency would do to America, and instead of agreeing with her, he tells what a decent and honorable man Obama is and that she has absolutely nothing to fear. Well if that’s the case, i’ll just go to the friggen beach on election day and chill out with a cold one.
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Well said. He should have stayed on the campaign trail and rallied with the overwhelming majority of Americans who opposed the bailout disaster.
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:56 PM
COME ON RED SOX!!!!!!!
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:57 PM
Holy crap. Intent just doesn’t translate sometimes…
KKK= Krazy Kos Klowns.
Do you want people coming here and looking at us like they do at the scum over at KOS?
They have been saying for 8 years that Chimpy isn’t their president and they site their fears of a totalitarian state.
If we started saying similar things about Oslime-a, how is it that we are different than they are in the eyes of moderates?
Do you see my point now?
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:00 AM
I’d love an exhaustive list of what Obama voters say about why they’re for him. I’m sure it would hilarious. Just nonsense. Boy are we in trouble.
Paul-Cincy on October 12, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Wait until the anti-free trade and union thuggery stuff starts to wind its way through the Dim congress.
Watch out for the hyperinflation caused by the white-hot treasury printing presses enlisted to pay off all the EITC and Fanny and Freddy deadbeats for phoney “stimulus packages”, including more tax welfare “rebates” and even food stamps for a country with a 6.1% unemployment rate..
Notice that the responsible investor class has taken the brunt of this, and yet they are now being called on to pay for all the crap, above and beyond the 850 billion dollar crap sandwich. No reduced windfall profits taxes for them!
Money is fungible, and China’s gonna get trillions while we are forced to subsidize local idiotic behavior with our blood money.
TexasJew on October 12, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Man, I may have to re-think this Obama cat. The way you describe him, he is, like, going to be the most powerful president in our history, and going to fundamentally change the way America acts, lives, and breathes. No president has ever been able to do that before. He must be something wildly special to have such powers. And to think we use to criticize him for having no experience, no record, no judgment. But now he is given attributes that would make Nebuchadnezzar blush. My my, the sky is indeed falling.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:04 AM
You nailed it again. Some old lady at his rally tells him she’s afraid of what an Obama Presidency would do to America, and instead of agreeing with her, he tells what a decent and honorable man Obama is and that she has absolutely nothing to fear. Well if that’s the case, i’ll just go to the friggen beach on election day and chill out with a cold one.
roninacreage on October 11, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Old scared lady ‘08!
TexasJew on October 12, 2008 at 12:04 AM
My my, the sky is indeed falling.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:04 AM
The stock market woke up, took a look at the polls and shed 2 trillion dollars like shuckin’ peas. Do you have a 401K?
TexasJew on October 12, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Yup, what’s left is sitting in govt bonds for the time being. I doubt seriously the market would be stable or bullish if McCain were ahead by triple digits.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Does McCain need to feel Barry’s metaphor approaching his ingress before he understands what the hell is happening to him?
FIGHT!
This isn’t Senatorial table tennis, it’s the survival of our Republic.
profitsbeard on October 12, 2008 at 12:12 AM
AUINSC on October 12, 2008 at 12:17 AM
Our republic has been through civil war (with real shooting), two world wars, a forty year long Cold War, a Great Depression and Jimmy Carter, and still it is strong. Electing this ninny ‘O’ is the death of our nation? You either have no faith in this country, or you have so frightened yourself that your thinking has gone all screwy.
We will survive O just like we survived both the Clintons and Herbie Hancock.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:20 AM
csdeven-
Your concern is misplaced.
McCain could lock his lips on Obama’s rear end in supine devotion and the left would complain that the suction might irritate Obama’s cheeks.
There is NOTHING you do that pleases them.
And EVERYTHING you do is WRONG to them.
Stop trying to placate an IMPOSSIBLE opposition and FIGHT for the survival of our Republic against CUNNING crypto-Marxist weasels.
Of which OBAMA is uber-weasel NUMBER 1.
profitsbeard on October 12, 2008 at 12:23 AM
trailboss-
Get real.
profitsbeard on October 12, 2008 at 12:24 AM
Profitsbeard, get some medication.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:25 AM
Allahpundit: He’s As Helpful As Leprosy!!
grtflmark on October 12, 2008 at 12:27 AM
The Clinton’s aren’t Obama. I can’t remember a candidate that had so much verifiable data on his virulent behavior. My feelings are that if Oslime-a is elected, 2012 will produce a conservative nominee in the strain of RR.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:28 AM
I agree. But I think, politically, the real gain would have been to oppose it.
Spirit of 1776 on October 12, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Actually, since we are now going thru one the several ‘Clinton patented delayed-action bombs’ right now, I think your assessment of his lasting impact on our nation may be a bit pre-mature. Same goes for Herbie Hancock…those mannequins may have done some permanent damage to our psyche.
AUINSC on October 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
“verifiable’ may be the key word. The Clintons were and are slime defined, and just as hard to pin down. O is a relative babe in the woods.
And if you are correct about Obambastica and 2012, so much the better. We could use another Reagan any time now.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:32 AM
You’re missing the point also. I am talking about making sure there is a clear difference between rhetoric based on fact and the rhetoric the moonbats spew that is based on paranoia.
Rational is the only thing that separates us from the forces that have taken over the democratic party. We need to make doubly sure that are comments are more rational than hyperbolic.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:33 AM
LoL. Cheers to you.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
+1
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
If you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Tav on October 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
Tav, you have some really weird comments, but I’m with you on this one.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:36 AM
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:34 AM
If I hadn’t said it, glad your back. Place isn’t the same w/out ya.
Spirit of 1776 on October 12, 2008 at 12:36 AM
I’m glad you’re still here. You are the voice of reason around here. Especially when the place starts going nuts.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Show me a sane man and I will cure him.
Tav on October 12, 2008 at 12:38 AM
The difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad.
Tav on October 12, 2008 at 12:42 AM
How is making Obama answer up for his history, his associations and his political record an attack?
We need to stop letting the left redefine the rules by changing the language.
Pretty soon, putting a woman’s panties on a man’s head will be called torture. Oh, wait…
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 12:42 AM
Most blog comments are about aspects of human sanity. Few people comment about human insanity, despite the fact that there would be much more to comment about.
Tav on October 12, 2008 at 12:45 AM
Torture?
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 12:45 AM
I don’t think so. The MSM had already started the “angry” narrative, and he didn’t want a scene that could be exploited by the left. I’d also bet that his advisors told him to watch out for liberal plants in the crowd. However, if he rolls over at the last debate, I’ll change my answer to yes.
This race ain’t over, but hypothetically… No fingerpointing from either side. All the GOP base are belong to Sarah. She’ll be a gracious team player and begin riding the right-wing tsunami into 2012. As far as Mac is concerned, blaming Sarah would be like the Lakers blaming Kobe for their loss in the finals.
Mr. Wednesday Night on October 12, 2008 at 12:49 AM
I hope you’re right, but to quote every character from every George Lucas movie, I got a bad feeling about this. Obama really is different from any other candidate in the modern era. If he wins, there will be very few restraints on his actions: the weakened Republican party has neither the congressional seats, nor the energy, to seriously oppose him, his triumphant cult of personality will feel all the Messiah make-the-waters-recede talk was justified… and so will he. I’ve always thought the most dangerous thing about Obama is that he’s nuts – he believes all the transformational “lightworker” bilge about himself, and he will feel emboldened to make those big changes that only a once-in-a-lifetime superman such as himself can make.
Where will Reagan 2.0’s power base come from? The Supreme Court is far more debased that it was in Reagan’s day, and a couple of Obama appointments will ensure no judicial opposition to his plans. You’re listening to the last year of Limbaugh and Hannity on the free airwaves right now, and I doubt it will take more than a year or two to get the Fairness Doctrine applied to satellite radio, which will never afford anything like their old audience anyway. Four years of Obamanomics will leave an even more desperate and uncertain electorate with less freedom and will to resist socialism, which the monolithic media will tell them is the only answer to the increasingly mythical “Wall Street fat cats” causing their problems. Hell, the electorate is already willing to believe that, even as the true culprits promise to hold more witch hunts, and we’re at the zenith of “alternative media’s” power. The political and cultural system, as a whole, has become disturbingly comfortable with the idea that it’s immoral, and increasingly illegal, to oppose Obama in any way.
This time out, Republicans didn’t really get to pick their own candidate for president. In 2012, after four years of government support for a triumphant ACORN and Obama’s immigration policies, every vote for the new Reagan will be drowned in half a dozen fraudulent votes for the Messiah. I don’t see anyone ready to take that “new Reagan” mantle on the horizon – the media will make well and truly certain that it won’t be Sarah Palin – and even if such a person rises up, the country waiting for him in 2012 will be much closer to France or Germany than the America voting itself into oblivion this year. THIS was the year for the new Reagan. I’ll always wonder whatever happened to the Man of Tomorrow.
Doctor Zero on October 12, 2008 at 12:51 AM
White guilt: see entry #4
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 12:52 AM
Tav, csdeven, trailboss-
So stop fighting against those who have brought about the current financial mess and relax into comforting cliches about the revivifying course of an Obama presidency for a putative/ mythical conservative revival in 2012.
If you stare at Obama, you see a slimy abyss of disinformation that even the post-collapse Nietzsche would have found distasteful.
They guy is a huckster tht makes the Clintons seem amateurish and tame.
And he beat them both.
profitsbeard on October 12, 2008 at 1:00 AM
The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 1:03 AM
I’ve never understood why McCain hasn’t vigorously pressed the case that he and other called for regulations well before Obama even thought of it.
Powerline offers a blog post that includes the letter that McCain and others wrote in May 6. Here’s the link:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/10/021750.php
It concludes:
McCain must have decided to vote for Obama too.
BuckeyeSam on October 12, 2008 at 1:08 AM
Never attribute to messianic aplomb what brute force can accomplish.
Our best hope at this point is that the vagaries of parliamentary procedure and bureaucratic inertia will give us the time to extricate ourselves from the “honourable defeat” McCain is planning for his own benefit.
spmat on October 12, 2008 at 1:08 AM
If things look completely hopeless on Nov 3rd, I might just vote for Oslime-a so I can take Carlos Mencia’s advice.
Because I will have voted for him, I’ll be able to call him the “N” word. If anyone questions me, I’ll inform them I can call him that because I voted for him.
And if Oslime-a is elected, the days of white guilt will be over. No longer will there be the fear of being called racists because the guy is a race baiting militant terrorist enabler.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 1:08 AM
The sea is dangerous and its storms terrible, but these obstacles have never been sufficient reason to remain ashore… Unlike the mediocre, intrepid spirits seek victory over those things that seem impossible… It is with an iron will that they embark on the most daring of all endeavors… to meet the shadowy future without fear and conquer the unknown.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 1:13 AM
Eye of the Beholder
Thanks. Interesting list of quotes.
That was one of the topics I covered while talking with two conservative friends last night. Both Hispanic and both very out numbered.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 1:23 AM
The words, “red pickup truck”, come to mind. LOL!
+.985 ;)
FloatingRock on October 12, 2008 at 1:27 AM
White guilt will not be erased by an Obama victory.
That is like thinking that negotiating with terrorists will achieve peace.
Until/unless the premise of “white guilt” is challenged it will never be absolved.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 1:38 AM
First, Obama is the ethereal tip on a leftist putsch that has little to nothing to do with Clinton Inc.’s “third way” politics. Obama is a carefully crafted, candy-coated shell over a bubbling leftist rage.
Second, Herbie Hancock rocks my face.
Third, you’re a dick.
spmat on October 12, 2008 at 1:44 AM
I can see the last couple of days of this debacle already: McCain has a rally, walks out to thousands of waiting Republicans…who start to boo him on sight. His very respectful, half-assed campaigning/debating has the effect of throwing us to the wolves and installing the first real fascist regime since Wilson.
McCain may see this as an “honorable defeat”. History won’t.
nocomme1 on October 12, 2008 at 1:46 AM
That is why I’ll call Obama the “N” word.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM
The Clintons beat themselves to a far greater degree than Obama. You are reading way too much into Obama, and attributing to him far more ability than his short history indicates.
The country will change some with Oy in the oval office. No doubt. But the country and our culture evolves around us regardless; the POTUS has surprisingly little effect on that. Change is coming – no matter who sits in the White House, and you and I can’t control that. The forces are way too big and too complex. Focusing all your energies on this election as the be all end all is foolish.
ACORN, screwy as it is, organizes and brings power to the once powerless, and it makes those of us who like the status quo really quite fearful. We should take a page from their playbook, and use our organizations to influence events as best we can.
Our real fight is in our homes, in our neighborhoods, churches and temples, local schools, and how we choose to spend our money. That’s where we can actually make things happen. John McCain, Sarah Palin, Barack Oy, can’t and won’t do for us what we have to do for ourselves.
We as a people have and will do the real and the hard work of making this country outstanding, not the govt. That’s why I have faith in our future regardless on what happens on Nov. 4, 2008.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM
You must be confusing me with someone who cares what you think.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 1:55 AM
The worst guilt is to accept an unearned guilt.
csdeven on October 12, 2008 at 2:01 AM
Which is why I will never accept it, I have done nothing to earn it. ‘White guilt’ is either for pussies that don’t accept that they and only they are responsible for their own actions, and so are other people, or for racists who have done something to feel guilty about.
But, it is a useful tool to manipulate those referred to above into illogical and indefensible acts like, oh, approving reparations for slavery. Apologies, yes, reparations, Bullum Shittim.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 2:08 AM
Not exactly what I meant…
But it may make for an interesting proof of your theory.
I’ll just hope that BO loses and we put off that test for another day.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 2:08 AM
Apologies are just a stepping stone to reparations.
I have nothing to apologize for and know of no one to apologize to.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 2:13 AM
Apologies are a cultural norm in acknowledging past wrongs, and should only be issued by the govt in response to past govt wrongs. The are socially acceptable and often quite effective in reducing tensions.
Reparations are a blatant transfer of wealth from the innocent to the non-sufferer.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 2:21 AM
Good cop, bad cop
You can’t beat someone to death with the truth. The truth exists without anyone’s help. You can ignore it or expose it.
May as well use the truth against Obama because he sure won’t. Obama cannot even acknowlege his middle name
Using the truth against Obama is a lot more noble than Obama using lies to score against McCain
We have reached a level of poltical correctness that the hard truth is considered cruel and unusual punishment while soft lies have become the kinder, gentler truth
Palin should whack the truth into the crowd with magnum force.
entagor on October 12, 2008 at 2:27 AM
I understand the difference and stand by my statement.
I also understand your point, but I don’t think it is a “one size fits all” situation.
Issues from WWII btwn Japan/China and Japan/Korea are cases in point.
Sometimes, an apology is enough, sometimes it is the inch that begets the mile.
Knowing the difference is the key.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 2:39 AM
Also, a “cultural norm” is only applicable when applied to one culture or similar cultures.
I think we passed that point decades ago.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 2:45 AM
Could it be that the libs might want to drive a wedge between Mccain and Palin knowing fully well that the likes of Allah Pundit will only be too glad to help that cause? They have already succeeded in shaming Mccain into dropping even the very vaguest attempts in defining Obama and now they want to portray Palin an evil witch who will do anything to win even back stab her own mentor. But, the famous Allah Pundit will questions his own base’s motives but not the enemy’s. Some pessimism which only applies to one side.
promachus on October 12, 2008 at 2:47 AM
Truth and agreed.
But sometimes giving an inch is enough, and in all practicality often has to happen. Great examples with Japan/Korea/China. However, some of those who suffered under the ‘Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere’ are still alive, and some of those who enforced it are too. Japan’s insanity with its neighbors is living memory. Reparations may not be out of the question.
With ‘white guilt’ and slavery reparations in the US, it is only the descendants who are left to heal old wounds, and social, rather than monetary, acknowledgment should be the only recourse. Otherwise new wrongs are inflicted.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 2:49 AM
The quote below is from the NYT article that’s linked in the Headlines.
What am I missing? Isn’t this the second time in a week that McCain has campaigned in Iowa? Why is he campaigning there? Iowans sold out to Obama’s ethanol subsidies a long time ago. I can’t believe he’s spending time there. If the NYT is lying about that, fine. I’d like to think they’d get that kind of thing correct.
Who is running McCain’s campaign? Is this part of his going through the motions until November? Geez, this is disheartening.
Here’s the McCain-Palin HQ phone number: 703-418-2008. I copied it off their Web site.
BuckeyeSam on October 12, 2008 at 2:51 AM
If that’s true, McCain has no business being president. It is a mark against him, not they.
FloatingRock on October 12, 2008 at 2:51 AM
Well, old ways die hard. I believe we still have a generally ‘American’ culture, though it is being sundered.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 2:53 AM
I’m sorry, what?
spmat on October 12, 2008 at 2:55 AM
Oh, and you’re still a dick, trailboss.
spmat on October 12, 2008 at 2:56 AM
I agree.
I just don’t think, in this case, that a “Sorry about that” will be accepted as the end.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 2:58 AM
You are right. So we must be prepared to resist those who demand more, and do so without any guilt.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 3:02 AM
I wish I could agree with that.
There is an American culture and it’s possible that “we” are part of it. But it only exists in a “general” sense by the narrowest of margins.
Obama is, as far as I’m concerned, proof of that.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 3:11 AM
And, if it goes that way, I would agree.
But, it depends on who makes the first move.
If the “Sorry about that” happens under Obama and it is not deemed good enough, then who will fight the demand for more?
Obama? Lib Dem Congress? The American Culture will be voiceless at that point.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 3:17 AM
Well, we, as in WASP’s and Jews, and Catholics, and Irish, and Latin American, and European bloodlines, will have to buck up and take our hits, but say no. Hard to imagine, si?
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 3:22 AM
We shall si.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 3:26 AM
Has there ever, in history, been such a mediocrity, that has turned so many people, ostensibly on the same side, into such complete and total loons?
Great people and horrible people have divided nations, but since when has someone so insignificant; Lacking charisma, intellect or the ability to persuade the masses been able to make people who normally would be pretty good allies, if not friends, fight other like this?
But honestly… The “only guy who can save the world from 0bama” has divided his own party as much as the Civil war divided the nation.
What’s up with that?
LegendHasIt on October 12, 2008 at 3:30 AM
I know, we have allowed ourselves to become voiceless in this culture, and to forget where we laid our balls. That doesn’t have to be.
Ok, question for the Culturalist – does a black president provide impetus to race-based demands for reparations, or does it decrease the perceived need, as in “you are truly now fully Americans?”
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 3:32 AM
I agree. The Confederacy should apologize immediately. They should have done it years ago….
FloatingRock on October 12, 2008 at 3:42 AM
Sorry, way too tired to respond. Nite.
trailboss on October 12, 2008 at 3:44 AM
Good night.
FloatingRock on October 12, 2008 at 3:47 AM
The answer to the first part is “yes” because the answer to the second part is “no”.
TheCulturalist on October 12, 2008 at 3:56 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »