Politico: McCain staffers starting to rally to Palin’s defense; Update: Biegun debunks NAFTA, Africa smears
posted at 2:00 pm on November 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Better late than never. Nothing yet from Steve Schmidt, but foreign policy guru Steve Biegun and spokesman Tracy Schmitt — among others — are on the case.
That she remains a player and may be the party’s nominee in four years would make it smart politics for Republican staffers to praise her in print. But those who went on the record suggest that they were doing so out of genuine affection for Palin and a sense that the image of her coming out of the election – that of a self-absorbed conniver — was not indicative of the person they knew.
“I’m appalled by it because Sarah Palin was one of nicest people I have ever had the chance to work with,” says Biegun, a former Bush NSC aide. “I’ve worked in Washington for 20 years, on the Hill, in the White House and in the private sector, and she ranks at the highest levels of decency, kindness and graciousness of anybody I’ve ever worked with.”…
“Gov. Palin was a breath of fresh air, particularly for those of us who’ve been living in the Washington bubble,” said Tracey Schmitt, the vice presidential nominee’s traveling spokeswoman and a veteran of the RNC and both Bush campaigns. “Because she is a working mom, she brought a real sense of perspective to the campaign trail, which was important.”…
Two other McCain aides who were pressed unexpectedly into Palin duty also have only positive things to say about her now
“One of the great developments of this campaign is the addition of Sarah Palin as a powerful and energetic new voice in American public life,” said Taylor Griffin, a McCain press aide who had been focusing on economic issues until he was dispatched to Alaska in late August. “She’s smart, insightful, and has an uncanny ability to ask the right questions.”
Biegun is the one who approved the prank call from “Sarkozy” and was, apparently, quite graciously absolved for it by the ‘Cuda afterwards.
Here’s more on her diva-ness or lack thereof from Greta’s show last night. Exit question: Romney likes to refer (awkwardly) to conservatism as a three-legged stool of “strong military, strong economy and strong family.” Palin’s cornered the market on the last one, but that’s the least important insofar as Obama’s first term will be defined by how well he handles the first two. If the economy comes back, Afghanistan improves, and he keeps the bomb out of Iran’s hands, no one will beat him in 2012. If, god help us, the economy’s still in the toilet and foreign policy is a shambles, we’ll run on that. Either way, social conservatism won’t matter much except to the extent that it usually does, as a basic litmus test to make sure the base turns out. In which case, what’s the argument for Palin, who’s young enough to wait and run in 2016, 2020, or even, conceivably, in 2032, when she’d still be younger than Maverick was this year? Newt, on the other hand…
Update: More from Biegun via Lowry at the Corner:
He says there’s no way she didn’t know Africa was a continent, and whoever is saying she didn’t must be distorting “a fumble of words.” He talked to her about all manner of issues relating to Africa, from failed states to the Sudan. She was aware from the beginning of the conflict in Darfur, which is followed closely in evangelical churches, and was aware of Clinton’s AIDS initiative. That basically makes it impossible that she thought all of Africa was a country.
On not knowing what countries are in NAFTA, Biegun was part of the conversation that led to that accusation and it convinces him “somebody is acting with a high degree of maliciousness.” He was briefing Palin before a Univision interview, and talking to her about trade issues. He rolled through NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Colombia FTA. As he talked, people were coming in and out of the room, handing Palin things, etc. She was distracted from what Biegun was saying, and said, roughly, “Ok, who’s in NAFTA, what the deal with CAFTA, what’s up the FTA?”—her way, Biegun says, of saying “rack them and stack them,” begin again from the start. “Somebody is taking a conversation and twisting it maliciously,” he says.
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 Next »
uh the telegraph is a far left newspaper. But anyways why does anyone care about what those tea-sipping brits think?? They cant vote here. Plus basically everything they said was untrue too.
ousoonerfan15 on November 8, 2008 at 4:32 PM
The Telegraph is only one of the international papers printing this crap. If you can’s see the damage done by all these papers repeating these lies, then I won’t waste my time explaining it to you.
Blake on November 8, 2008 at 4:36 PM
I’m the exact same age as he is and I graduated from high school in 1978 (a year early). I remember the Carter years quite well–my parents along with myself and my siblings were forced to move from California to NM if they didn’t want to go broke.
Our president-elect hoped that too few people remembered those years and it seems that his wish was granted.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 4:36 PM
again why do we care about what international papers print??
ousoonerfan15 on November 8, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Buck Up!! These guys are doing CMA because the word is out not to hire them in the future elections. Sarah is smart and knows who they are. She just has enough class not to say anything. Here’s what we have to do.
2010 is on the horizon. We need to think Senators/Congressmen, especially Schumer, Reid, Frank and the blue dogs. Any dirt anybody can dig up? They are quick to report on everyone else, so let’s turn the tables on them and the media. How about Katie Couric and the rest of them? We have rights too.
Obama is going to self destruct. The election was less than a week ago and look at what is happening. He’s insulted Nancy Reagan, insulted the animal shelters calling himself a Mutt and had all sorts of praise and hope from all the terrorists. He’s never held a job!!! You watch, they are going to squirrel him away saying that he can’t talk to the people because he’s busy working on a “plan”. Uh huh. It would be funny if it weren’t so serious.
Cash is king right now. Just be happy that all the idiots are out there buying cars that they have to suck their knee caps in, which drops demand so people like me, can drive GMC big SUV’s. This is stupid. We are the richest and the best Country in the world and we work for and deserve better than this.
Close the primaries…. first task, which is mandatory. Work in your state to mandate picture ID’s to vote with registration necessary at least 2 weeks prior to election. For crying out loud… Obama insisted that people have 2 forms of picture ID to get into his acceptance speech.
We can do this…. And, we need Sarah and Mitt. Forget Huckabee, he’s a main reason that we ended up with McCain. I like Bobby Jindahl too, but scrap Charlie Crist (RINO) and Pawlenty (RINO). Newt is good sometimes, but he’s more worried about him and his wife and whatever book or website they are promoting.
The fight begins.
suzyk on November 8, 2008 at 4:45 PM
I checked Legacy.com and couldn’t find one–only from the AP. Odd.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 4:45 PM
Also, it unfortunately looks like it’s going to take more than 4 years to get the economy back on track — especially with the Democrats thinking that the answer to the problem is to continue borrowing and spending (on “tax credit” welfare payments and apparently never-ending extenions of unemployment benefits) hundreds of billions of dollars that we don’t have and can’t afford to be borrowing for this kind of crap.
I don’t see re-election of Obama as a sure thing. Far from it.
AZCoyote on November 8, 2008 at 4:47 PM
Could it be that she is not dead or if she is the Zero has her on ice
driver on November 8, 2008 at 4:49 PM
The UK Telegraph is by no stretch of the imagination a left wing paper. In fact, it’s considered the conservative paper in England. It’s owned by Conrad Black. The Guardian and the Independent are the left wing papers over there.
ramrocks on November 8, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Back to the headline – Duh. She’s a wonderful woman, and a solid politician. And she knows two things about the economy that Mr. Harvard Law – the “brilliant” one – will never know, because he is a fucking idiot and a doctrinair socialist:
- if the government spends less money, the governed will thrive, and
- if the government taxes the governed less, revenue to the government will go up.
Jaibones on November 8, 2008 at 4:53 PM
e
Jaibones on November 8, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Boy, are they gonna get a crash course!
RightTurnOnly on November 8, 2008 at 5:02 PM
…like saying Hillary Clinton is considered a conservative politician.
RightTurnOnly on November 8, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Like your “can do” attitude, Suzy!
RightTurnOnly on November 8, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Just think back to the night she arrived home. Standing next her was her husband and the look on his face said to me that; “These guys don’t know what and who they’ve unleashed on themselves”.
thomasaur on November 8, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Bwaaahaahaa!
Obama will unravel and implode long before 2012 because he has nothing but style.
Not even a 24/7 All-Lying-All-the-Time MSM will be able to cover this vacuous ass for that long.
Barry is the guy who pretends he knows all about car engines, and ultimately ends up with a handful of mysterious thingamajigs and a dead vehicle.
profitsbeard on November 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Forget Newt. By 2012,he will be a colonel in Gore’s Green Army, peddling books about solar heating on H&C.
whitetop on November 8, 2008 at 5:36 PM
in re Carl Cameron:
http://jimtreacher.com/archives/001891.html
warbaby on November 8, 2008 at 5:40 PM
We Republicans just embarrass ourselves by fixating on these frivolous conspiracy theories. This “Obama was born in Kenya” thing is about om the same order of crazy as Rosie O’Donnell screaming on The View about how 9/11 was an inside job. The media pounces on this kind of stuff and uses it to propagate the “myth” that Republicans were overly negative and the Obama people were pure as the driven snow. Do you know how many Democrats yell at me for Republicans being “unfair” to Obama by accusing him of being a secret Muslim (when, in fact, it was Hillary that was pulling that crap, not us)?
Outlander on November 8, 2008 at 5:43 PM
I don’t talk or write like this very often BUT:
Every one of these excuses for human beings should be BITCH SLAPPED…
sorry girls hope no one took offense by that…
but when I see someone mistreated like this…ERRRRR!!!!!!!!!
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 5:48 PM
AP-
As one that cringed every time Allah posted another poll of doom, I have to say that he was at least trying to keep us balanced, and in the end, while the CBS/NYT Al Jezeera poll turned out to be wrong, most of the others were within the ball park. So, Allah asserting there is a reasonable possibility of THE ONE not being defeated needs, in my opinion, to be treated with a healthy dose of serious examination and contemplation.
We all see that THE ONE is campaigning NOW for 2012. That initial press conference spelled it out. Another factoid is the Clinton campaigning all the time that won him a second term which we were all convinced he would lose because Clinton was sooooo bad and all of America had to know it. Turned out Americans did not care and wanted a second helping of horndog.
We would do well to learn the ways of the Jedi master Allah, and learn to read the large and bold lettering on the wall. Allah is not a moron, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest we could have 8 years of THE LORD GOD MESSIAH BARAK OBAMA. Besides, in 2011, Oprah is going rogue, and will have her own channel (OWN) to broadcast to my fellow broads how THEY NEED to give Baraky Baby another chance. And we would be racist idgits not to capitulate to Oprah’s demands don’t you know!
God save us!
freeus on November 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM
The fight begins.
suzyk
Great dose of realism, there.
Thanks
warbaby on November 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
First, my apologies for participating in a thread hijack. I responded on the first page of this post by pointing out the obvious – Allahpundit is a giant flaming liberal douche.
Some whacky conspiracy people hijacked the thread with disinformation about the Berg-Obama lawsuit, so I shot down their silliness, but that has spawned yet more hijacks directed at me. My apologies beforehand for responding to the hijackers.
Y-not,
I have no idea how Sarbanes-Oxley applies to the nefarious shenanigans of the Obama campaign. I’ve never read the law, nor am I in a mood to. That said, I am convinced that the Obama campaign was fully involved in at least two types of fraud – voter registration fraud via Acorn and other means, and inducing illegal campaign contributions through low credit card security and refusing to allow public scrutiny of contributions below $200. Will these things be investigated by a Democratic-controlled Congress, FBI, and Justice Department? Hell no.
Peacenprosperity -
All you are doing is linking a kooky right-wing blog written by someone who knows no more about the law than you. That blog, in turn, is linked to another blog which is linked to another blog, all claiming that Obama has to give Souter his birth certificate by December 1. Every single one of those blogs, plus you, are full of Barbra Streisand.
Here is what happened;
1) Berg filed suit in Pennsylvania.
2) The judge rejected the suit on one ground – lack of standing by plaintiff Berg. I disagree with that philosophically, but the decision is in line with a number of cases holding that taxpayers cannot sue Congress for acting beyond its constitutional authority. As a lower court judge, I would reluctantly have followed precedent and ruled for Obama. However, I would have made it clear in the opinion that I think this is bad case law that is ripe for review.
Had Judge Surrick been a serious lawyer and not a partisan Democrat hack, his opinion could have been simply this:
“Due to lack of standing, plaintiff’s petition is denied.”
Instead, he used his judicial bully pulpit to take a giant dump on Berg. But everything he said about Berg and the merits of the case itself is what we in the business call dicta. It has nothing to do with the disposition of the case.
3) Berg took the case to the US Supreme Court on October 30. He filed two items. The first was for an emergency injunction to stop the election. Souter denied his motion.
The second thing he did, on October 30, was file for writ of certiorari. This is a direct appeal of Surrick’s decision. Therefore the only issue before the court is whether Berg had standing to sue. Should the Supreme Court decide to grant cert (highly unlikely), it could even more remotely agree to grant this case de novo review, meaning that they will hear not only legal arguments but also evidence. That will not happen. Evidence will not be presented, only legal arguments.
Now, you are probably asking yourself, if these blogs are so full of Barbra Streisand, then where does that December 1st date come from, eh, smart guy?
Let me answer that. Berg filed for cert on October 30. All opposing parties have 30 days to respond to the application for certiorari. 30 days after October 30 is November 29. However, November 29 is a Saturday. The federal rules further provide that when a deadline falls on a weekend or a federal holiday, the deadline is extended to the first day that is not on a weekend or a holiday – Monday December 1.
Obama’s response, should his team file one, will not include a birth certificate. It will be an brief on the one issue decided by the lower court – Berg’s standing to sue.
Incidentally, do I think there is something fishy going on about Obama’s birth certificate, his true name, and his possible citizenship in 3 different countries? Absolutely. But will this lawsuit succeed in forcing him to prove his citizenship? Sadly, probably not.
Phildorex on November 8, 2008 at 6:14 PM
Sure wish our moderators would do something about the wildly off-topic posts.
ProfessorMiao on November 8, 2008 at 6:14 PM
With regard to European newspapers (and Australia/NZ ones), you have to remember that many “conservative” parties are still a lot more liberal than their counterparts in the US, hence their journalism is more left-leaning. (In Australia, where I lived for 2 years, their conservative party is the Liberal Democrats (I always found that funny).
With regard to the GOP’s chances in 2010, 2012 — I think they are excellent if Obama falters, but we can’t allow ourselves to self-destruct. We have to run coherent campaigns with clearly defined, compelling solutions to our nation’s problems. Obama’s pitch was flawless, even though his ideas were nothing new and quite flawed, and with his charisma was able to sell “hope” to the masses, which they bought in bulk quantities without ever asking to read the ingredients label, the delivery instructions, or the potential side effects.
mark88hosting on November 8, 2008 at 6:16 PM
Having heard Gov. Palin at a campaign rally during the week before the election, I can assure the readers here that the focus of her presentation was on energy and its impact on the economy and on our national security. She was equally passionate about federal support for families with special needs children.
She said NOTHING inflammatory about Obama, nor did she talk at all about issues that concern social conservatives– except to say in a most generic way that Republicans are supportive of the fundamental value of life.
Believe me, she had her supporters at the rally ENERGIZED. She has poise and a most effective speech delivery. You cannot fake authenticity, and the crowd recognized Sarah Palin’s genuineness.
The media wanted to trash Governor Palin from the moment of her announcement to serve with McCain. The media and the Obama campaign recognized her as a formidable opponent with measurable executive experience.
Instead now, America has a neophyte who needs training wheels and who has a grievance agenda shaped by his Alinsky masters. His sidekick is a certifiable buffoon. The two egos in this upcoming administration do not add up to even one person of character. Hussein and Robinette could have their own SNL skit for the next four years, but I don’t think that America will be laughing much.
onlineanalyst on November 8, 2008 at 6:19 PM
McCain and Palin lacked enough focus and charisma in their campaign and that’s why they lost. Obama blew them out of the water with his feel-good “change we can believe in”, “change we need”. For some bizarre reason, experience didn’t matter, a laundry list of questionable associations didn’t matter — just hopes and dreams. I hope that this presidency doesn’t end like that of the last young, dynamic, charismatic, idealistic president we elected – JFK. That’s obviously a worst-case scenario for Obama, but I can see a Carter-like one-term presidency becoming more clear if there isn’t an extraordinary turn of the economy for the better, and as long as the GOP doesn’t screw up in the 2010 or 2012 election cycles.
mark88hosting on November 8, 2008 at 6:28 PM
Closed Borders, Jobs for Everyone, Crime is Down
cjs1943 on November 8, 2008 at 6:40 PM
Thanks.
cjs1943 on November 8, 2008 at 6:46 PM
This is another fallacy perpetuated by the MSM. Having been to several of Mitt’s campaign events, I can tell you that the man is warm, personable, and genuine. He charmed everyone in the room, and did not come off as the least bit “blow-dried”.
JA on November 8, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Wouldn’t it be terrific for Governor Palin to narrate a half-hour program on energy production? She could make a convincing case about the abundance of oil in her state. She would emphasize the ecological responsibility of the producers. She could provide a guided tour of the ANWR area in dispute to demonstrate what it actually looks like and how negligibly small it is in relation to the rest of the refuge area. A map or graphic could support the point.
As a person aware of both hunting and wildlife husbandry, she coule make a case visually of how species are actually flourishing.
She could demonstrate how energy production generates jobs directly and indirectly through supportive and ancillary manufacturing.
With dollars and cents figures, she could demonstrate how our own energy independence keeps our costs down and does not make us vulnerable to nations that hold us in thrall. She could make a case that using our own resources provides revenue for both her state and the nation.
Such a program practically writes itself. The visuals are obvious. As narrator, Sarah Palin presents her own expertise convincingly with the charm that is innate to her personality.
No media filter would edit Governor Palin into a caricature again.
Maybe some conservative think tanks could underwrite this television venture. I am thinking perhaps using the Heritage Foundation and Newt’s American Solutions as a start.
onlineanalyst on November 8, 2008 at 7:04 PM
You are very welcome!
Buy Danish on November 8, 2008 at 7:09 PM
yes…+2…and soon.
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 7:11 PM
onlineanalyst –
Not a bad idea. Political infomercials can help reinforce GOP positions and specific candidate positions over time, and not just in election years. The big caveat with these is to make absolutely sure that what you are saying in the is factually correct, that you’ve made a convincing argument, and that the position stands up to the tests of time and changing world circumstances. You could create a great infomerical about a political issue, only to find it irrelevant when conditions or priorities change…then you run the risk of your asserted position being used against you at election time.
mark88hosting on November 8, 2008 at 7:15 PM
By that do you mean the drop in the price of oil, ( energy), the Arabs have used that ploy ,I think , one too many times. Energy independence utilizing the abundance that we have here in North America should be the overall theme in any such endeavor.
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 7:26 PM
Are you sure his teeth weren’t too perfect and he wasn’t too tanned? Apparently all this matters a lot. If only he had something like BJ’s blue dress in his closet we might be able to support him.
Think about it. One candidate is smeared despite his formidable education, experience and accomplishments because he’s too nice, too well-groomed, is the wrong religion, and isn’t a cradle to grave social conservative.
The other candidate is smeared because despite having nice teeth and being very attractive, she isn’t Ivy League and is too Alaskan, or something.
Who can possibly meet these exacting standards?
Buy Danish on November 8, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Lol… why do you think they went after her with such a vengeance? She IS a serious threat to the SQ… come on Danish… you know that!!!
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 7:35 PM
The people kneecapping her are either, angling for positions in the Soetoro circle or actual Astroturfettes infiltrated in by Axelwad.
Beto Ochoa on November 8, 2008 at 7:44 PM
Yes, I know that! It was sarcasm, poorly executed, perhaps.
Buy Danish on November 8, 2008 at 7:54 PM
“Who’s in NAFTA?” is a fair question.
After all, who is in North America?
Here’s the answer:
Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Canada, Cayman Islands, Clipperton Island, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Greenland, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico, Montserrat, Navassa Island, Netherlands Antilles, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, Saint Bartholemy, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Martin, Saint Pierre, Miquelon, and the United States.
Ask Biden: “Plugs, how many countries are in North America?”
I’ll bet he can’t name 10.
__________
RJGatorEsq. on November 8, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Nope, Mitt’s teeth looked real, no fake tan, no botox, no hair dye or plugs. Looked like he took about five minutes to get dressed and ready. Pretty ironic that the MSM has christened Mitt the “plastic Ken doll” when it’s the Dem metros that look like they have to be pried away from the mirror.
JA on November 8, 2008 at 8:10 PM
oops… me being too sensitive is propably more the case.
This woman has so much to offer…it galls me they went after her…line em’ all up against the wall n’…no blindfolds.
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Fred and Sarah or Sarah and Fred 2012
oldairman on November 8, 2008 at 8:22 PM
This is an exact example of the type of question to fire back at the “media”…………….
We should hammer the “media” at every turn, question EVERYTHING they report, and consider them no longer a “Free” press, but an enemy to our Representative Republic ………….
Seven Percent Solution on November 8, 2008 at 8:33 PM
It’s that very distinction that escapes so many….blows me away…..
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Apparently he’s on vacation, but he surfaced long enough to give an email interview here. He says there were eight or nine people who would leak throughout the campaign, but doesn’t name names. He also doesn’t, to my mind at least, put to bed the idea that he could be one of the smearers of Palin. He certainly didn’t rebut any of the stories, or defend her from them. But I’ll let you judge that for yourself.
I notice we haven’t heard from Tucker Eskew either. Wasn’t he the ‘Cuda’s “chief of staff” (for lack of a better term)?
meltenn on November 8, 2008 at 8:56 PM
The names of McCain’s staffers are public record, right? I mean, with a little diligence, anyone could come up with a list of ever staffer with enough influence to matter. This is like AP’s 4th or 5th post eliminating a senior staffer as the source of the leak. So who’s left? Is it sufficiently obvious now that whichever staffer is pushing these rumors isn’t worth listening to, or validating with a formal repudiation?
RightOFLeft on November 8, 2008 at 9:03 PM
The Republicans will do much better if they form a coherent, consistent, conservative message and stick with it; and stop trying to out-Democrat the Democrats as McCain seems to have done on several occasions. Let them come across the aisle to us.
ddrintn on November 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
My view… If they haven’t spoken up yet …quislings all…
jerrytbg on November 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
As a young woman, it’s killing me that we’re having to “debunk” anything. It’s so discouraging to realize we haven’t really come very far at all. =/
herrevery on November 8, 2008 at 9:56 PM
U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG’S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS
(Contact information and PDF at end)
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.
Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama’s response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”
Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.
The Defendants’ response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg’s reply will be submitted thereafter.
peacenprosperity on November 8, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Something tells me that after each smear, in accordance with the law…
“I’m John McCain and I approve this message”
joey24007 on November 8, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Sure wish you’d get your own blog since you’re so keen on making rules.
I can’t help how someone responds to something I say. I can only keep my own fly zipped. How’s about minding your own?
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 10:30 PM
They should defend Palin, she will be the next Prez..;)
dec5 on November 8, 2008 at 11:35 PM
Palin is a strong Woman. Intelligent and above the ones that are smearing her. She will stand tall. Come out of this mess more of a Politician. Then in 2012 she will kick a** and become our next President!
sheebe on November 8, 2008 at 11:47 PM
It didn’t help that we answered with Bob Dole. I can’t even remember a campaign in ‘96.
ddrintn on November 9, 2008 at 12:41 AM
More doubt cast on the Newsweek story about Palin’s trip to New Hampshire here. In addition to the points brought up at the link, Steve Duprey who travelled with Palin that day says that he saw no evidence of the things that Newsweek claimed (ie that she refused to go onstage with the two NH GOPers).
Should make most people wonder what else might not be quite as Newsweek says it was, but I doubt that the MSM will notice all these discrepancies in a fellow MSM source’s story since that messes with their narrative.
meltenn on November 9, 2008 at 1:33 AM
I like how some people figure Sarah Palin is toast because the msm keep slamming her. The msm will slam anyone who’s a threat. If we started dumping every politician the msm tries to discredit, in 2012 we’ll wind up running … McCain.
On the contrary, the media’s constant attacks on Sarah Palin are the best indicator they see her as a threat.
We really need a candidate who is a threat!
theregoestheneighborhood on November 9, 2008 at 2:13 AM
theregoestheneighborhood on November 9, 2008 at 2:13 AM
This neighborhood is a whole lot smarter with you around.
Saltysam on November 9, 2008 at 2:29 AM
Tonight at work, I waited on some people from Alaska–if I named the restaurant, you’d know it–and I asked them if they loved Sarah Palin. Their eyes lit up and started talking about how much she has done for Alaska, and that she does NOT make a promise, unless she intends on keeping it, and in the two years of her leadership, she has already kept every one of her promises and has done even more.
I know they love her up there, and my guess is that in 2012, we’ll love her as president.
mauipundit on November 9, 2008 at 2:46 AM
There is one other strange thing about the ‘leakers’. If they are just mercenaries looking out for themselves then why are there no John McCain rumours floating about? He was at the top of the ticket and if they are just looking for a scapegoat, he makes a lot more sense than Sarah Palin for that purpose.
sharrukin on November 9, 2008 at 5:29 AM
Yea but…but…FOX News said… It’s time that real conservatives get mad and take back their party! FOX News does NOT represent conservatives and it’s time they figure that out! But…alas…we will be stuck once again in 2012 with the guy that lost last time (Romney) and he will get slaughtered!
sabbott on November 9, 2008 at 6:32 AM
I don’t think that is really a suprise. No doubt the leakers figure that McCain is still a sitting Senator with years of experience and connections. While he might not be in the market for their services in the future he has friends. Gov Palin is a newbie and the staffers know she has plenty of enemies who are more than happy to believe any negative trash about her and few power players are inclined to support her.
katiejane on November 9, 2008 at 9:45 AM
.
This is so anomalous. This needs to be investigated.
Geochelone on November 9, 2008 at 10:28 AM
How could the total voter turn out in Ohio go DOWN by 5%.
Any one? any one?
Geochelone on November 9, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Are you joking? When people don’t think their vote matters, they don’t vote. In the case of Ohio, many people didn’t trust the system.
Phoenician on November 9, 2008 at 10:30 AM
She was, indeed, fantastic. The media can suck rotten eggs.
rlwo2008 on November 9, 2008 at 10:36 AM
“many people?” This I presume is your well thought our reply to explain away something that needs to be seriously investigated.
Geochelone on November 9, 2008 at 11:34 AM
http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/11/long-knives-are-out-and-fight-will-be.html
Dr Evil on November 9, 2008 at 12:39 PM
I don’t think it’s just the Left that considers Palin and her populism a threat. These nasty rumours suggest to me that the Republican Elite (Washington insiders?) also consider her a severe threat to them as well and will do whatever it takes to destroy her.
The conduct (or lack of) the Republican local and national campaigns this cycle tell me we need to throw out the entire RNC leadership and start over from scratch!
rspock on November 9, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Good news! The “Palin doesn’t know that Africa is a continent” lie is already firmly entrenched in the vernacular, now. Every half-wit who hated her is now presenting this as undisputed fact, including notable half-wit Jon Stewart.
Good job, McCain campaign liars; may you all rot in Hell.
Kensington on November 9, 2008 at 1:32 PM
I love old John McCain for his Service to the country, but now he needs to send his inept, counerproductive campaign staff off to the far corners of the globe and he should just fade off into the sunset.
rplat on November 9, 2008 at 1:53 PM
Sarah Palin doesn’t know Barack Obama is intent on undermining the Constitution, militarily and economically and socially weakening America, and reducing the nation to Third World status.
That’s a rumor I want to hear spread.
A little more troubling than a faux geography quiz.
profitsbeard on November 9, 2008 at 3:36 PM
The Dems have the WH and the Congress so I expect them to go full on with their plans to raise taxes during a recession and cut defense in a time of war. Therefore, I strongly disagree with your premise.
muggedbyreality on November 9, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Yeah about Grandma I email that tidbit to Sean Hannity.
Where are the funeral services, the burial (US or HI), obituaries, Obama and Family’s trip back for burial?
Like Sarah said family comes first.
Millions of minds are dormant on this matter.
ProudPalinFan on November 9, 2008 at 6:17 PM
I think that given that so much of this has now been debunked, and that she has responded maybe Palin would be best served by letting it go. I appreciate that she probably still wants to defend herself and respond, but she’s now called out the people who have smeared her as the cowards that they are. And I think that now she should say that she’s ready to move on and move forward just like everybody else in the country.
I think that this really could die for lack for feeding if she uses the Greta interview to put this to bed and talks instead about where she wants to take Alaska, etc. I think that the clothes story especially still has legs, and that the more that she talks about it, the longer it’s going to take for it to be forgotten. The smearers look like they’re passing the blame for their mistakes, and Palin can take this chance to be sort of statesmanlike and move above and beyond it.
meltenn on November 9, 2008 at 6:32 PM
FYI/since I am born and raised in Puerto Rico:
Puerto Rico is a commonwealth of the United States; is not a state, just a US Territory (the oldest colony along with Guam) and US the TAXPAYERS sent MILLIONS every year to support the Island. I am an advocate for Statehood for PR because:
1-We are natural born US Citizens.
2-We use the US Dollar.
3-We have fought all wars ever since WWII and now, so we have been to all wars by PR’s own sacrifice and devotion to the country.
4-We don’t vote for POTUS. Therefore, we don’t have a say on President, etc…so if PR is sent to war along with the resst of the country, oh well we have to go along with it even though there are protests left and right.
5-We have a US Congressman (1 for 4M)with voice and no vote.
6-Some US laws apply to PR and some don’t b/c of PR Constitution (confusing so don’t ask!)
7-So far a Self-Determination process for PR has to be supported by the US Congress, President and would have to accomodate PR senators and such to accomodate the 4M ppl.
8-WE ARE NOT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS! I get that a lot here I am mistaken by Mexican b/c of my looks and I don’t get sometimes a fair treatment.
9-As for Presidential primaries, the Dems. have campaigned in PR because for the primary of Hillary and O, Puerto Ricans voted for the Presidential candidate. Hillary won by a landslide. The MSM that flew to PR were baffled that PR cannot vote for president in elections but can choose a candidate for the Dem. ticket.
10-Republican side, don’t campaign in PR for primaries, and I can’t recall which president (Rep.) has flown to PR. I guess Cheney did but I am not 100% positive.
FYI from me to Sarah and the blogosphere. So get educated because it is convenient and beneficial for PR to be the 51st. State of the Union.
ProudPalinFan on November 9, 2008 at 6:36 PM
(Regarding, respectively, Romney and Palin):
Well said. I was thinking about these, well, “naysaids,” this afternoon while reading a lot on the internet, and (overview here), what the Right has to now do is coalesce.
First, as a Party, as a group of people who are “together” “working” and also together because we have a lot in common, and then support a candidate (one among many, worked out in cooperation).
Think back: Reagan was “old” when he ran for the Presidency on his eventually successful campaign, he wasn’t the best looking, wife Nancy was “odd” yadda, yadda, yadda (and I liked both and do like and respect Nancy, just saying, no one is perfect, everyone has their liabilities), same with President Bush, etc.
The expectations for “a movie star” candidate need to be dropped and the iconographic qualities about the candidate recognized by ISSUES and CHARACTER, what they represent and believe in.
This causes people who can’t stand “value voters” and “social conservative” issues a bit daft, I realize, is a real irritant to them, BUT, the point I’m making is that THE CANDIDATE we group together to support to win in 2012 has to be enthused, enjoyed and supported because we really enjoy WHO THEY ARE, not what their hair color may be, whether they’re “blow dried” or have excellent dentistry (which helps, just saying, that can’t be the reason to dismiss someone).
In my experience this past campaign cycle, many on the Right were very petty, very mean with one another. We have to stop the “knock down, drag out” cutting down of one another just because someone’s favored candidate is not ours, and look at shared “values,” or shared, mutual concerns and issues.
I ALSO want to suggest – if I may be so bold here – to stop “feeding” the naysayers. Stop interacting with people who show up as “astroturfers” and go on about how bad the GOP is and how stupid someone is and why they’ve left the Party to go vote for Obama and whatnot else. AND that includes people who continually harp on the Party needing to “abandon the social conservative issues.”
No, no we do not need to abandon social conservative issues, nor conversations. If we do, we’re mostly Liberals. The financial conservative ideology is to be respected AS MUCH AS the social conservative ideology and concerns because these two work together in results: education (how it’s arranged and administered, why and at what costs, the implications of investments in that area versus the social liberalisation of youth, etc.), energy (same base issues, whether to be self sufficient [conservative ideology] versus being big-spending [use of more taxpayer money, higher taxes] dependencies and limitations of resources [liberal ideology]) and on and on.
The social conservative VALUES and perspectives are very important because they work together to a successful organization politically. IN my view, all the criticism about “social conservatives” and issues has been one of the most serious handicaps to the GOP in the last five years or so.
It’s also where most of the infighting originates: denigrating or seeking to suppress social conservative opinion and concerns in preference for more socially liberal “acceptability.”
S on November 9, 2008 at 6:58 PM
@ ProudPalinFan on November 9, 2008 at 6:36 PM
I read a while ago, last time Puerto Rico voted on whether to become a state or remain a territory, that the majority of P.R.s voted to remain a territory, BECAUSE (what I read, not my assumption) a lot of P.R.s receive a lot of financial aid from the U.S. taxpayers (and are not taxpayers themselves) such that they’d lose all that if they became a state.
I READ that welfare, essentially, runs very high in Puerto Rico — money many there rely on to live and paid for by U.S. taxpayers — and if they became a state, they’d then be out of that dependence situation and then be deemed self supporting as other state residents are (that means taxes and far less dependent individuals).
What I read, anyway. So, if all that’s true (what I read) then it’s a cultural problem in Puerto Rico…has to change away from the Liberal mindset of the “have to have welfare” mentality to one of independent individuals who appreciate the opportunities that Capitalism provides.
S on November 9, 2008 at 7:06 PM
I don’t mean to sound like a broken record about this, but I still have yet to hear Sen. McCain himself come out and refute this and rebuke those who are perpetuating these statements. Doesn’t he at least owe her that? Could it be that he had something to do with it? If he can make time for Letterman, surely he can take a minute to do this.
jehowe2nd on November 9, 2008 at 7:32 PM
totally agreee with you; the more time that he is silent, the more disappointed I am in him.
Red State State of Mind on November 9, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Yup, if this is not part of a counterattack planed by Sarah , he’s a coward and a failure.
the_nile on November 10, 2008 at 3:48 AM
Morning!
Yes Puerto Rico is a very complicated issue; for example that IS the biggest brawl there is in the island: For Puerto Ricans to determine to decide either statehood, independence or status quo. That is the reason why I don’t understand why here in the US abortion is such a big issue. Imagine North America’s population struggling every single day to decide between being a colony, break free or be dependent on a bigger country! Plebiscites have not done their job because US Congress basically can do with PR whatever they want whenever they feel like it. To put it mildly, they can kick us out and Guam and “c’ ya!” Of course, with a transition of several years, cutting off fed funds and then we would have to develop our own currency, kill US Passport, struggle with citizenship…you get the picture.
It is of utmost importance for this country to take a close hard look at what is going on in Puerto Rico because perhaps they might disagree with the President’s/Senate/House decision on this matter. I have never taken advantage of the system, not even sneak around for WIC for both pregnancies. It gives me a little, liiiittle hope that now on these elections the party that “advocates” for statehood won in PR in a landslide. Economy and corruption had a lot to do with it.
Believe me, there are lots of people here in PA that thought I was walking all over the island in indigenous clothes, necklaces, and covering the essentials with little clothing. Downtown San Juan looks a lot like Downtown Cleveland!
ITA on the welfare issue. I believe in putting these people to work to get a check; not sit at home pretending to be poor while having satellite TV, gaming consoles, and spend that money on fancy cars. In PR I worked and studied in college at night, while my mom was dying from breast cancer and I pulled off everything. That cannot be taken away from me so I believe anybody can do the same. Got my BA, married and had my kids, my mom did not see all that but that’s life.
It takes a great amount of courage to (I don’t mean to say it, but) change the course of Puerto Rico’s destiny. Go figure, PR leans Democrat.
I will kill this subject because I don’t want to deviate from the thread. Thanks anyways for reading and Google on PR Statehood, Puerto Rico’s status, visit Wikipedia, and such. If anybody needs translation/interpretation of a Spanish news article related to US Politics pls. let me know and I can help you guys.
xoxo PPF
ProudPalinFan on November 10, 2008 at 7:52 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »