Video: John Ziegler and David Shuster yell at each other over Palin
posted at 2:45 pm on January 9, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A screaming match for your Friday afternoon entertainment. Shuster’s numbers are off, but not by much: It was 59 percent who thought she was unqualified to be VP, not 65.
Ace is right about the Palin interview, incidentally. Grievance is an unappealing quality in a politician, especially one whose media opportunities would be better spent showing off her policy chops ahead of 2012. She has endless surrogates willing to complain about the coverage on her behalf; doing it herself plays well with the base but at the price of diminishing her. Ironically, she herself once warned Hillary not to be perceived as a whiner. Funny what a campaign can do.
Which is not to suggest that she’s blowing smoke. Via Gateway Pundit, here’s the latest from the Anchorage Daily News. They’re still pursuing the “Trig is really Bristol’s son” smear.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
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 »
Your appeal to Allah reminds me of Little CindyLuWho who was no more than two asking the Grinch why he was taking their Christmas Tree (or a Holiday Schrub for you atheists), Why Santa, Why?
I’ll say it again. Allah needs his Road to Damascus moment. It’s like he is Batman, never revealing himself, but hardened in his ways.
…Dumb and silent before the wicked, I refrained from any speech. But my sorrow increased; my heart smoldered within me… Psalm 39
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Define divisive.
the_nile on January 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Quote of the Day (Sully classy as ever):
“I met Richard John Neuhaus only a couple of times, but he took the second occasion to tell me to my face, with his clerical collar on, that I was ‘objectively disordered’. I remember this rather well because we were in an elevator at the time and I didn’t quite know where to look.”
Andrew “The Sarah Palin Vagina Monologues” Sullivan
Somehow, assuming this is true, I doubt Father Newhouse’s comment was over Sullivan being homosexual, but being “Sullivan.” As a former fan of Sully, I was shocked how quick he could attack Palin, not on her qualifications (I disagree but fair enough), but on his Baby Trig Trutherism jihad, without a scrap of evidence other than his wild conjectures, without even batting an eye about the hypocrisy of the whole thing. The over the top viciousness of that attack was incredible.
Perhaps Andrew Sullivan should look in the mirror.
Mr. Joe on January 9, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Sarah would have made a good VP. I think she is sincere, honest and hard working. She might have had a hard time with the shallow and power hungry Legislative branch–but, would have shone out as being the most genuine among them, right or wrong.
jeanie on January 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM
You have got to get a clip of Nora O’Donnell and Zeigler just now (almost 1 PST).
He told her they left out the full context of the Palin quote, but that’s what you’d expect from MSNBC who doesn’t bother to mention what party Blagojevich is in and who thinks that situation is funny.
She said that wasn’t fair and threw it to commercial.
MayBee on January 9, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Governor Palin:
Stay in Alaska, the Country & the Republican party doesn’t deserve your Greatness.
Alaskan People:
Cherish Sarah Palin, she is a great and thoughtful leader.
portlandon on January 9, 2009 at 4:01 PM
I had no problem with Palin talking about media bias. I think more politicians should point out when they are being treating unfairly. It’s called media literacy. We are a society who consumes media in huge doses and I think we need to inform the public that the people producing our media have an agenda, even in the entertainment business. If we are going to massive consumers, we should also be literate in what we are consuming!
terryannonline on January 9, 2009 at 4:01 PM
Ziegler doesn’t come off that great in parts of this, but he does a good job of repeatedly busting Shuster for throwing his own opinions in to the news as “facts” (i.e. she was “clearly unqualified”… Something tells me he’s never said that about our community organizer in chief who has no executive experience, and no experience at anything really except for voting “present”).
As for this:
I don’t think she’s whining, AP, I think she’s answering specific questions. I agree it comes off like whining, which is probably not a good thing, which is probably why she issued the statement Shuster refers to at the beginning… but she’s not a whiner. She’s just honest. She’s not going to give the normal diplomatic Republican answer when asked about media bias… some mumbo jumbo about “the people can decide for themselves if the coverage is fair”, etc. She’s not campaigning anymore, so she answered the questions honestly. End of story. Again, I see how it comes off (and how the media will once again spin her), but she’s just answering questions.
RightWinged on January 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
The Senator Obama who did absolutely nothing in the US Senate other than run for President? This guy announced he was running after a whopping 300+ active days in the Senate, and that was viewed as enough experience by the annointed. Furthermore, he cited his experience as a community organizer. He also has an easy path to the US Senate, it was a gift.
V15J on January 9, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Respectfully, I will say I don’t know of anyone in the party more divisive coming into 2008 than John McCain. Toward the end of the primary season, it was all about stopping McCain. And yet, on election day he got my vote because I considered the alternative to be far worse. I could be wrong, but my sense right now is that most of the party likes Palin. In 2008 there was a minority who would rather see Obama elected than either bite their tongues or say a kind word about Governor Palin. Personally, I can’t imagine a candidate favored by this bunch that I could support, given their trash and burn mentality. For me, this minority is the divisive element and I am in no mood to bow down to them.
littleguy on January 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM
McClatchy Watch does a great job taking down the unhinged ADN editor.
Jim62sch on January 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
She divides the party along lines of education, class, and intelligence.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Here’s a list of his voting record, and here’s a site where you can find his committee assignments and sponsorship history.
Off the top of my head, there’s (of course) Coburn-Obama and Lugar-Obama.
You may disagree with him, but you can’t say that he hasn’t been busy.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:05 PM
That last one was for you, upinak.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Saying Sarah runs Alaska like D.C. is dishonest. Alaska in General makes more money then D.C. and we do it “ethically”.
Other then the wacked out people saying is so BAAAAAAAD… who has she divided the lines? Education, Class and so on?
Are you going to go jihad elitist?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Agreed.
Fear us. We are coming.
DeweyWins on January 9, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Big Snchookemdoodlies… you do realize.. NV is NO VOTE. Right? Come on.. LOL look at THAT Record LMFAO!
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Dick Cheney didn’t think Palin was uninformed about the VP’s role, but Biden clearly was. The media failed to point that out. Can anyone deny that Palin was singled out by the media and subjected to far more scrutiny than the other VP candidate or the top of her own ticket? Thanks for playing.
As for class warfare, when did any conservative bring it up? Liberal spokespersons tout Princess Caroline’s sole qualifications for the job as being groomed for the role by her family and likewise knowing more people with fortunes.
Palin is attacked for “personifying a sensational, tawdry Jerry Springer lifestyle,” as if she is responsible for the mud slung at her and her family by virtue of holding office and running on the Republican national ticket.
Is being from a small town in Alaska a class thing?
What about attending a state university v. an Ivy League school and private schools?
What about winning beauty pageants? Playing basketball and wanting to be a sportscaster before entering politics?
Starting a family at a young age? Having more than two kids?
Hunting and being an avid outdoors enthusiast?
Teen pregnancy? A blue collar husband?
Conservatives are not making issues of these things. They’re the reason Sarah Palin is supported by “the base.” Because she is “one of us.”
chunderroad on January 9, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Voting “Present” is not a vote .. sorry people.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Further, there are 50 sitting governors in the U.S. (soon to be 49), and roughly half are Republicans. Can it seriously be suggested that she was the most qualified among them? What about Pawlenty? And what about all the former Republican governors, like Romney and Ehrlich?
…
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 3:57 PM
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM
Big and from your other site:
But it didn’t mention how many time he DIDN’T Vote… i.e. NV.
Hmmmm get your facts straight Big Schnookemdud… you are looking the fool again.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM
You may have something there: she’s very classy, intelligent and educated. The one’s who hate her are petty, arrogant and obsessive. Go Sarah!!
littleguy on January 9, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Which quote was he talking about? I hope someone’s told him that Shuster was lying when he said that her statement on the interview criticized Ziegler when it was actually criticizing the media.
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 4:12 PM
Right – about 20-25% NV. He missed a lot while running for President. Just because there’s no “NV” statistic for governors doesn’t mean that your favorite politician didn’t spend a significant amount of time elsewhere as well.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:13 PM
You mean like Reagan. And the yokels should STFU and listen to their handlers.
She’s brought down corruption , Obama has cooperated with it.
the_nile on January 9, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Thanks Chunder. Like a well-called-in artillery barrage bludgeoning an infantry attack.
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Also, is there not a single issue where you don’t come down on either side? Senators are not obligated to cast a vote for everything that comes up for a vote.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
OMG are you this Farking Stupid?
He missed 24% of the votes. The other Votes he was THERE and did NOT vote on the issue at hand.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Class, of course, in my post referred to “a social stratum sharing basic economic, political, or cultural characteristics, and having the same social position,” rather than to “elegance, grace, or dignity, as in dress and behavior.” Like I said, she divided the party along lines of education and intelligence.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Actually THEY DO. I.E. we vote their asses in.. They are by all counts SUPPOSE to be in that little office on on the floor.. VOTING on the PEOPLE’s RIGHT for a better way of LIFE.
Big you are to stupid to breath.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:17 PM
I see nothing wrong with Palin getting some things off her chest. She was an absolute rock throughout the campaign.
Let the woman speak her piece.
It’s the least we can do for all the crap she took on our behalf.
The Ugly American on January 9, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Hic… you don’t mind that I call you a Hic.
That would be called.. Elitism. Thanks for Playing!
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM
There may have been several other qualified Republicans to choose from for VP, but none of them had the same “stuff” that Palin had, reformer, take on the old boys network, living her proclaimed values, etc.
There are qualifications and there are qualities. Palin had both.
myrenovations on January 9, 2009 at 4:18 PM
You mean , like it’s their job ?
the_nile on January 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Whoa, you get it! What a Concept HUH!
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:19 PM
I thought we elected them so they could network with lobbyists, get rich, and further their own personal ambitions….like the POTUS-Elect.
By the way, how’s the weather up there today?
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 4:23 PM
Um, you just described everything real conservatives admire about Sarah. We find qualities in her, or anyone else for that matter, that we admire, and therefore she’s dividing us?
Are you in a padded room?
fogw on January 9, 2009 at 4:23 PM
Yes, like Reagan, except Reagan did not divide the party, and it was the educated, intelligent voters who preferred him over Carter in November. Sarah Palin is on the wrong side of the same dichotomy.
As to the second part of your post, after mentioning that I never said she was a bad Governor, I will recycle what I wrote a few minutes ago:
Democrats make lousy choices when it comes to picking candidates, but that does not give Republicans a free pass to do the same.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM
warmer… a balmy -4
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM
I will be real honest about Palin, the fact the liberal media hates her makes her a bigger deal in my eyes than if they did not care about her at all. It proves they fear her
If I had known about her before all this happened I wound not have been this impressed.
This proably also explains some of the dislike I had for Huckabee and Mccain and Brooks and the affection I feel for Coulter,Malkin and Pat B and even Rudy G even though he is to the left of me.
This weird thing of why our guys think they have to kiss ass with the media people is beyond me. Even our media people do this. Attacking the media and mocking Hollywood and not trying to make friends is always a better play in the long run.
Then you have Allah emabrassing himself like a school girl because Chris Hitchens says something semi-nice about him.
Can not believe Malkin lets him screw up this site like this.
kangjie on January 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM
How about you just stop. You don’t know crap about Sarah. Seriously you are sounding more an insane idiot!
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:25 PM
We elect them to make decisions, and to cast votes based on them. During the campaigns, we hear them go back and forth on issues, and we assume it’s just a political tactic. Sometimes we vote for them anyway, sometimes we vote against them, and sometimes we decide not to cast a vote.
Have you ever decided not to cast a vote in an election?
In your enthusiasm to condemn Obama, you’re imagining new regulations for elected officials that are not in the Constitution – which is something I imagine you’d be quick to condemn if anyone else on the other side of the political divide did it.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Actually, my online moniker is a Latin phrase. “Hic” translates merely to “this”–no insult there. You lose at your own game.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Of course. Still you may have something there, since I was reading a blog entry by Frum’s wife earlier where she denies being an elitist (being, as it were, from the same “class”) as Governor Palin and laments her own lack of education. I presume this and her intellect must be the significant factors in their opposition to the classy, intelligent and educated Governor Palin.
littleguy on January 9, 2009 at 4:28 PM
Edit:
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Sarah isn’t Reagan c.1980. She’s somewhere in the development cycle between the ‘64 Reagan and the ‘76 Reagan.
The GOP actually once chose Jerry Ford over Ronald Reagan. That’s Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan bad.
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM
no I vote when ever it comes up whether I want to or not, since it is my RIGHT! You need to look around and maybe learn something about the officials you elect.
That is nice.. but you are still acting like a elite jerk. So what is the deal.. you hate her, you don’t like her… you don’t believe her? You obviously lied about Sarah… so WTF?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Bravely done, Upinak, but I don’t think you’re going to get far with reasoned arguments… not even the most diehard Obamabot really thinks his lackluster Senate record was a strong point on his resume. The “qualifications” issue is just a convenient stick they can use to beat Palin with. There will be other sticks, most of them just as flimsy. I notice the undeniably long list of McCain’s qualifications didn’t seem to impress them much.
I doubt the electorate will be very much interested in a long Senate career as a primary “qualification” for the next President. In fact, my crystal ball tells me that will be a net minus in the eyes of most voters, four years from now. I think people will be much more interested in Palin’s credentials as a corruption fighter, judging by the warm-up act of the circus that’s about to get under way. That’s the part of her resume I would advise her to burnish, and if she assumes any sort of leadership role in the party, she would do well to get it on chemotherapy to clear out its more Blagoyevichian elements by 2010. A lean, mean, squeaky-clean GOP will be well positioned to fight the Democrats in 2010 and 2012, when voters will be sick and tired of picking their representatives out of police lineups.
Doctor Zero on January 9, 2009 at 4:32 PM
Yep, educated, intelligent people with class like her, losers dispise her.
She isn’t perfect, but no human is. Let’s not get all holier than thou on the good Gov. of the great state of Alaska.
omnipotent on January 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM
Nobody yet has offered anything in defense of Governor Palin’s qualifications that was not either a) untrue, b) irrelevant, or c) a comparison against some Democratic politician. (By “irrelevant,” I mean citing one of her virtues that makes her qualified to be mayor or governor, but which is irrelevant for the Vice Presidency.)
I think it’s funny when people like you insult my intelligence. Thank you for the laugh. (Now that was elitism.)
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM
if you wanna play that game. What doesn’t qualify her to NOT be VP.. POTUS.. or even Gov.
Have you ever run for an office?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
I’m baffled why MSNBC continues to be infatuated with the VP candidate on the losing ticket. If she’s so awful, why give her attention? Shouldn’t they be roundly ignoring her if they wanted her to go away? What a bunch of candyasses.
the_souse on January 9, 2009 at 4:36 PM
See hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Dude, have you ever heard of “Reagan Democrats”? They were blue-collar, not college educated, not “upper-class”. Besides, every segment of the electorate favored Reagan over Carter!
littleguy on January 9, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Attention!
Ann Coulter will be on Cavuto in a few minutes to talk about Sarah Palin~
Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin. Awesome.
ivybelle1 on January 9, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Not voting is also a RIGHT!
What happens when you don’t know the issues or their implications when you get into the voting booth? Do you flip a coin, close your eyes and point, or just assume that the one with the little “R” next to his/her name is always right?
What if you don’t really care one way or the other?
Personally, Id’ rather abstain than risk casting a regrettable vote for something. I guess that’s just me though.
Big S on January 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Wasn’t Shuster the one who got suspended for using the term “pimping out” in reference to Chelsea Clinton, and then wept on the air making his apology.
Perfect illustration of the double standard on treatment of candidate’s families.
Jim62sch on January 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
If you reread your question in English, you will see that it is the exact same question that I asked of the thread at large–namely, “what qualifies her to be VP, especially over every other Republican governor or ex-governor?”
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:40 PM
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Back during the Reagan Era, he united the party and the country with his communication skills, business and pilitical common sense, and love of America and its people. Since that time, the Republican Politicians have split the party themselves through their Elitist behavior and lack of connection with the average American.
In Sarah, people see somebody they can identify with. Somebody who has achieved things through hard work. Somebody who seens approachable because of the way she talks to people, not down to them. People identify with her because she is not embarrased by her Faith, her family or her country. If the Beltway Elite would quit trying to not rock the boat (i.e., be Moderate) and advance their own wealth and status, perhaps the Repubican Party would not be so divided.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 4:42 PM
Can you answer the question or are you going to be the elitist you can be?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:42 PM
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 4:42 PM
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:44 PM
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Sorry. I’m so used to the national PDS saufferers, I just answered in that manner. Do carry on.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 4:46 PM
At the time, the median Republican, and especially the median of the younger segments Reagan brought in to the fold, were better educated than the median Democrat. True, the median Reagan Democrat was not as well-educated as the median Republican, but they were more educated than the median of non-Reagan Democrats. Much has changed in 28 years, and with people like Palin, Jindal, and Huckabee leading the party, the pendulum is unlikely to swing back the other way any time soon.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:47 PM
saufferers=sufferers
oops.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 4:48 PM
So with that said, you whom thiks a Democrat with a supposed superior education, is a better choice?
Am I following you correctly?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:48 PM
You didn’t ask one that I had not already asked of you. Besides, real life calls. Happy Friday.
hicsuget on January 9, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Honestly? Chrarisma. Never underestimate charisma. It’s the reason twerps like Shuster and his fellows in the MSM will always be on a mission to “kill the monster” until she’s six feet under.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Ooops, sorry. *Charisma This thing needs an auto spell checker before submitting. ;)
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
I’m one of those who doesn’t think Palin is qualified to be POTUS and thinks there are better candidates out there. I think her education background is weak. While certainly not an automatic disqualifier, IMHO it can (and in Palin’s case, think it does) indicate a lack of intellectual curiosity and horsepower. Some thought her performance in the debate was great. I thought she had her moments, but there were also some times where I winced. To me, the ability to speak contemporaneously and debate are also pretty good indicators of both intellegence and education, whether formal or informal. With those disclaimers, question for those of you who think an Ivy League education (or thinking that if a candidate or politician has one that’s a good thing) is elitist. If you or your children had the opportunity to attend Harvard or Yale, or whatever school had the absolute best faculty teaching the subjects in which you or they had a keen interest, wouldn’t you take advantage of that opportunity? I’m not speaking here about a springboard to a political career, but any other kind.
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM
You are going off education? Have you met someone who had a degree (let’s say masters) and a rock was smarter then the person?
I have on many occations and sometimes it is easier to talk to a rock.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Fear us. We are coming.
Don’t forget to get your super-awesome strike force patch!
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Standing up to liberals is unappealing to liberals. The country is waiting for a politician who calls it like it is.
peacenprosperity on January 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM
As others in the blogosphere have pointed out, the best part about the interview was that “www.howobamagotelected.com” was positioned under Palin’s face for much of it. Too funny.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 4:57 PM
I’m a little tired of the phrase “intellectual curiosity”, as if there are tons of intellectually curious Woodrow Wilsons out there waiting to put down their tomes to run for office. (Wilson probably ended up being a pretty bad president, by the way, but that’s just my opinion.) Anyone who takes a look at some serious politically- or economically-related problems and not only thinks about the solutions, but attempts some sort of solution, is intellectually curious enough for me.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 4:57 PM
She’s not and Obama is? Nuff said! Idiots!
sabbott on January 9, 2009 at 4:59 PM
Still doesn’t top that awesome Obama salute. I don’t see it very much, though. I thought I would.
Well, at least they know who Palin is. Maybe you can straighten them out on Reid, Pelosi and the rest.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Anyone who takes a look at some serious politically- or economically-related problems and not only thinks about the solutions, but attempts some sort of solution, is intellectually curious enough for me.
Exactly the point. The answers that Palin gave during the Couric and Jennings interviews (and in the VP debate) showed that she did not had the depth of knowledge on the subjects that someone who had given them much thought would have. She answered with generic platitudes that came off as memorized.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:01 PM
And that differs from Obama how, exactly? Hell, he’s taking office in a couple of weeks and still does it. But I’m sure that inspires your confidence nonetheless.
Palin has shown she knows a thing or two about budgeting. Obama STILL hasn’t.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:04 PM
As far as I know not ONE newspaper or MSM smear lie machine has stated any reason why Barry was qualified to run for President, nor any legitimate information on Barry that wasn’t tainted with some form of cover up, or ONE of Barry’s friends who doesn’t have a shady anti-American past!
David is a joke,..but then again,what liberal mouth tool isn’t!
christene on January 9, 2009 at 5:05 PM
By not telling Couric what newspapers she read. Ever heard of using that as a stepping stone? Anytime someone who is being watched says something like.. I like slurpees.. the people who own/run that business are going to use it and RUN with it.
I thought it smart she didn’t say who she read, watched etc because all it would do would be a backlash. She saw what it did to McCain.. why would she even bother?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Won’t need it for a nancy boy like yourself.
DeweyWins on January 9, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Pssst…it’s because he’s a lefty Ivy League-educated African American who can read a teleprompter like nobody’s business.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM
And that differs from Obama how, exactly?
Are you kidding me? Obama is an incredibly thoughtful and knowledgeable person. You may not agree with many of his proposals, but only a fool would say that he does not come off as someone who does has a command of many issues.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:08 PM
No offense, but that’s bull. Has everyone forgotten the campaign placing Sarah under house arrest, in Philadelphia of all places? Sarah was handling Couric and Gibson the way the likes of the Wallaces, Schmidt, and Davis wanted them handled. Plus, she had to toe the McCain line, which isn’t the easiest thing to do. McCain himself can hardly do it.
Sarah was like a brilliant downfield passer being made to hand the ball off 40 times a game. She was horribly and tragically misused by McCain, and she’s the one who is paying and will continue to pay for their malpractice.
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 5:09 PM
Won’t need it for a nancy boy like yourself.
Heh. you obviously don’t know who you’re dealing with. But, don’t let me interrupt your little conservo-wank fantasy.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:10 PM
Ziegler need to get back on Radio, I used to listen to his show on KFI & when he filled in for Drudge.
borg on January 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Are you hitting the bong? Or just drinking the water?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Okay, you obviously don’t understand. Reagan Democrats made the difference, and in the last election they were known as “lunch bucket” voters. There may be fewer of them, but they’re still there and they actually show up to vote. As for qualifications, these are subjective once you get beyond the constitutional requirements. Governor Palin’s qualifications are extensive and well-known, at least among the classy, educated and intelligent.
littleguy on January 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
upinak – Of course I’ve met people with advanced degrees that give rocks a run for their money. But in general, I’d disagree. Two guesses as to what I do, but every colleague of mine has an advanced degree (it’s a legal requirement) and the vast majority are pretty darn smart. I haven’t attended an Ivy, but other than legacies, you have to be the top of the top in testing and grades to get it. Of course there are people just as smart elsewhere, but as far as concentrations of smart people, don’t you think Harvard would be a good place to study? And on balance, don’t you think having more education is better than less?
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 5:09 PM
TOUCHDOWN! Excellent post.
kingsjester on January 9, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Like what? The economy? LOL
Only a fool would say that she does not come off as someone who does have a command of many issues. Her issues may not be the ones Obama has command of, though. Like community organizing. I haven’t seen or heard any evidence, in fact, that Obama really thought very deeply about his alleged area of expertise, constitutional law. Have you?
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Oh goody.. are you Erik Erikson? And like I care who you are?
Does anyone care?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:12 PM
She was interviewed by Peter Jennings? How did I miss that one? ;)
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Sure. The back-and-forth is OK.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
upinak – I agree wholeheartedly. I’ve been an adjunct for the last 20 years or so (that’s fancy acadmemic talk for a part time professor). I was also the IT director at a local university. Anyway, what I have seen of ‘education’ is grossly over-rated. Look at Caroline Kennedy with her ivy league pedigree. She is an absolute ditz that I wouldn’t let walk my dog.
Anyway, a lot of education is all about an incestuous group of people who go to committees and give each other awards.
bullseye on January 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM
That must have been a heck of an interview. I hear Sarah also appeared on “MTP with Tim Russert” and Firing Line with William F. Buckley, Jr.”
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 5:16 PM
I missed Pete’s interview, damn I wonder if it was a lively debate. How’d he look?
thomasaur on January 9, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Stupid Question:
Correct Answer:
Sounds like all of the folks under discussion are QUALIFIED to be Preseident and thus qualified to be VICE PResident as well. In fact, when Trig reaches the age of 35 yrs, HE will be QUALIFIED to be President.
All the arguments about qualifications need to be grounded in fact. Almost everyone of us here is qualified to be President. Whether we should elect someone like Sen Obama, Gov Palin, Big S (who can’t be bothered to vote for something or someone he hasn’t analysed down the the hairs on the candidates asshole and believe Senators can quite justifiably be paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for showing up for their duties-jobs only 75% of the time), or hicsuget (who has an anal retentive streak a mile wide about grammar and his/her own positions on correct qualifications for office, and yet thinks Gov Palin is a dick) is a whole ‘nother story, idn’t it now?
Subsunk on January 9, 2009 at 5:18 PM
I think it depends on the person. Some people have no reason to be in college.. others are and will always be “students’.
Example are those who go into some college classes get a bachlors and guess what… never use it. Why? Because they realized that even with the degree they have, they didn’t like what they were doing and moved to a totally different field. And in some cases work crap job.. like laborer, but make more money then they would have in the degree field.
Another example: My Mom is the perfect example. Forever Students. Hate where they are, has multiple degrees, yet want to go back and get another one because they think that it will help them, when in most cases (generally speaking) the businesses and corps just want someone who has shown they can do the work and have gone to college for a degree and can LEARN! I love my Mom, but she hasn’t figured this out and I am tired of telling her that she has to work for it, it won’t be handed to her.
Two good examples. But there are certain fields that yes, I appreciate more education.. Doctors, and anything Medical (with internships of some sort) and Engineers…
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »