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 | regular view
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 »
One story about academia… We had a ‘consortium’ of schools. One of my first tasks was to sit on the tech board and meet with the other tech heads. OK.. The first meeting was about developing a mission statement. An hour and a half totally wasted. We were all tasked with coming up with alternate mission statements. So, I happened to find an online mission statement generator at dilbert. After two or three tries I had a statement that was absolute garbage but had a lot of big words in it.
When I presented it, the group discussed it for about 15 minutes. Only the guy across from me knew what I had done (he was a dilbert fan) and he almost had a stroke trying not to fall on the floor laughing.
So, Academia is a lot of leftist overblown blowhards who are clueless as to how the real world works. (there are some good ones out there, but you have to really search for them)
bullseye on January 9, 2009 at 5:19 PM
The classic libtard assesment of a cadidate with absolutely no political accomplishments that they have elected president.
Thanks Tom. This is based on your belief he was a great academic despite never seeing his transcripts.
You are a fool Tom.
DeweyWins on January 9, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Yeah….sorry, Tom_Shipley, but a slip like that shows an obvious lack of intellectual curiosity. I mean, goose and gander and all that. ;)
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:19 PM
I would define “devisive” in the political sense as someone who divides people into antagonistic groups that cannot be unified sufficiently to win an election. From the reaction I have seen to Palin (here and elsewhere), I am convinced that she will divide Republicans into groups that will not unite to elect her. And she will not win over independants at all.
For me, this makes her the anit-Reagan or the anti-Bush (43), who were much more sucessful at uniting the three key components of the Republican Party: fiscal conservatives, religious conservatives, and strong foreign policy advocates.
Don’t get me wrong, I liked Palin and admired her for what she had to endure on the campaign. But she is not good for the party right now. Maybe in ten years it will be much different. Remember, she is only 44 years old. She has plenty of time to get ready for prime time on the national stage.
RedSoxNation on January 9, 2009 at 5:20 PM
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.
Palin is a brilliant attack dog who can deliver someone else’s words well.
This theory that McCain handlers reigned her in is just BS. I mean, I think they did reign her in, but that’s not why she came off as less that brilliant.
Someone as smart as you claim Palin to be would not give an interview like the ones she gave to Couric and Jennings. And McCain’s strategists would not give someone that smart the line “I may not answer the questions you ask, but that’s because I want to speak directly to the American people” so she essentially had an out to answering any question in the VP debate.
Someone that smart would be able to draw on her own knowledge and give a coherent answer. Someone that smart would NEVER give an answer like this:
Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy- Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions.
It’s just gibberish. It’s like she grasped at every idea she knew conservatives liked and just threw them out there in no coherent form.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:21 PM
I posted this on another thread, but I’ll post it here too.
She’s damned if she does, and damned if she doesn’t. She gives an interview for a documentary on media malpractice — a subject that she is eminently qualified and justified in discussing — and she gets slammed.
If she were to slink quietly away and descend into her hobbit hole with a copy of the Federalist Papers and the Collected Works of Thomas Sowell, Russell Kirk, Friedrich Hayek, Phyllis Schlafly, and William F. Buckley, Jr., conservatives would criticize her for not standing up and fighting back at the media’s smearing of her record.
If she does nothing, the narrative of her as an unqualified and unintelligent rube will become set in stone.
If she gets too much exposure she opens herself to criticism that she’s ignoring her work as governor and is acting like an attention hog.
If she sticks to her work as governor, people will say that she has no national appeal.
If she comes out and gives an eloquent discourse on the situation in Gaza, she will be criticized for trying to usurp the new Obama administration by pretending as if she won the election.
She can’t win with these people. She needs to do what she thinks is best, and ignore the chattering.
Congratulations to conservatives for helping the liberals destroy another voice for conservatism. We always end up eating our own. Whittaker Chambers called us on that years ago.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Tom_ Shipley -”I see dead news guys, all the time.”
thomasaur on January 9, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I missed Pete’s interview, damn I wonder if it was a lively debate. How’d he look?
OK… Not Jennings. The other ABC guy. The not dead one… Gibson. the Charles Gibson interview.
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Man, I really gotta see this interview with Peter Jennings since you’ve mentioned it twice now. I can’t believe I missed that one during the campaign.
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Well, the Constitution sets down a few simple qualifications for the job, and I’m sure Sarah Palin can provide ample documentation she meets those conditions – just like Barack Obama did!
Beyond that, the short answer is that Presidential qualifications are whatever the majority of the electorate, in states worth the proper number of electoral votes, wants them to be. The only people in the world with direct, completely relevant experience for the job are ex-presidents, who either can’t run again, or wouldn’t win if they did.
It’s fair to point out that Palin’s first big interviews did some damage to her, but it’s equally clear that she has charisma and the media is still interested in putting her on the screen, and people are watching those interviews. Obviously she’s never going to be pronounced “qualified” by people who think only Yale graduates are qualified, but how big a slice of the electorate are they? How many truly persuadable voters would dismiss her as a candidate, based solely on what she’s said and done so far?
It’s a fool’s errand to insist the Republicans find a candidate who will be pronounced “qualified” by the media elite, because that person does not exist. The hope that somehow a candidate from the GOP will grace the talk-show circuit and inspire admiration from the reporters, and in turn prompt some vast legion of chin-stroking moderate philosopher-citizens to head for the polls in an armada of Volvos, is futile vanity. The GOP needs someone with presence and conviction, who has the right ideas and can explain them to the voters in an attractive way, backed by a party that doesn’t have to escape from grand-jury hearings to support the candidate on the campaign trail. I haven’t seen anything to tell me Sarah Palin can’t be that person. She’s done extremely well under very difficult conditions so far. If she plays her cards right between now and 2012 – and remembers that she will have to meet far higher standards than a Democrat candidate would – she can put Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson behind her.
Doctor Zero on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
You ate lead chips as a child?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
I hear you expresso loving east village libtards really bring it in a catfight.
I guess you are the toughest dude at your bath house.
I will be sure to stay clear.
DeweyWins on January 9, 2009 at 5:23 PM
I can see why a liberal would find “tax cuts” to be gibberish, but keep in mind also that it wasn’t HER campaign.
Anyway, if I hear Obama utter the platitude “I’m open to any plan that works” one more time…
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Your right, John McCain was also a divisive candidate. That might explain why he lost so badly. If Palin is the candidate in 2012, she will lose by a wider margin. We need someone that all Republicans can get behind and that can attract some independants…Otherwise, we lose again…
RedSoxNation on January 9, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Good point…
RedSoxNation on January 9, 2009 at 5:25 PM
If you’d look at the record, as opposed the MSM b.s., you’d see she’s probably the most balanced candidate as far as the proverbial three legs of the stool are concerned.
Jindal may also be in this class, but he’s even earlier in his development than Sarah.
Huck, Romney, Rudy, all of them have a problem with one or more of the other “legs” of the party.
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Ziegler: “This is like O.J. interviewing the cops.”
HILARIOUS!!!
D2Boston on January 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
How? Prove to me how she is doing it.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
And don’t forget the utter gibberish of capital gains tax cuts for small businesses, the fact that most small businesses make less than 250k per year…wait, was that 200k a year? Or 300k a year? Or was it that 95% of all poodles in kennels making less than 250k per year are entitled to health care reform? Or that Hezbollah was kicked out of Lebanon by the French and ourselves? And that NATO needs to step in there? (Barack says so, says Joe Biden.)
Come on, Tom. Defending the indefensible.
ddrintn on January 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Because it’s a right does not make it right, you fool…. it’s these peoples’ JOBS to know the laws & issues that they are voting on.
Remember, THEY work for US, not the other way around. And we’re paying them a pretty penny to represent us. If he’s going to not even show up 24% of the time, and when he DOES show up, not do his job, then he isn’t worth a whole heck of a lot, is he?
UltimateBob on January 9, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Well said, sir. I’m sure the wet sponges would be fearful in a fight with Ole Tommy.
Subsunk
Subsunk on January 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM
I am littleguy. Hear me roar!
Another one of “Sarah’s People“.
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Geez, guys, keep your bathhouse, sponge-fight fantasies to yourselves. Maybe start a private chat?
Tom_Shipley on January 9, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Are we getting punked? LOL,..We must be right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1s6ld271Dk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThEAO0lt4Dw
christene on January 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Changing the subject tom?
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:32 PM
You mean she had a speechwriter? OMG!
First off, fool, it’s “rein her in,” not “reign her in.” She was running for Queen. You come off as “less than brilliant” when you make stupid mistakes like that.
Um, last I checked, Peter Jennings is still dead. There have been no zombie sightings that I’ve heard of. I don’t recall Palin giving any interviews with dead people.
She chose to redirect that one question in order to make a follow up point. That’s called debate strategy. It was effective. She totally unnerved Ifill and took control of the debate from that moment on.
If you say so. I interpreted her statement to mean: shoring up the financial sector was crucial if we want to be able to work on jobs and health care, etc. In other words, first things first.
But what do I know? I’m just an ordinary American who knows the difference between “rein” and “reign” and has heard the news that Peter Jennings is no longer in the land of the living.
Hey, perhaps next you’ll complain about Palin’s interview with Tim Russert.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Did you not watch Ziegler’s interview? Sarah was compelled to give the Couric interview and continue it, even though it broke bad.
If anything, Sarah’s is sweet and deferential. Maybe too much so. See her comments about Hillary and even her air kiss to Sweet Caroline yesterday. She has refrained from calling out two names she would have every right to light up at every opportunity: Nicolle Wallace and Andy Sullivan.
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 5:36 PM
I’m sorry I’ve never heard say anything beside mantras and slogans. Did you watch his press conference yesterday? It was nothing but platitudes and fluff. When did fluff equal being thoughtful and knowledgeable. When they asked him about abortion during the campaign, his answer “It’s above my pay grade.” WOW! How knowledgeable and insightful. I’m not joking when I say I thought his speech in Germany was the most vapid speech I’ve ever heard a politician give.
terryannonline on January 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM
I am getting bored with all the Palin-haters.
upinak on January 9, 2009 at 5:41 PM
+100!
Doc, you’ve been writing some awesome stuff lately!
“…a vast legion of chin-stroking moderate philosopher-citizens to head for the polls in an armada of Volvos…”
LOL!!! You rock!
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 5:41 PM
+
the_nile on January 9, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Every candidate is divisive. There hasn’t been a unifying candidate for this party since Reagan. I don’t even count Bush because I know of many fiscal conservatives like me who gnashed our teeth when we voted for him in 2004 — but what would the alternative have been?
I believe Palin has the potential to be unifying in the same way that Reagan was, although she has the added hurdle of gender bias to overcome which will be a formidable challenge IMO. And that bias is demonstrated by both men AND women on both sides of the political spectrum. Anyway, that said, in the end if she were to get the nomination, Republicans would unite behind her, just as we grudgingly supported McCain this time, or as the PUMAs reluctantly went home on Nov. 4 and gritting their teeth pulled the lever for Obama.
This is why I don’t understand why Republican candidates feel so compelled to be so conciliatory toward the left when all it serves to do is alienate the base and those in the middle who might otherwise lean right (which would be the majority of voters). They certainly don’t make those kinds of overtures to us. Republicans are far too willing to let the MSM write the narrative, at the expense of our own ideals and principles. This manufactured panic-mongering over the last several months is an excellent example. The press has been sowing the seeds for this meltdown for years now, and it’s finally coming to fruition. And instead of cooler minds prevailing, we all fall to prey to their fanning the flames and the panic just snowballs whether its justified or not.
NoLeftTurn on January 9, 2009 at 5:45 PM
bullseye – I assume you have a post-grad degree to teach at the college level. Even if not, do you think your education was valuable? And do you think any of your students found your teaching valuable? Do you want your kids to go to college?
upinak – I see education a bit differently. I can’t remember 80% of the details I learned in college or grad school, and I don’t have an undergrad degree that directly relates to my work, but I don’t think that’s the point – unless you’re going to learn a trade or training to be an accountant or doctor, etc., where the empirical information is as important as anything else. Sounds campy but I think exposing yourself to different schools of thought and challenging yourself with ideas that are completely divergent from your own is a good thing. That can be done outside of college, but that’s tough for most people. Besides, a degree gives you a leg up on those that don’t have one. I like the fact that people who have degrees are far less likely to rely on government handouts than high school dropouts.
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 5:46 PM
No other pick was even close assuming they had to be mostly pro-life. Sarah was the best pick. If there was a more experienced pro-life candidate, then that would have been the pick, but there wasn’t. And don’t tell me Romney is pro-life. If Ridge was pro-life, and McCain picked him and doubled down on experience, AND the mortgage meltdown didn’t hit, he had a great chance to win. But given the circumstances, Sarah was the RIGHT pick. He brought up the minor-leaguer early when he had to, and made the correct pick, but mishandled her rollout.
McCain lost the election with the male vote on the economy when he panicked and buckled when the mortgage/economic meltdown hit and showed a lack of strong leadership.
Once that economic meltdown hit, there was NO WAY he could have won given Obama’s control of the MSM.
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 5:52 PM
Shuster and the rest of his left wing buddies are out of their minds. Palin is as qualified as Obama and these jerks can yell, scream and slobber on themselves until the cows come home but it will change nothing. In Fact, Obama’s entire administration is the epitome of gross incompetence.
rplat on January 9, 2009 at 5:55 PM
Round 2 coming up now on “1600 Pennsylvania Ave”
Get your popcorn and soda pop!
Go RBNY on January 9, 2009 at 6:02 PM
SOAB! I missed it.
Sorry Ann.
Sapwolf on January 9, 2009 at 6:03 PM
You think that Reagan wasn’t “divisive”? I’m sorry, but you’re being historically illiterate. The most divisive GOP convention in recent history was the 1976 convention when half the delegates wanted Reagan and kept shouting “Viva Ole!” The Rockefeller Republicans were furious at him for not bowing out of the race sooner in order to “unite the party.” He won the nomination in 1980 because he built up a coalition of social conservatives who were former Democrats and united them with the radical fiscal conservatives. He didn’t “unite” the party — he transformed it. Palin has the same potential if you ask me. She did this when she ran for governor. There are vast numbers of blue collar citizens who belong to no party at all and have no interest in politics, but they like her.
As the article I linked to noted:
Now you can sneer at this as “populism,” but tell what other Republican politician can draw a crowd of thousands of people (like these folks from Pennsylvania) who will wait in line in the cold for hours to hear him or her speak?
Divisive? No, popular is the word you’re looking for.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 6:04 PM
Shuster …
the dude just has to be
I can’t watch the dude …
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 6:04 PM
I want “divisive” … I want to know where people stand
if you are a Republican who wants to be a democrat … I want to know
if you want to stand up for principles and conservatism … I want to know
American politics have been divisive since the word go … Hamilton v. Jefferson and so on
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 6:07 PM
I’m late getting in here, but here goes:
In addition to the NV Voting Record which others already commented on I noticed this:
And from Dan McLaughlin last fall in Obama and the Integrity Gap: The Machine on Obama’s work as a State Senator:
Dan has many embedded links if you want to check them out.
INC on January 9, 2009 at 6:12 PM
Business and computers.. However, back to the point. The emphasis on ‘education’ isn’t about education. It’s about the little cliques, the frats, the sororities, having lattes with the right marxist professor, banging the right blueblood on the beach etc.
Trashing someone like Sarah who has proven repeatedly that she can accomplish things because of her ’substandard education’ is disingenius. What it is all about is that she hasn’t been a part of the Boston, DC and Long Island country club set. She’s busy running a state while the TRUE ELITES are fawning over obama at a Maya Angelou poetry reading.
Again, the real purpose of demanding academic credentials for politics is to keep out the rif raff. Of course, in real occupations like engineering, you are getting a real education and your school, course of study and grades do matter.
Even the liberals can’t quite come out and say “we don’t want some alaskan fisherwoman who hunts and doesn’t come to our cocktail parties to kiss our butts as VP.” What they can say is “Oh she didn’t go to hahvahd..”
bullseye on January 9, 2009 at 6:18 PM
AP, wht good would it do to remain silent when the media keeps repeating the same charges that have been debunked over and over again by her “surrogates”?
At one point the rule was to not answer charges because they would disappear by the next news cycle if you said nothing. That’s no longer the case when the MSM is allowed to be so biased, and with the rise of partisan news sits.
Fighting back is not an unattractive trait. Allowing yourself and your family to be smeared is.
kcewa on January 9, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Gee, after more than 30 days of non-stop media bashing and character assassination Palin was negative in the polls.
After 9 mos of non-stop media mashing and character obfuscation Obama won 55% of the 50% of Americans that bother to vote.
Wow. What a surprise.
Can someone tell me why MM keeps such an obvious ass-sucking Obama nut like AP around? Trying to justify her continuing web- presence when the unFairness Act gets passed, maybe.
klickink.wordpress.com on January 9, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Here, here. A lesson, incidentally, that John McCain never learned.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 6:41 PM
I don’t see what the big problem is … the interview was about media bias … she was unfairly attacked during the campaign … she had a platform to attack back and she did … we are like 2 weeks away from the Messiah taking the throne and the economy tanking even more … this interview will not matter anymore
the very fact that the media is still going after her shows that she is a threat PERIOD … if she was the person they try to make her out to be they would just leave her alone, the dems/media know that she is 44 years old and in the first term as governor … over the next 20 years she can strike at anytime … they are trying to destroy her now
they tried it with Reagan and it didn’t work and it won’t work now
they see a threat to the liberal order and are trying to eliminate it … end of story
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Excellent point.
I’m especially amused when people complain about Palin’s college hopping, but forget to mention that Obama basically got his undergrad degree from Occidental College and transferred to Columbia at the last minute (so to speak). And he’s never released his transcripts. Neither has Palin, but she reportedly got straight ‘A’s.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM
what … no exit questions on why the VP candidate supported the presidential candidate over the bailout issue this time?
I thought I had seen it all when Hotair.com ran a poll about Palin and Murkowski without even checking the people who ran the poll … they needed a commentator to break the source of the poll for them
wow … unbelievable stuff going on
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 6:45 PM
The Sarah Palin calendar being sold by an Alaska photographer is currently #1 on Amazon.
But look at the reviews and the search keywords. PDS is alive and well at Amazon.
Jim62sch on January 9, 2009 at 6:46 PM
If I may jump in. I think the point is that there is no degree or educational pedigree that qualifies one (or disqualifies one) for the Presidency. And, it’s certainly not fair to compare the requirement that most of us who have pursued careers in the sciences/technology for specialized education and training to the educational backgrounds that political candidates may or may not possess.
What matters are accomplishments, skills, values, and vision. I’m satisfied that Governo Palin has accomplished a great deal with her education. In my estimation, she achieved more solely on her merits than Obama achieved, despite the additional education he received.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 6:48 PM
the Palin man had good instincts, attack attack attack. The idiots have already proven themselves irrelevant, now they just need their heads bashed in. That’s my roughshod appraisal.
Kill, kill, kill. Killer instinct; I like it.
anti-boomer on January 9, 2009 at 6:53 PM
I replied to you over at McClatchy Watch. I think the ADN’s been reading Trig Truther Central. I know Sully’s been in direct contact with the head Troofer at Truther Central. I don’t want to link it and give them traffic, but some time back they both mentioned (obliquely) that they’d been in contact with each other. Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if the ADN had as well.
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Uh, how, uh…can you uhhhhh…ya’ow…tell?
capitalist piglet on January 9, 2009 at 6:58 PM
after what Palin went through let her blow a little steam off.
rob verdi on January 9, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Obama is a radical Marxist Socialist in the spirit of Olinsky, Ayres and Stalin. You might as well say that Hitler was an incredibly thoughtful and knowledgeable person as well as demonstrated by Mein Kampf.
technopeasant on January 9, 2009 at 7:04 PM
bullseye – That’s painting the educational experience with a pretty broad brush. And what you describe is very different than my experience. But as we know, anecdotal experiences are unreliable indicators.
I don’t care if Palin didn’t go to Harvard, although I wish she had more heft to her educational resume. My point is that getting an education at Harvard or Yale or other prestiguous schools is a pretty good thing and most of us, if given the chance, would take it. Other than the inherent benefit of learning, it opens doors, provides opportunities and increases earning potential. There is certainly a conservative elite that also loves the Ivy League and its grads. Are they better or worse than the liberal elite?
P.S. I’m not an Obama apologist but Occidental is a very good school. Maybe not Columbia, but very highly ranked.
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 7:06 PM
I agree. It’s a great little liberal arts college.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Education opens doors. Degrees from prestigious institutions opens doors. That’s certainly true. Obama’s Harvard Law Degree certainly gave him a leg up (although I have yet to see any evidence that he is an accomplished legal scholar).
But isn’t it just as impressive when you meet someone who does not have much or any formal training in a field, but who has accomplished a great deal anyway? When I meet someone, I sometimes learn where (or if) they went to college. Even when I was a professor, I occasionally knew where someone attended grad school, less frequently where they attended undergrad school… but I always knew what papers they had published.
Having taught at a land grant university for a number of years, I have no difficulty relating to Governor Palin’s educational background. I had quite a few transfer students. Generally, they were dealing with family or financial issues and, frequently, they were the most focused and motivated students.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:17 PM
You know, this thread reminded me that the degree thing is simply never going to go away. Palin’s enemies are always going to knock her for it.
Maybe we should just accept that and start a fund to pay for her to go and get an advanced degree. MBA might be the quickest route to a terminal degree. She may even be able to take an executive MBA course on-line. I think IU’s Kelley School may have a good one.
Maybe that would shut up Palin’s critics.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:22 PM
Especially after the Media gives him his daily tongue bath.
Geochelone on January 9, 2009 at 7:23 PM
The vast majority of the college degree holders in this country went to state schools just Governor Palin. There is absolutely nothing wrong with state schools.
I wish someone would ask this simple question: When did an ivy league degree become a prerequisite for the presidency?
And if Obama is so brilliant for having graduated from Columbia and Harvard, why is Bush stupid despite having graduated from Yale and Harvard?
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 7:26 PM
I think we have to separate education from getting a ‘ticket to the club’. For hard sciences such as medicine, engineering etc I want to be treated or served by those with a great education.
However, most of the Ivy Leaguers we have in congress today are lawyers.. Where has that gotten us??? Trillion dollar deficits??
The bashing of Palin’s education had nothing to do with the press trying to vet her academic credentials. It was one talking point they could use against her. We still have no real idea what obama supposedly accomplished in school do we?
Ah, there you have it… Hahvad and Yale are ways to keep people out who haven’t had the proper debutant’s ball, whose daddy isn’t in the right positions in the local political scene etc. Some people can take the education, like Theodore Roosevelt, and apply some robust life experiences, ethics and morals and become a damn good public servant.
Both stink. A lot of the attacks from so called republicans directed at Sarah Palin were from the country club/ivy league snobs R and D alike. The DC cocktail party set are afraid of Palin Rs and Ds alike.
And just what did barryo accomplish with that ‘education’?? he ended up being a political hack accomplishing next to nothing. Oh, he did make a brillian real estate deal with the obama mansion and then made a brilliant reduction of the hospital board members that happened to benefit Rezko.
bullseye on January 9, 2009 at 7:27 PM
“Fight with me, fight with me, fight with me” Remember those words?
Then we all got angry because McCain refused to fight. We got furious with Bush too over this same thing.
I expect Palin to fight for what is right. I said the same thing last night. The troops get discouraged when the leader does not fight.
She needs to continue to set the record straight, over and over again.
We have got to stop letting the media just get away with this kind of garbage.
Someone said today that Palin is a victim of death by 1000 cuts. She needs to swing back with her own blade every once in a while.
Even Barack Obama defended himself. Remember the speech in Philly?
Us surrogates have been fighting this Trig truther crap since the beginning and still it continues as ADN just proved. This is one that Palin herself needs to call the media out on, and she just did. The surrogates clearly have not been able to get this one done. However, in 2004, the surrogates could get it done with Dan Rather.
Yes we expect our leaders to fight for us and then move on. If she spends the next three years complaining about the media, that might be a different story.
To complain is one thing, to call out is another.
Do any of us want a leader that refuses to stand and fight when needed???
If it was not for the interview she did, none of us would have ever known that she was still be hounded by the largest newspaper in her state over Trig.
Now we know and it time for the surrogates to fight. She can move on and we can fight this one for her.
kcarpenter on January 9, 2009 at 7:30 PM
over/under 300 comments.
I usually don’t bother to read these threads since I hate how nasty it gets.
Palin is 35 years old and a natural born citizen.
She’s qualified.
jimmy the notable on January 9, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Come on, guys, I’ve got 50 big ones riding on this thread.
jimmy the notable on January 9, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Yeah, I was the one who tipped McClatchy Watch by e-mail, after somebody (I think it was you or ramrocks) tipped me here last night.
Jim62sch on January 9, 2009 at 7:30 PM
I love the Gov.
:-)
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:31 PM
+1
wccawa on January 9, 2009 at 7:32 PM
And a stunning campus. We’re about an hour and a half away. I’d kill to work there.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:33 PM
It’s about a half hour from me. Ditto about working there. I interview there last year. Hiring freeze, alas…
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 7:37 PM
More thinly veiled misogyny everywhere, 24/7. It still is a matter of Sarah being more like a man inside, (rock hard with conviction), while being a strong and beautiful woman, than all of her detractors on both sides of the political spectrum and in both genders. Envy…not a pretty vice.
…”doing it herself plays well with the base but at the price of diminishing her.” (With her detractors–so what?)
I think it’s time for her to ‘do it’ (tell it like it is) herself rather than the MSM ‘doing it’ to her (sticking bs in her mouth) for the millionth time. I for one am glad she’s answered the stupid questions that have come up from that train wreck of an interview. Why must she play the old political games when she’s one of a rare breed of non-politicians and why must the idiots have to keep asking them over and over again, as if they ask again that they will accept her answer?
It’s the same old same old: Palin wasn’t qualified to be VP but Barry Whosane was qualified to be POTUS. NOT!
Christine on January 9, 2009 at 7:39 PM
Shuster…he reminds me of something I stepped in at the farm.
Christine on January 9, 2009 at 7:41 PM
It’s like a little Hot Air circle. I like it. I haven’t been to Truther Central lately. It’s hard to stomach it.
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Yep, ironically, higher ed is feeling the pain right now. What do you do?
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:43 PM
he is the kind of dude you just want to knock out
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 7:45 PM
Bullseye – Gotta take issue with your last comment. Obama did become the President of the United States. Love him or hate him (lemme guess . . .), that’s certainly getting the most out of your Harvard degree.
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 7:47 PM
This is the left’s entire case against Sarah Palin; she gave two weak interviews. That’s awfully thin gruel for a claim of incompetence, especially for a candidate with Ms. Palin’s credentials. Shipley, Shuster, et al forget that The Lightworker Himself hid from the press for several months early in the primaries, because he was too gaffe-prone to handle live questions in an unscripted environment. Somehow, though, that did not disqualify him as incompetent to hold office; that assessment is saved for Republicans.
Sarah Palin is more qualified to be President than is Barack Obama, frankly, but set that aside for a moment. I’d like some Democrat to defend for me the proposition that Sarah Palin, because of her two weak interviews, was less qualified to hold office than was John Edwards, who, when nominated for Vice President in 2004, had held public office for exactly 3 years of his entire life, and had written no major legislation nor chaired any major committee. If you can make that case for me, then I’ll listen for a moment while you try to explain how two interviews erase the last 12 years of public service. Without that case, though, I’m not even giving you a shrug of the shoulders; you’re just completely without a case.
philwynk on January 9, 2009 at 7:49 PM
I’m a bit of a jack (jill?) of all trades, but the interview was for a technical writing/research position.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 7:50 PM
His stupid smirking coverage of the “Turkeygate” scandal was too much for me.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Winner.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 9, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Circular reasoning. You seem to be saying that Ivy League degree-holders are more qualified to be President. And as evidence you point out that Presidents who have degrees from Ivy league colleges have proven how invaluable their Ivy League degrees are (with the notable exception of President GW Bush).
The point is that anyone who looks at Obama’s record can see that he rose to power through political connections and favoritism, not because of something he learned cracking the books at Occidental, Columbia, or Harvard. It’s true he made those political connections at Columbia and Harvard, but that’s like crediting Caroline Kennedy for her political accomplishment (of being considered for Senate) based on her connections. Birth right or educational pedigree — what’s the difference?
What’s this fascination with what someone did 20 years ago? Honestly, I never ask someone where they went to college, even when I worked in academe it rarely came up.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM
This is the very, very worst of the leftist excuses for their empty suit (mind you, I have no idea what johnnynucleo’s politics are, I’m just saying this is the worst argument the leftists use.)
They’re trying to make the case that Obama is proved competent simply by having won the election. Obama said the same about himself; he proved he was competent by running a campaign.
This is simply nuts. Winning an election proves nothing at all, especially in this case, when it was clear that the press was not going to report the slightest negative about The Messiah regardless of the circumstances. We’re supposed to vote for candidates because of their PRIOR accomplishments, not consider them accomplished because they won while we weren’t looking.
Let’s be serious, folks. This is a man who has accomplished nothing of note other than getting himself noticed by party bosses. We’ve just elected Chauncey Gardner President. If you don’t recognize the reference, go get Jerzy Kosinski’s little book “Being There,” or rent the Peter Sellers movie based on the book. Just a hint — it takes less time to read the book than to watch the movie, and the book is better.
philwynk on January 9, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Hate to be too repetitive, but Palin has no chance of winning the GOP nomination. She’s too polarizing. Essentially, she’s Huckabee with a uterus.
therightwinger on January 9, 2009 at 7:59 PM
If you ever are in the market to do higher Ed fundraising or marketing/communications, I have connections at the Claremont Colleges.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 7:59 PM
R.S. McCain’s take (mostly in response to Frum’s piece from this morning) is interesting. He says that Frum “…fails to look at the situation from the standpoint of the Ordinary American.”
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 8:02 PM
The GOP has to find a candidate has wide appeal. Palin only appeals to social conservatives. So unless you want to win the deep south, and a few other states get behind someone who can win and election and expand the map.
Bobby Jindal and Mark Sanford would be a good start.
therightwinger on January 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Do I get half if I help you?
Oh hold on, I did just help you!
Okay, I want half.
kcarpenter on January 9, 2009 at 8:07 PM
what a tool
kara26 on January 9, 2009 at 8:08 PM
Fundraising is what I do! And, yes, I’m in the market at the moment. I used to work for the west coast office of a ivy league school (oh the irony — considering this discussion). Shoot me an email at phoenician06 at a yahoo.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 8:10 PM
I wasn’t justifying Obama’s election. I just found funny the comment that he hadn’t done anything with his education. He got a pretty good job. Aren’t libs supposed to be humorless?
johnnynucleo on January 9, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Wrong. You must be confusing Sarah and Huckabee. Get beyond the MSM and look at the actual record in Alaska. It’s not “not conservative,” but she’s no fire and brimstone sort, either. She lives her life as a social conservative, but it’s not the sum total of her political existence. He strongest accomplishments are actually in the areas of good government and fiscal responsibility.
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 8:16 PM
I tried to view the Ziegler interview by Shuster on the link
AllahpunditAntipalin provided, and it’s vanished into thin cyberair. Click on the msnbc.com link to “Truth Squadding Palin’s Claims,” and it automatically rolls over to the next story on the playlist.OTOH, the Norah O’Donnell piece with less than ten seconds of Ziegler is still up and running. In that one, Matt Lauer wraps up by saying that everything that Palin says makes news, as if the likes of Lauer were not the self-appointed arbiters of what news is and how it is covered.
L.N. Smithee on January 9, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Ace has it from a different source. It’s still working.
meltenn on January 9, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Ok, sorry for making you the Obama apologist on this thread.
Personally, I believe Obama is an intelligent (by no means brilliant) person, someone who was smart enough to get into good schools and fortunate enough to be able to afford them. Having said that, I think his rise to power has much more to do with connections and favoritism than it does with his much touted brain-power. Had he accomplished anything of note in his field of study I might be more impressed by his intellectual chops, but I just don’t see evidence of that. I don’t think his degrees are evidence, one way or the other, of his qualifications for the Presidency.
Y-not on January 9, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Look, I want to put this to rest. Let me say once and for all. Obama graduated magna cum laude from HLS. That’s impressive. He worked for a top notch law firm, got elected to the state legislature, the US Senate, and is our next president. That’s impressive. Good for him. He is now preparing to spend $1 trillion, and the repercussions of his plans could cripple our economy and put the future of our free market system in jeopardy for decades to come. I don’t care about his college degree. I care about his policy ideas.
Twenty-eight years ago, guy with a a b-grade point average from Eureka College was smart enough and courageous enough to set this country straight. He had the right policies and principles. In the end, that’s what counts.
ramrocks on January 9, 2009 at 8:31 PM
The thought of Shuster “truth squadding” anything having to do with Sarah Palin is enough to make me want to bust a gut.
MSNBC and “truth” do not belong in the same sentence unless they are on either side of the words “does not tell the whole…”
Nat Hound on January 9, 2009 at 8:36 PM
anybody who claims that Palin only appeals to “social conservatives” once again is uneducated on her record
she is a social conservative but she does not govern in that matter … she governs by the Constitution
she has her personal beliefs but its not the focal point of her administration
joey24007 on January 9, 2009 at 8:43 PM
The truth is he never worked for a top notch law firm – or any law firm, and he got elected as a stete rep and a US Senator because he agreed to be the “Clean Face” for a corrupt political machine. That’s not impressive.
It’s like being a front guy for a mob connected business so they can get a business license is an impressive accomplishment.
I agree that policies are imoportant, but so is character.
kcewa on January 9, 2009 at 8:45 PM
I concur. Obama’s pedigree may be impressive, but his functional resume – what he’s DONE with all those wonderful opportunities – is mediocre.
“He’s smart” is often the prelude to a lackluster presidency. Carter: intelligent. Clinton: intelligent. Both were frequently hamstrung by their over-reliance on themselves and a hesitation to delegate tasks to trusted people.
We’re stuck with the guy for the next four years, so we’ll have plenty of time to see how he does when the buck stops on his desk. For our country’s sake I hope he’s up to the job, because Biden certainly isn’t.
sulla on January 9, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Expand the map by doing what? Downplaying social conservatism to try and appeal to the same people who voted for Obama? Good luck with that.
kcewa on January 9, 2009 at 8:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »