BACK SHE KOS POLITIKAKKE - Politics thread

by **Woody** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 14:49:38

The Dude wrote:Enquirer said Palin had an affair with her husband's business partner?!?!?

omg cougar for real

by **The Dude** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 14:50:25

That's what my friend said but she gets all her news from Perez

by **dajafi** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 14:54:16

This latest turn in the conversation reminds me that unless someone starts posting hot and/or doctored pics of Palin, I might have to do some actual work today.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 14:56:25

The Dude wrote:Enquirer said Palin had an affair with her husband's business partner?!?!?

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sarah_palin_at_war_with_her_daughter_over_pregnancy_wedding/celebrity/65370

Doubt they have it on that good of authority, otherwise I think they'd be hyping it more than the mom/daughter wedding fight angle. The McCain camp said they're gonna sue. Let's see if they follow through.

by **Woody** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 14:58:21

I don't think they post the "newest" stuff online -- I think what the Dude is referring to may be in the current issue (not sure though?)

by **Woody** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:00:09

“The smearing of the Palin family must end,” said McCain senior adviser Steve Schmidt. “The allegations contained on the cover of the National Enquirer insinuating that Gov Palin had an extramarital affair are categorically false. It is a vicious lie.

“Following our John Edwards exclusives, our political reporting has obviously proven to be more detail-oriented than the McCain campaign's vetting process. Despite the McCain camp's attempts to control press coverage they find unfavorable, The Enquirer will continue to pursue news on both sides of the political spectrum."

Yikes.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:02:22

Woody wrote:I don't think they post the "newest" stuff online -- I think what the Dude is referring to may be in the current issue (not sure though?)

I mean, Bristol being pregnant only broke, what, three days ago? So that story isn't old.

I think this is the cover of the current issue:

So they hype it up there, along side the pregnancy thing.

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:02:57

What's wrong with the twins?

by **Woody** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:04:45

The Enquirer probably has more 'splainin' to do

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:21:19

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQLTekcur-E[/youtube]

Oh crap Woody.

by **Woody** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:24:26

Dead to me.

by **seke2** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:26:24

official animal of the obama campaign, the nittaly lion

(i kinda don't care about penn state so that doesn't bug me, but lol)

by **dajafi** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:29:10

Vox homie and undeniably smart young righty Ross Douthat on Palin:

I've watched Palin's address on television twice now, after seeing it live last night, and I think that it's being just slightly overestimated - out of relief among conservatives, and perhaps out of guilt among the cable-news talking heads and CW purveyors. It's not that it wasn't a good speech; in fact, I think it was precisely the kind of speech that Sarah Palin needed to give at this juncture. It helps her immensely, and it makes me more confident about her future in national politics than I was 48 hours back. I'm just not entirely sure how much it helps John McCain.

A lot of people have commented on Palin's smilingly sarcastic style, her willingness to go straight after her ticket's opponents, her "I'm not giving an inch" approach to the firestorm of the past few days. If you leave aside the extraordinary hubbub surrounding the evening, this was in certain respects a very conventional speech for a veep nominee - albeit one delivered with a steel-in-velvet style that Spiro Agnew would have given anything to be able to project. And for a female candidate who's been brutalized in the media for the last few days, I think that this was exactly the right approach. [...]

But John McCain didn't pick Palin because he needed an attack dog for the stretch run. He picked her because he has a domestic policy problem, because he needed to shore up his reputation as a reformer, and because he needed to chart a new direction for his party, and suggest a GOP future that isn't just a parade of old white guys and a re-run of Reagan's greatest hits. As far as symbolism goes, this speech helped him on that front; on substance, not so much. Instead of opening new vistas for conservative politics, it reinforced the perception - which is unfair, but not all that unfair - that the only thing John McCain's GOP has to offer on the domestic front is a big yes to drilling, an end to earmarks, and a big no to Obama's tax increases.

Probably worth pointing out yet again that, one, Palin hasn't been so much on the anti-earmark thing; and two, if McCain both passed his proposed tax cuts and eliminated all earmarks, the best estimates are that we'd lose something like $1 trillion from federal revenues while cutting something like $18 billion from federal expenditures.

(That said, a Dem Congress would allow neither of these things to pass. If McCain wins, I suspect we'll basically see some combination of the two tax cut proposals at the front end of the next session, and then a truly hellacious fight over spending at the back end.)

by **dajafi** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:30:19

You gotta be shitting me. As if it wasn't bad enough when Kerry referred to "David OrtEZ" and "LamBERT Field"...

by **CalvinBall** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:30:55

O'Riely interviewed Obama today. It is broadcasting at 8 pm tonight.

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:31:26

In other political news...

Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick pleads guilty, resigns.
4 months in jail, 5 years of probation, $1 million in restitution.

Abramoff in fed court for sentencing
Facing 11 years in the pokey (hopefully, he'll find out why "pokey" is an apt name).

by **drsmooth** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:42:00

jerseyhoya wrote:
CalvinBall wrote:... I just don't get a sense that many republicans are all that excited about the election even with Palin. ....

“This lady has turned it all around," Limbaugh said today on his show. "From now on on this program John McCain will be known as John McBrilliant.”

well that's 1 was-there-any-doubt republican base voter converted. oh wait

Someone should take bets on who'll make more chauvinistic cracks about Palin before November, Biden or Retch

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:47:54

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:
CalvinBall wrote:... I just don't get a sense that many republicans are all that excited about the election even with Palin. ....

“This lady has turned it all around," Limbaugh said today on his show. "From now on on this program John McCain will be known as John McBrilliant.”

well that's 1 was-there-any-doubt republican base voter converted. oh wait

Limbaugh has a pretty good track record of not liking McCain. I'd say this was a pretty good demonstration of Palin adding excitement to the ticket in the eyes of one very prominent Republican.

by **The Red Tornado** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:52:34

I can guess 5 of the 7 people voting for McCain- I wonder who the other 2 are?

by **Werthless** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 15:52:38

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:
CalvinBall wrote:... I just don't get a sense that many republicans are all that excited about the election even with Palin. ....

“This lady has turned it all around," Limbaugh said today on his show. "From now on on this program John McCain will be known as John McBrilliant.”

well that's 1 was-there-any-doubt republican base voter converted. oh wait

Someone should take bets on who'll make more chauvinistic cracks about Palin before November, Biden or Retch

Do "was-there-any-doubt republican base voters" need converting?

Archived

BACK SHE KOS POLITIKAKKE - Politics thread

Added for Jerseyhoya: Who are you voting for?