dajafi wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:So, um, McCain and Graham, two Republican members of the "Gang of 14" voted to filibuster an Obama judicial nominee, perhaps violating the spirit of the agreement that preserved the filibuster way back when. So, um, do the Dems now threaten to remove the filibuster? This can be done with a simple majority vote in the Senate.

I think this is about as likely as Bill Clinton and Joe Lieberman getting gay-married. In Texas.

pacino wrote:see if you can spot the sexism

allentown wrote:

pacino wrote:see if you can spot the sexism

Superficially identical. Merkel's looks like the jacket is velvet and the shades are different. This is like saying two men in pinstripes, one light grey and the other dark grey and with different ties, are dressed identically. It looks like Clinton is standing super straight to be taller than Angela. Professional business dress for either sex is not where one should look for great creativity.

Trent Steele wrote:

gpicaro wrote:CNN:

Palin took aim at Newsweek's eye-catching cover this week that shows the former vice presidential candidate in her running outfit - an image that was apparently lifted from a Runner's World photo shoot months ago. Writing on her Facebook page Monday night, Palin said the depiction is flat out "sexist, and oh-so-expected."

"The choice of photo for the cover of this week's Newsweek is unfortunate. When it comes to Sarah Palin, this 'news' magazine has relished focusing on the irrelevant rather than the relevant," Palin wrote. "The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist, and oh-so-expected by now."

"If anyone can learn anything from it: it shows why you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, gender, or color of skin. The media will do anything to draw attention – even if out of context," Palin also said.

I guess. On the other hand, if you're going to voluntarily pose for a photo in pair of running shorts for the sole purpose of showing off your sexy ass legs, I can't see how you can be upset when that image is used later. It's silly to pretend that: (1) Palin's appeal isn't a little bit due to her MILFy attractiveness; and (2) she doesn't utilize that to her advantage. Nothing wrong with that, but there's a sword/shield sorta thing going on here. Can't really have it both ways.

allentown wrote:

Squire wrote:

allentown wrote:I agree its a strange cover for Newsweek, but don't see her complaint. This is not some candid shot grabbed by a paparazi or something photoshopped. It looks like something she very carefully posed for, so it is obviously a photo she wanted to have out there. Probably not in this setting, but a planned Palin PR photo.

It strikes me its about context. When you pose for Runner's World its one thing but when its put on the cover of a news magazine its different. It seems to me as pretty much exactly the same issue as it being OK for Barack Obama to be allowed to use his middle name but no political opponent being allowed to refer to it.

Look. Palin's a joke but I think she's right about this. In any event she's a lightning rod for the Republican party which will likely cause some to spend less time going after actually viable candidates.

SQUIRE

As I said, I agree the photo is a little strange in the Newsweek context. The reason I see this one as being on Palin is that this is clearly a deliberately posed political photograph. I looked at all the Runners' Week photos linked a few posts above. This one is unique. Taken indoors, not outdoors. Switches to tight shorts, tight top, the previous under-top garment gone, either wearing nylons or oiled her legs. But, most striking, posing leaning over a draped American flag, with an Army placard dangling in front of the window. This is a photo that Palin definitely wanted out there for political PR purposes. The other photos in the spread are very different in character. This one was a calculated statement. I think her camp is upset because they were trying to target somewhat different messages/images to different audiences and the use of this photo on the Newsweek cover scrambled that micromarketing, getting this photo out to a generally older, less outdoorsy niche than she wanted. Other than wearing sneakers, this photo has next to nothing to do with running, specifically, and is a fairly obvious effort to look hot.

BTW, next to the spread it is made clear that the photo belonged to the photographer and was sold to Newsweek by his agent, not by Rodale. Makes the terms and content of the photospread doubly strange.

WilliamC wrote:

TheBrig wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Despite that bit that dajafi posted, and I think there's something to it as well, I think most of Palin's appeal comes from people who like her because the media elite and political elite don't like her. Maybe the looks get her in the door or something like that, but they stay for the generic conservative sound bites and because they feel like she's been unfairly attacked. Magazine covers like this will only fortify the 1/3 of the country that really likes her in their resolve that the media is out to get their girl.

No doubt. It's enemy-of-my-enemy stuff, spiced with a dash of damsel in distress. I read somewhere today that her approval remains considerably higher among men than women--another data point suggesting she remains more of a sex object than anything like a feminist hero.

Palin’s rated favorably by more men, 48 percent, than women, 39 percent

That's just about the gender gap in exit polls. Kerry and Obama both ran 7% better with women than men. Maybe looking good while scantily clad has a bit to do with it, but the gender gap is more explanatory I think.

You could also argue it might be gender bias in the opposite direction, with Palin's sex appeal having as much or more of a negative effect on women voters as it has a positive effect on male voters.

Affirmative. I don't think this is arguable though is it? Being honest.

A new Public Policy Pollling survey finds that 52% of Republican voters nationally think that ACORN stole the Presidential election for Barack Obama last year, with only 27% granting that he won it legitimately.

dajafi wrote:This is troubling:

A new Public Policy Pollling survey finds that 52% of Republican voters nationally think that ACORN stole the Presidential election for Barack Obama last year, with only 27% granting that he won it legitimately.

To be sure, a lot of Democrats probably felt this way about Bush. But those elections, 2000 in particular, were really close, with much more in the way of reported irregularities. Obama's wasn't a blowout, but it was more comparable to '88, '92 or '96--not particularly late election nights.

That many on the right seem to perceive ACORN as American politics' answer to SPECTRE would be really funny if it weren't so depressing.

At the front of the bookstore, a display of "Going Rogue" books sat next to a table loaded with tomes by the likes of Richard Dawkins and Vladimir Nabokov. NBC, CNN, ABC and other networks set up their live shots nearby. And Judith Doctor, 69, asked a Barnes and Noble employee for an orange wristband, to no avail.

Doctor, a self-described spiritual therapist, said that Americans have mostly misunderstood Palin's visceral appeal. It has nothing to do with her politics, or her folksiness, or her looks, she asserted.

"She's alive inside, and that radiates energy, and people who are not psychologically alive inside are fascinated by that. There's a wire in those left-wing liberals that has never been quickened, and Sarah's got it."

Doctor described the day she saw Palin introduced as McCain's running mate as one in which "an electric shock went through me. I began to weep. There is something about that woman that has destiny, whether it's in politics, to be president, or to host a talk show."

dajafi wrote:

A new Public Policy Pollling survey finds that 52% of Republican voters nationally think that ACORN stole the Presidential election for Barack Obama last year

jerseyhoya wrote:According to Kos's latest poll in Florida, Crist Rubio has gone from 57-11 to 47-37 since they announced. I think Rubio is going to win that race by 10% when all's said and done. Crist should pull out now and run for reelection.

AND the Daily News is reporting Rudy is running for Senate. Holy poop.

dajafi wrote:Perfect:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:According to Kos's latest poll in Florida, Crist Rubio has gone from 57-11 to 47-37 since they announced. I think Rubio is going to win that race by 10% when all's said and done. Crist should pull out now and run for reelection.

AND the Daily News is reporting Rudy is running for Senate. Holy poop.

Perhaps not

I just flashed to that scene in "Kill Bill Vol. 2" where Michael Madsen asks Darryl Hannah if her primary reaction to news of The Bride's death is relief or regret. An Il Douche campaign for Senate next year would have given me something to be excited about... except for the fact that I don't much like Gillibrand, that is. But I think the whole lesson of the last four years of American politics is that it's much easier and probably more fun to be agin something/someone than fer it/him/her.

That said, if he'd run for governor and won, I could have lived with that. Albany is such a $#@! disaster that his dictatorial inclinations might have been helpful, and at the least it would have been gratifying to watch Giuliani and the equally vile Dem legislators make each other miserable.

(Meanwhile... it'll never happen, but I can't possibly imagine a more entertaining election than one between Eliot Spitzer and Rudy Giuliani. Take away party ID and 9/11, and they're almost the same $#@! guy!)

jerseyhoya wrote:Can't Cuomo just primary him? He'd win by 40%. I guess he doesn't want to piss off the black vote, but Cuomo will beat Lazio like a drum either way.

jerseyhoya wrote:According to Kos's latest poll in Florida, Crist Rubio has gone from 57-11 to 47-37 since they announced. I think Rubio is going to win that race by 10% when all's said and done. Crist should pull out now and run for reelection.

AND the Daily News is reporting Rudy is running for Senate. Holy poop.