Wednesday, September 3, 2008

As seen on Huckleberries on-line

Huckleberries online featured the latest noise about Sarah Palin and most certainly her daughter Bristol. Indeed, the posts at HBO got hot and heavy at TuBob's rather snarky post concerning how the GOP has been very willing to portray Sarah Palin. Well, the GOP were very prepared to portray Governor Palin in exactly the way that TuBob was describing. While the McCain supporters were whining and gnashing their teeth over TuBob's portrayal that they were quickly forgetting what was after all only on the news. And while crying that Palin was being made a victim of some kind of liberal attack dog in force, well, there is this little problem that the GOP did set up this target with the full intent that it would be shot at.

Yes, I put in my 2¢ worth, I was more than happy to respond to Bristol's Pregnancy threatens campaign. The Big Blog that Dave Oliveria reposted from a news source in Seattle, where the commenter in this case disclosed just how "conservatives" and "liberals" had switched roles when it came to Bristol's pregnancy. And of course, Idaho Values Alliance truly "inspired" by the fact that Bristol would be keeping her baby and marrying her boyfriend. But on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," seems the comedian had his audience in stitches and laughing hysterically in the aisles. Why? All he had to do was show us a Karl Rove in support of an obscure Gov. Palin as opposed to his dismissive attitude toward another governor, a Dem, head of a more populace state. Karl Rove v Rove. Those who appeared specifically on Fox News who played sexism to the hilt. That is, as long it involved a Dem candidate for president. On the other hand, we don't do sexist comments as long as it is a GOP veep in waiting. "The liberal attack dogs" have nothing on the double standard and two faced ideology of the GOP. And yes, actually, just because Palin owned a business, was a mayor and then a Governor for the last two years, should be a concern to anyone thinking about voting McCain/Palin. Proximity to Russia doesn't give you foreign policy experience. Visiting troops in Kuwait, or Iraq doesn't give you commander in chief qualities. Making trade deals with countries that have already received federal approval does not make you an international expert on business or the American economy. Any governor can do those things, as can any member of Congress.

While the GOP were trumpeting how much "executive experience" Palin has between being Mayor and Governor of (a sparsely populated) state as opposed to Obama or even Biden. On CNN, Wolf Blitzer made a challenging point about McCain having no executive experience himself. So, does that mean that McCain should be number 2 on the ticket and Palin number 1? Palin did not run a national campaign. Also on CNN, was a post Palin discussion of Palin making this "fantastic" and "impassionate" speech that was none the less a canned play to the base speech. And from what I understand, engaged in the typical retreads that had been heard for months. Whether a McCain ad, or McCain on the campaign trail, or people posting blogs, or people commenting to blogs. But today, "it was tough and fantastic." Or "dripping with sarcasm." What it also was, is a lie. Palin, what part of the speech I heard of where she spoke of being "proud of her country," she also happened to have a guilt by association with the Alaskan Independence Movement that wanted Alaska to be an independent nation. If you are "proud of your country" you would not join such a movement nor would you encourage your husband to join such a movement, nor would you desire any sort of association with such a movement.

Before heading to the Wednesday Farmer's Market in downtown Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, I watched some of Wolf Blitzer's afternoon talk show where Bill Bennett a morals crusader who shrugged off Palin's guilt by association with the seccessionist movement. And quotes that Blitzer put on on his board, how "irrelevent" Palin's association with such a radical movement was. But on the other hand, Ayers could be the useful tool to slap Obama across the face that because of an old friendship Obama has a guilt by association with a terrorist. By that logic, GW holds hands with Saudi leaders, who support extremist Islamic sects from which come terrorists, GW has a guilt by association with ...terrorists. But of course, Bennett won't discuss that.

On Larry King, seeing some clips just now of Sarah Palin taking hard attacks at Senator Obama while borrowing from Senator Clinton. Or shall we say, plagarizing Senator Clinton. What you say to people in Scranton one day while they are listening and something else in San Francisco another day, when presumably they don't. It wasn't the GOP who made claim to that victimology as political tool, it was Senator Clinton! If I were Clinton, I'd sue.


Dogwalkmusings said...

The whole thing has nothing to with we the people or the country - it's all about winning no matter what it takes.

Are the voters savvy enough to see through it? Only time will tell. If they even care.

The New Arch Druid's take on the news said...

Yeah, I'd have to agree as to the utter disengagement the GOP have with real problems. They are still pushing wedge issues, even using people as symbols for what is more important to them, wedge issues. Sarah Palin and her family are now wedge issues.

If you would like to comment more personally, Google talk Arch Druid2 or AOL IM FrmrId, or even Meebo Arch_Druid2