Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Journalists crowd Kendal Unruh of Colorado to get photographs of her hat, decorated with homemade buttons, reflecting her excitement at Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s nomination for vice president. In Palin’s speech on Wednesday night at the Republican National Convention, Palin castigated the media for the intense scrutiny on her since being named last week by Sen. John McCain as his running mate.
By J. Patrick Coolican (contact) 
Friday, Sept. 5, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Reader poll
McCain's acceptance speech
Remarks by Sarah Palin
Sun Expanded Coverage
The image was arresting: Delegates to the Republican National Convention, fingers jabbing toward the crowd of assembled journalists as Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin hurled invective at the press corps:
“I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone.”
Palin had been the subject of thorough media scrutiny the past week since her improbable selection as running mate of the Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain. Then, in her speech Wednesday night, she revved up the crowd by borrowing from the Republican playbook of the past four decades. Attack the media.
“There hasn’t been a lot of culture wars (yet this year), but yelling at the press is a way to resonate,” said Stephen Bates, a journalism professor at UNLV and a former associate independent counsel to Kenneth Starr, the special prosecutor who dogged Democratic President Bill Clinton for years.
The strategy was first seen in vivid images in 1964, at the nominating convention of another Arizona senator, Barry Goldwater.
There, former President Dwight Eisenhower thundered, “Let us particularly scorn the divisive efforts of those outside our family, including sensation-seeking columnists and commentators, because I assure you that these are people who couldn’t care less about the good of our party.”
The crowd at the Cow Palace in San Francisco went wild.
Spiro T. Agnew, George H.W. Bush and every Republican in between and since has used the strategy to great effect.
It’s worth noting, however, that Republicans do not have the market to themselves this year. Democrats are attacking the media, too. Media Matters for America and other liberal Internet outlets harangue the mainstream press, banging away on perceived conservative bias.
For McCain, there is a rich irony. He has long enjoyed a close relationship with the press. He has jokingly referred to the media as his “base.” His 2000 campaign was propelled on the quick-burning rocket fuel of the “Straight Talk Express,” which was compared to a rolling salon. He gave reporters great access and booze. He was jocular and showed intellectual range. They wrote glowing profiles.
But however implausible as attacks from McCain might be, Palin has a slightly more reasonable case, given the bevy of tough stories, including allegations and an investigation into whether she fired the Alaska public safety commissioner because he wouldn’t fire Palin’s former brother-in-law; and despite her saying otherwise, reports showing she initially supported the “bridge to nowhere,” a federal project in remote Alaska that became synonymous with pork barrel spending.
But why attack the people most responsible for delivering — for free — your message at the convention?
There are three principal reasons.
The first is to create an atmosphere of aggrieved outrage among the Republican faithful. Republican strategists have often successfully painted the media as part and parcel of a faraway “cultural elite” that is in league with a Democratic Party that wants to raise taxes, take away guns and so on.
For a quarter-century, Republicans suggested the media and the Democrats didn’t take the Communist threat seriously. Today, it is the threat of Islamic terrorists.
As the reaction among delegates shows, this is red meat for rock-ribbed Republicans — a group that, until this week, McCain had largely failed to inspire.
Robert Uithoven, former campaign manager to the 2006 campaign of Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, said he didn’t publicly attack the media in that campaign, but used a related tactic. This was during the final days of the race, when Gibbons was swamped in scandals.
Uithoven knew what the evening news and morning papers would bring, and he would tell Republican county chairs what was coming and how the reports were distorted or unfair. The campaign and county chairs would use e-mail lists and other ways to get the word out, which would insulate Gibbons and catalyze his supporters to see the media as being part of a conspiracy to destroy his candidacy.
Attacking the media can also intimidate the press corps into letting up. Contrary to some reports, editors, producers and reporters are human, and they respond to cajolery and flattery, but also to intimidation.
There’s anecdotal evidence of cowed reporters, especially during the administration of President George W. Bush.
This tactic is known as “working the refs,” derived from the sports term for barking at the referees in hopes of a friendly call. McCain opponent Sen. Barack Obama used the phrase himself this week when discussing the coverage of Palin.
Attacking the press serves a third purpose: It changes the subject. Every paragraph the media devote to Palin’s record as a small-town mayor, or whether McCain properly vetted her, or her unwed daughter’s pregnancy, is a paragraph not used to examine differences in the Democratic and Republican proposals.
McCain forces have reacted with coordinated outrage to the press inquiries. The press then reported the outrage and the cycle continued.
The campaign hopes for a public backlash against the press, which is quite possible, if not now emerging.
Uithoven said he was reminded of 2006, when intense focus on whether Gibbons had acted inappropriately with a cocktail waitress after a night of drinking drew the press off the more important scent.
Gibbons’ aggrieved defense and attacks on the character and veracity of the waitress — as well as the never-ending process stories about videotapes and lawsuits filed — meant less attention on whether Gibbons had hired an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper or whether he had an inappropriate dealings with a defense contractor.
Can it work?
Analysts and political scientists who study voter behavior aren’t sure. There are no statistics on the subject, but Michael McDonald of George Mason University and the Brookings Institution said the strategy can consolidate McCain’s Republican base.
But Republicans are at a big disadvantage at this point, nine weeks from the election. More voters are identifying themselves as Democrats than Republicans, by a margin of 15 percentage points. Those numbers indicate McCain must do more than consolidate his base. He must reach independents and even some Democrats.
Jennifer Duffy of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report said attacking the press can work on some issues, such as driving sympathy for Palin, but is not an overall winning strategy for the fall.
And there are signs that the press corps, weary of years of attacks by the Bush administration, are themselves beginning to stomp and shout a little.
In a column that received wide airing Thursday, the usually evenhanded Politico columnist Roger Simon wrote a piece soaked in sarcasm:
“On behalf of the elite media, I would like to say we are very sorry.
“We have asked questions this week that we should never have asked.
We have asked pathetic questions like: Who is Sarah Palin? What is her record? Where does she stand on the issues? And is she is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?”
When the media has become just another campaign arm for the Obama machine from Chicago I don't think telling it like it is will turn off the American voter. The bias of the networks is not even attempted to be hidden. The slander and attacks are so overt it is known by anyone that turns on a television or picks up a paper.
I think it's hilarious that now that the media scrutiny is focused on someone with an "R" after their name, suddenly it's not OK to ask ANY questions at all.
Of course, when the scrutiny is on someone with a "D" after their name, all bets are off. See: Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Edwards, Kerry, Kennedy, etc. etc. etc.
The disconnect and dissonance is sad, really, because apparently these people actually live their lives this way.
Another typically slanted story from the Sun. The media has left its integrity by the door. Palin was vetted by the media in 3 days in a way that Obama was not vetted in 3 years! You keep publishing stories like this because you don't WANT the blame to be placed on the media, but Americans aren't stupid. They can see a vendetta when it's presented to them. You'll drive more voters to McCain by doing this than you would be being fair and objective. Thank God the media IS stupid.
What part of the story is "slanted", dave? Is it the part where they called the right's penchant for blaming everything on "the liberal media" a "staple GOP tactic"? Was it the part where they said this particular tactic fires up the right wing base?
Again, it's absolutely hilarious that the right is now "up in arms" over LEGITIMATE QUESTIONING of a damn-near unknown choice for VP.
But when they screech "EARTHTONES" and "MONICA" and all the other non-issues the media screeches at "Ds", then they're doing their jobs. Is that it?
Astounding that you cannot see this is and has been a tactic of the right wing since the late 1970s when they decided that it wasn't the job of "the fourth estate" to bring down a corrupt POTUS and his administration.
No Patricia. It's amazing that the media gives a PASS to the Ds most of the time. They couldn't ignore Monica. Everyone had the story so they had to run with it. And it sold papers. And a D was already in power, so what did they care.
No, you miss the complete media bias toward conservative causes. You miss the complete lack of responsible objective journalism, as demonstrated by this story. Starting with the headline. It's you who are living with blinders on.
Uh, OK, "dave". I can see that facts don't really affect you. So be it.
But you didn't answer my very specific question: What part of the story is slanted?
When you get down to the reality of the matter, the news media has lost the definition of journalism and taken the National Enquirer approach to the news. After all it is more exciting but consider this, the news papers are losing readers daily led by the NY and LA Times closely followed by the Washington Post. The Vegas Review and Sun not far behind.
The fact that journalists are registered Democrats by a 10-1 margin is all the FACTS you need. But it's you that have a difficult grasp of the facts, Patty.
And I did address your "specific" question. Starting from the headline, the entire piece is biased because it is undoubtedly written by a registered Democrat. At least I have 10-1 odds on that.
A woman who might know something about this once said:
"When I hear a statement like that coming from a woman candidate with any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism or, you know, maybe a sharper microscope put on her, I think, man, that doesn’t do us any good. Women in politics, women in general wanting to progress this country. I don’t think it’s, it bodes well for her -- a statement like that."
That's a quote from Sarah Palin.
She wasn't thrust into the spotlight, she chose the spotlight.
She can't announce her daughter's pregnancy via a press release and then be STUNNED that people are talking about it.
If anything, maybe she's been asleep these past 18 months, as we've watched the media buffoonery reach new levels in reporting utter lies and slander (looking at you Faux News), with an assist from AM radio.
Scrutiny should come as no surprise for Mrs. Palin. It says something about her thought process that she's stunned and defensive that Americans have questions about her, her record and her policies.
Yes this is an uncomfortably biased article and reeks of desperation. Every attack the media attempts to stick on Palin seems to bounce off.
To those viewers who watched the Democratic and Republican conventions, it was pretty clear where the momentum and the energy was - and it was not in Denver with the Dems and their painfully stuffy group therapy session. It was with a war hero and a leader who has actually governed, not a couple of memoir writing, self aggrandizing washington insiders.
Whoever doesn't feel the main stream media is biased towards the Democrats and liberalism clearly has their heads so far up Obama's arse, that they can't even see the light of day, let alone, the corruption in the main stream media.
For instance, take a look at US magazine. A front cover photo of Palin and her baby with the headline, "Babies, lies, and scandal." I ask you libs, that's not biased??? It's been reported this morning that within 24 hours, US mag lost 10,000 subscribers and now advertisers are getting involved.
Obama gets softball questions from the media, but not from Bill O'reilley. Did you libs see that? That's how you ask questions. That's how you get answers. Obama finally admits the surge worked. He finally gave us the answer in his own words that we already new all along. Do you think Obama would give that answer as a result of questions for Chris Matthews, Matt Lauer, or Andrea Mitchell? Never in a million years.
"Ha-ha, your medium is dying!"
Well, "davey", to be honest, you DID NOT answer the question. Are you denying that screeching about the big bad liberal media is a right wing tactic and has been a right wing tactic since the late 1970s?
Are you denying that said tactic energizes their base? (If you deny that one, the irony is delightful.)
The remainder of the article simply relates back to the tactic. Is Stephen Bates' comment slanted? (Please go back & read & find out who he is before you answer.)
What about McCain's 2000 campaign? Were those media stories slanted? (Read the article; it discusses this.)
What about the very next paragraph wherein the author states that Palin has a good case against the media? Is that slanted?
Seems to me, davey, you didn't actually read the article. You saw the headline & the sub-head and made up your mind.
Tsk, tsk.
Hey dawg, since you're so interested in the US Mag piece on Mrs. Palin, you may be interested to hear more words from the author of that piece, Mara Reinstein... who just wrote another story:
Maura Reinstein: I'm Voting for McCain
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mara-reins...
She's voting for McCain. No, that's not biased.
Did O'Reilly mention anything more about how African-Americans act in restaraunts? Did he make any quips about how well-behaved Obama was?
Dawg, too bad you can't see past all that radical-right brainwashing...
Whatever you think of your candidate, here's what's interesting. Even if you think the media are liberal--they're not; the "L" word for most media is lazy--they have LOVED John McCain for years, and why wouldn't they? He was a maverick--or so they claimed (OK, I'm lapsing into partisanship because McCain is a lapdog, so I'll move along). Now that things don't go his way, he complains.
OK, here's what's going on. First, if McCain could stand all those years of torture in Vietnam without whining, why has he become such a big baby now? And the answer is, because he is a big baby who's become a gutless weasel. The saddest decline of a human being I have ever seen.
Second, in nominating Obama, Democrats went with someone the media also can love because he's eloquent, and whom they fear because they fear charges of racism more than they fear charges of sexism. When they bullied Hillary Clinton (and they did, though she has only herself and her husband to blame for her loss), they could easily claim it was just feminists sticking together, true or not. But to do that to Obama would invite the kinds of attacks that stick more easily, and so they are more careful.
I would suggest removal because all you've posted is a personal attack.
Stop wasting bandwidth.
I don't need to request removal, his weak and insecure words speak for themselves.
I'm "ponding" off attacks?
What? LOL!
I believe you mean "pawning," genius.
So you go on a weakly-worded tirade about the awful "liberal" "main stream" (Dawg's words, HA!) media, who actually are voting for McCain, as I so deftly pointed out, and then you scurry away from your argument?
When all else fails, eh?
Was Faux News on a commercial break? Did ya run out of kool aid?
I'm a "Foot soldier in the liberal arsenal?" Comparing me to a weapon? I'll take that as a compliment.
The McCain campaign, and their sycophantic supporters', attacks on the media are a stale tap dance around the real problem: they nominated a foreign policy neophyte for Veep and the man who was proud that he voted with Bush 90% of the time.
It's typical right-wing smoke and mirrors. "Don't listen to the MEEEEDDDIIIAAAA! They just want to inform you so that you can make a smart decision!"
We know the radical right like firedawg fears educated voters.
And they should.
I know this is going to sound funny, but I did NOT suggest removal. I prefer to keep comments like that out in the open so people reading can see exactly what they're dealing with.
LOL, that was a good find, thebs.
Firedawg criticizes an article about Sarah Palin that was written by someone who is voting for McCain?
He just can't win!!!!
No, I didn't watch Barack Obama on Bill O'Reilly. He has said many dispicable things, racist things, over the years and I won't waste my time with such filth.
But I read the transcript, and O'Reilly praised Barack Obama's foresight on the War in Iraq.
See, Barack Obama is willing to be challenged by the media, all media.
There are many, many, many reports about how John McCain rarely sits down with reporters anymore, and when he does, he gets angry and crotchety. Just like Grandpa Simpson!!!!
I think it is funny that you are so against the media, but you won't send Sarah Palin out to be questioned. She's a maverick, she's prepared to be Vice President, but she's not prepared to sit down on Face the Nation?
She can't face Bob Schieffer or Hannity and Colmes, but you think she could take over the presidency and stare down Medvedev or Achmedinijad? LOL!!!!!!
It's funny that many people here, myself included, have brought out FACTS about Sarah Palin's awful history of running governments, about sending a tiny village into 22,000,000 in debt, but you can't defend her, just attack me?
Your arguing is weak and can't stand up to facts.
Is Rush Limbaugh's show even broadcast in Oregon?
LOL!!!!!
Re mikeg's "self aggrandizing washington insiders":
You ARE aware that McCain's been in Washington around 25 years now, aren't you?
Once again, the irony is delightful.
The media is in the tank for Obama and the writer fails to consider this even possible? What planet is he on? The press spent for ink on Palins husband 20 year old DWI and her daughters pregnancy than they did on Obama connection to admitted terrorist Wm. Ayers. MSNBC is an embarassment of bias. Fox news has been fairer, even according to the Dems. themselves, thats pretty sad. The NYT ran three front page stories in one day about Palins family problems. Call that balanced?
I think Obama did a good job in the interview in the Fox News interview with O'Reilly.
It shows that he is maturing.
He said that the surge worked.
He strongly hinted that he would take military action against Iran if non-military options do not work.
Laguna: that's exactly what McCain wanted...
A diversion from the glowing reviews Obama got for his speech.
And then, after all the requisite press releases were sent, declaring Bristol's pregnancy, they turn around and whine about the media?
It was deft media manipulation by McCain's camp.
Unfortunately for McCain, it backfired something fierce.
There is no doubt that the work of mainstream media indicates a "liberal" slant. Life is tough, isn't it!
But, according to Phil Gramm, former top economic advisor to John McCain, "We have sort of become a nation of whiners. "You just hear this constant whining, complaining..."
Drill, Baby, Drill!
Obama is getting better at foreign policy.
He is hinting that he would order military action if non-military options failed with Iran.
Again?
Nancebot9000 has malfunctioned again.
Let's check the programming:
10 PRINT "Limbaugh Talking Points"
20 GOTO 10
Ahhh... I see. Nancebot's caught in a loop.
I am giving Obama praise.
He is growing as presidential material.
If non-military options do not work then he sees military options as viable against Iran.
Whaddya know? Firedawg has a little exaggeration problem!
He said: "It's been reported this morning that within 24 hours, US mag lost 10,000 subscribers and now advertisers are getting involved."
Let's take a look at his source:
"I'm hearing it’s 5,000, maybe more," says one well-placed source in the industry. Another source claimed that as many as 10,000 readers have already cancelled their subscriptions. A spokesperson for Wenner Media, which publishes Us, says "it is completely false that we are losing 10,000 subscribers." As for the 5,000 estimate, the spokesperson only said “that is false, too," but wouldn't comment further."
While a "well-placed source" the same type that reported 5000 cancellations, told HuffPo that it was more like 1000 cancellations.
Hardly anything to sneeze at.
Have any HARD evidence to backup your claim, pup?
Dang, can someone get a programmer in here to fix the Nancebot? He's caught in an infinite loop.
I am a 69-yr-old woman and a registered Democrat. I never miss voting on election day,and I plan to be at the poll Nov 4th this yr.
I'm very impressed by Governor Sarah Palin. What an accomplished woman. She is America's Margaret Thatcher. Our country should be proud that we have produced such a woman.
I wish the dumb people in the media would stop saying (over & over) she's the mayor of a small town in Alaska. She's the GOVERNOR OF THE ENTIRE STATE OF ALASKA. When we hear the commentators on major networks diminish Sarah Palin's accomplishments and even attempt to smear her as a woman, it outrages people all over this country! The media may be stuck on stupid, but the American people are not!
Obama foreign policy skills are growing every day.
He strongly hints that he will use military actions if Iran does not react to non-military actions.
And Jim Gibbons is GOVERNOR OF THE ENTIRE STATE OF NEVADA, but that doesn't mean we should throw him into the White House!
Jfnance, are you ok? You keep repeating yourself over and over.
It's getting really, really annoying.
Seriously, Nance, the same, exact comment 11 times?
Obviously, no one wants to play with you.
You have to be just a wee bit skeptical of the "I'm a registered Democrat BUT ..."
They're all over all the political boards on the 'net already. This is almost as good as '00 & '04.
Are they paying you guys these days, "JanK"? I sure hope so. They got paid upwards of $1.50-$2.00 per post last time.
I am praising Obama and nobody cares.
I am re-evaluating his foreign policy skills.
He has said that he would strongly consider using military action if non-military options did not work with Iran.
I may swing my vote behind him now.
You're right: no one cares.
Well, I'm a registered republican*, and I'm here to say that John McCain is an awful, awful representative of our party.
He is for amnesty. He even praised a migrant worker in his speech last night.
He believes in global warming.
He keeps changing his mind on gay marriage. He's for it, he's against it, he's for partnerships, he's against them. I have no idea where he stands today, or where he'll stand tomorrow.
He's a maverick alright, a dangerous maverick!!!!
*not really
Well now, isn't this interesting. "JanK" on August 31 (scroll to the post) http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/aug...
Funny how you didn't mention being a Democrat then, "JanK".
Or how about later that same day (last post) http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/aug...
Or still later that day http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/winning... (Note the incorrect use of "Democrat".)
Even more (the requisite "Hitler" comparison) http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/winning...
See, "JanK"? I had you pegged. Now begone troll.
Vote for Strong Leadership
Vote for Obama who will strongly consider the military option if peaceful options fail with Iran
Yes, as opposed to McCain, who JOKED about killing innocent Iranians with cigarettes and sang a little ditty about bombing them.
In public.
At a town hall meeting.
Whaddya mean McCain doesn't have the temperament to lead? He's only a little trigger happy, that's all!
Obama for President!!!!!!!!!
He is going to be tough with Iran and might use the military option if Iran does not behave!!!!!
Go Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is funny to see all you Obama-ites agree with the 'chosen one', when he reserves the right to attack Iran. One day ago, the left was all over Bush for threatening force. You would follow your new god even to war, that is scary.
Yes, it is absolutely crazy that Obama thinks Iran should not have a nuclear weapon.
What is he thinking?
Of COURSE Iran should have a nuclear weapon!
His judgement is sound.
Much better than "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" like McCain!!!!!
Ksand99...are you saying now that Obama will let Iran have a nuke?
I have voted democrat my whole life. Nobama will never be my president! He is the weakest person ever that has ran for President in this country, even worst than Jimmy Carter. He needs to go back being a community organizer and play basketball with his friend Rev. Wright. He is extremely prejudice. He has no right running for President of my country! I have been in the military for 27 years and I am more ready to be president than he is! I am a very PROUD Republican now and forever. McCain - Palin will win by a land slide!
Gordon the liberal, your all the same. You all love calling names and act like you know all. Harry would be proud of you. Stating I'm a fraud, for what, that was my post. So what, I can't carry a gun? Bush might have 26% rating; it's a heck of a lot better than the democrat congress approval rating that is currently in the single digit!
Gordon: Don't know if you remember four and eight years ago how these trolls were all over the place. "I am a registered Democrat" and "I have voted Democrat all my life".
Last go-round there was an "army" of them & many of them were supposedly getting paid per post. It's funny they've "infiltrated" the Big, Bad LV Sun :)
It's hilarious. This is their idea of putting up a candidate in whom they can have confidence. LOL.
Wow, shihan; you managed to work in a lot of talking points into a couple of gibberish sentences. Congratulations!
Patricia, Looks like this is your full time job. Well come to think of it, you being a LIBRAL, it probably is! You Libs are so typical!!
9/5/08 at 8:39 p.m.
9/5/08 at 8:35 p.m.
9/5/08 at 8:32 p.m.
9/5/08 at 3:33 p.m.
Shihan, would you please press spell check before you post you ignorant ass.
Actually, shihan, I have a full-time job running a small company. You see, I'm the boss. Sometimes I'm in the office, sometimes I'm in the field.
And you?
Oh and would you like us to go back & review your posts to show what a troll you really are?
Any Liberal who claims the "News" media isn't showing favoritism to Obama must be wearing horse blinders. CNN should be registered as a PAC for Obama, considering the way in which they slant information to vilify Palin. Considering Obama’s background of associating with a known avowed Communist during his growing up years, and having a friendship with an avowed American terrorist group member (Weather Underground), he wouldn’t even be able to get the lowest of security clearances in the military, IF they actually allowed him into the military! If Sarah Palin had that same background, it would be front page scandal news! I’m sure that the “News” media knows that the majority of general public realizes their bias for “Liberals,” but there are enough people who are too stupid and will believe anything that they read, and will vote accordingly. Perhaps voters should be required to take an intelligence test to qualify as a voter! That would thin out the ranks! As it is now, many people will vote for Obama because he makes them “feel good” That’s a reason to vote for him?
Palin is everything Obama isn’t. Obama is for more government control, anti-gun ownership (tell that to the criminals), wants to impose a windfall profits tax on oil companies (big mistake), wants to increase Social Security taxes, wants to increase gas taxes, wants to increase Capital gains taxes, tells the National council of LaRaza that American children should learn Spanish in order to communicate with illegals from Mexico!, is for open borders and legalizing all the illegals here now, and like past President Clinton…has received an estimated $33,000 in illegal campaign contributions from Palestinians via his web site. Imagine the uproar if all of this applied to Palin? The manner is which much of the “News” about Palin is reported amounts to propaganda used against her. The intentional avoidance of the "News" media to focus on the background of Obama mentioned above amounts to propaganda by ommission of reporting it.
The Junior Senator Bacrack H. Obama and Governor Palin are well educated individuals. B.H.O.’s resume has him as a community organizer who snorted cocaine, a Junior Senator, voted present 131 times with NO executive experience and has voted 100% of the time along party lines. He is connected with the corrupt Chicago Daley gang; is supported by an infamous narcissistic reverend and priest; has close ties with two convicted felons Tony Rezko and Williams Ayers and until recently his wife was not proud of America.
On the other side, Sarah Palin`s resume includes her 14 years of executive experience as Governor, Commander of the National Guard in Alaska, former Mayor, City Councilor; PTA member and who does not snort cocaine Her eldest son, to serve his country, enlisted in the army and is scheduled for deployment in Iraq. From a heart beat, her experience as a mother of five alone qualifies her for commander and chief. Keep smiling…
Oh petey, Palin's "well educated?"
Well I guess you could say that, seeing as how she attended five different colleges in 6 years.
Don't know exactly how you could equivocate a B.A. in journalism from the University of Idaho with a Summa Cumme Laude graduate of Harvard Law, but whatever.
And so angry with the drug use?
You are aware that Sarah Palin admitted to smoking pot during her run for Governor, right?
Right-wing hypocrites.
I'm sure your not at all concerned with McCain's connections, including Pastor "Catholics helped Hitler kill Jews & are a cult" Hagee, Pastor "God says kill Islam" Parsley, "Agents of Intolerance" Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, Americans are "whiners," Ahmed Chalabi, I dated my current wife while married to my ex-wife, etc. etc.
Neither candidate can claim to be perfect. The sooner you realize this, the better.
Wow....in the last week or so, Democrats have made fun of small town dwellers, mothers, mayors, people that live in small states, working women, blue collar workers, hunters, gun owners, people that believe in God and now.......they are making fun of people with college degrees....
Before long, they will run of groups of people to make fun of.
harrisonlimptiger, typical lib, they love calling people names! I would have to disagree with your lame comment though, since I do have 3 college degrees. So I would not consider myself an ignorant ass. But that is better than being called a Liberal!
Three college degrees? In what? Was "basic grammar and spelling" not part of any of your classes? And how did you manage that with "27 years in the military"? How old are you?
Come on; you're making the claims. Enlighten us.
Wow, just think you are the people I am trying to protect. Thanks for your support! You are the same people that spit in the faces of the Vietnam vets!
I didn't think you'd answer. Trolls never do. No one's interested in your talking points. Either answer my (rather specific) questions or begone.