I got chided over at Hot Air by somebody who claimed the “facts” have been out there for two weeks, and I just wasn’t paying attention.
Sorry, but no, they have not. Where are the economic analyses balancing a bailout against none? I’ll tell you where they are: Nobody has bothered to do any.
Pardon my skepticism, but hysteria tends to do that to me. Let’s see those analyses.
Not everybody is shrieking “the sky is falling!” Here’s law professor Ilya Somin:
Past history shows that stock market drops, even big ones, don’t necessarily cause longterm damage to the economy. Today’s drop in stock values, while the largest in absolute terms, is not even in the top 10 relative to total shareholder value. The 1987 stock market crash was much more severe - a 22.6% loss in share value on the Dow Jones in one day - three times today’s 7% drop. Yet the economy recovered swiftly, in part because policymakers were wise enough to let failing firms go bankrupt and free up their resources for use by more efficient industries.
Like me, Somin is waiting for more analysis. And economists across the political spectrum are signing a petition against a bailout, saying in part the same thing I am.
If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, Americas dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.
For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.
So everybody, take your meds, calm down, and start doing the math.
Oh, speaking of skepticism, Mike Pence had the best line:
“I must tell you, there are those in the public debate who have said that we must act now. The last time I heard that, I was on a used-car lot,” said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Indiana. “The truth is, every time somebody tells you that you’ve got to do the deal right now, it usually means they’re going to get the better part of the deal.”
That’s exactly how I feel. Does anybody else think this is remarkably like all that green nuttiness? Ratify Kyoto and use only one sheet of toilet paper, or we’re all going to DIE! Give us 700 billion dollars now or we’re all going to DIE!
I’m sending this to Peterson, Specter, and Casey today.
It seems imprudent to rush a bailout bill. There have been no committee hearings, and as far as I have been able to tell, very little data. Forbes reported this week that, “’It’s not based on any particular data point,’ a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. ‘We just wanted to choose a really large number.’” This does not encourage me, nor does it make me tend to accept that a disaster is waiting to happen, and the Great Depression will repeat.
I neither accept nor reject the disaster scenario, because no evidence has been given either way, at least in the media. That a certain person does accept it is not evidence: It’s an appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.
I don’t write to encourage you either to accept or deny the scenario, or vote for or against the bailout. I merely ask that you solicit evidence and weigh it carefully before you vote. A bailout could, after all, be as destructive to the economy as none at all.
U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., may be throwing a monkey wrench into efforts to pass a $700 billion bank bailout, instead favoring alternative plans that looks to free up capital and credit markets via tax and regulatory relief while allowing financial institutions to temporarily skip dividend payments to shareholders.
Republican and Democratic officials in Washington said McCain was offering alternatives Thursday to the $700 billion plan backed by the Bush administration, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke and U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
That plan has the federal government acquiring bad mortgage assets from struggling banks with the goal of keeping them afloat and allowing more credit to flow.
McCain appears to be siding with conservatives and House Republicans who question the bailout and its costs to taxpayers as well as government rescuing private lenders and perhaps taking ownership stakes in rescued banks.
The alternative plan allocates less public money and relies more on tax breaks, lifting regulatory barriers and using less bailout-oriented mechanisms to free up capital and credit. It also seeks to create a privately funded mechanism to ensure mortgages and mortgage-backed securities.
One Republican official said McCain is standing up for taxpayers as he, President Bush, congressional leaders and presidential foe Sen. Barack Obama try to hash out a deal. A deal was close to being finalized Thursday but House Republicans and McCain are looking to get alternatives considered.
According to Gingrich and Dick Morris on Hannity and Colmes, McCain has killed the Paulsen bailout and will present his own version, which will require the government to lend, not give the money, and regulations will be reformed and taxes will be loosened to help them pay us back.
Both Gingrich and Morris were giddy. They both said McCain has shown that he will stand up to anyone–including the president–to fight for the country, and he’s changed the argument: Now, the Dems support giving a trillion dollars to the Wall Street “fat cats,” as they called them over and over, but McCain has refused, in the name of the taxpayer.
Both Gingrich and Morris said that McCain had utterly and totally pwned the Dems, who will be forced to support McCain’s plan.
McCain will then go to the public and explain that Obama supported the bailout, but McCain crafted an alternative, despite immense pressure from the president and the Department of the Treasury.
As a bonus, McCain stood up for the conservative wing of the party, not the moderates, as everyone expected him to do. Both Gingrich and Morris said McCain has totally won the argument.
Let’s hope it all pans out this way.
I hate talking heads and never watch their shows, so no, I did not see Hannity and Colmes, because I hate that show. If it is true, I also don’t know that Newt and Dick have any idea what they’re talking about. Newt usually doesn’t run his trap without something behind it, but Dick Morris is another story.
I’ll be watching to see what happens, and what McCain does, and I’ll be posting about it. Got that doctor appointment today, sometime. Haven’t made it yet (they don’t start taking calls for another thirty minutes).
Republican incumbents in close races have the easiest vote of their lives coming up this week: No on the Bush-Pelosi Wall Street bailout.
God Himself couldn’t have given rank-and-file Republicans a better opportunity to create political space between themselves and the Administration. That’s why I want to see 40 Republican No votes in the Senate, and 150+ in the House. If a bailout is to pass, let it be with Democratic votes. Let this be the political establishment (Bush Republicans in the White House + Democrats in Congress) saddling the taxpayers with hundreds of billions in debt (more than the Iraq War, conjured up in a single weekend, and enabled by Pelosi, btw), while principled Republicans say “No” and go to the country with a stinging indictment of the majority in Congress.
This creates pressure on the “change” message. If this issue is made controversial, and Obama is not the first to make it an issue, how exactly is a Washington deal backed by Bush’s Treasury Secretary “change?”
Our financial markets are in turmoil and the Administration was right to call for decisive action to prevent further harm to our economy but nationalizing every bad mortgage in America is not the answer.
The Administration’s request amounts to the largest corporate bailout in American history. Congress should act, but should act in a way that protects the integrity of our free market and protects the American taxpayer from more debt and higher taxes.
To have the freedom to succeed, we must preserve the freedom to fail. Any solution to our present crisis must preserve our essential economic freedom.
Congress should delay consideration of any legislation until the facts and competing solutions can be fully debated, consider alternatives to massive government spending and figure out how to pay for the solution through budget cuts and reform instead of more debt or taxes.
Congress must not hastily embrace a cure that may do more harm to our economy than the disease of bad debt.
Before any bailout is enacted, Congress must set itself on an unalterable path to truly overhaul these Government Sponsored Enterprises from the top down and hold those accountable, in and out of government, who drove them, and our financial sector, to the brink of bankruptcy. Some important work is already underway, but additional reforms are needed. Even now, we read that the Treasury Department is using Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase many of these bad mortgages while it seeks the authority to purchase them all.
Congress should also ensure that these GSE’s can no longer pose a systemic risk to the entire economy while placing them on a brisk schedule to be fully private companies with no guarantee of taxpayer support in times of trouble. And Congress should immediately repeal the Affordable Housing Fund, which will actually siphon off capital from these under-capitalized entities, in order to fund left-wing, third-party organizations.
Next, Congress must consider all available options to put our nation’s economy back on its feet. There are no easy answers but there are alternatives to massive government spending.
Indexing the Capital Gains tax to inflation (which the Treasury Department can do without any help from Congress), or suspending it for one year, would release an enormous amount of capital into our economy. Passing an energy bill that lessens the price of gasoline at the pump through more domestic drilling, wind, solar, nuclear and conservation would bring relief to family budgets and create American jobs. Establishing an entitlement reform commission to develop bipartisan solutions to the crushing weight of entitlements would strengthen the American dollar.
These and other alternatives to a massive federal bailout must be fully considered and debated before Congress acts.
Finally, any new expenditure of taxpayer dollars should be paid for with fiscal discipline and reform. If Congress decides to spend nearly $1 trillion on a corporate bailout, it must find budget savings to prevent that cost from being passed along to the American people.
We must address this crisis with forethought, creativity and fiscal discipline. Protecting the American taxpayer from higher debt and taxes and renewing our belief in the power of the free market must be our guide.
Mike has more at his blog. And since nobody’s brought it up, why should we reward these crooks and idiots for their bad behavior?
He also wonders why there is so little interest in the devastation wrought by Ike, versus Katrina, which we’re still talking about.
A friend of mine emailed me the simple answer, which I borrowed for the header. Boiling down her rant, what she said was this: Katrina got tons of coverage, crying newscasters, incorrect but dramatic stories of “roving gangs raping babies” at the Superdome and Sean Penn in a sinking boat because it was a hurricane that hit a Democrat city, with and incompetent Democrat Mayor and an inept Democrat Governor. Bad local and state governance, and the woes betiding Democrats in general = handy hammer to beat Bush and GOP in ‘06. So much coverage we’re still talking about it.
Ike got little coverage, no crying newscasters, no fake horror stories and no celebrity attention because it was a Hurricane that hit a bunch of Republicans in cowboy boots, who’d elected a competent Republican Mayor and a capable Republican Governor. Good local and state governance, and no woes betiding Democrats in general = no hammer to beat Bush and GOP in ‘08. No coverage.
That’s also the reason after Katrina the MSM covered the whiners in Louisiana, and ignored the survivors in Mississippi.
I would like to thank the US media for doing such a grand job this last week of lowering expectations by portraying Governor Palin - whoops, I mean Hick-Burg Mayor Palin - as a hillbilly know-nothing permapregnant ditz, half of whose 27 kids are the spawn of a stump-toothed uncle who hasn’t worked since he was an extra in Deliverance.
How’s that narrative holding up, geniuses? Almost as good as your “devoted husband John Edwards” routine?
Both of them delivered technically sound performances. Romney, completing his opportunistic conversion from Massachusetts moderate to Reagan conservative, resorted to a heavy dose of old-fashioned, Arthur Finkelstein-inspired liberal-baiting, while Huckabee used a little more humor.
But all of that was forgotten moments after Palin, who received a standing ovation that lasted for more than three minutes before even opening her mouth. To the delegates in the hall, she had become a living, breathing and besieged symbol of the national media’s (and the Democratic Party’s) mockery of and condescension toward them. This sort of kinship with the audience is an enviable way for any speaker to begin any speech, and Palin never squandered it.
She hit the right policy points - particularly on energy policy, where she brought the crowd to its feet with her embrace of aggressive domestic oil drilling and derision of the Democrats’ skepticism - but what really resonated with the conservative audience was her poise, her confidence, her determination and her humor.
“You know,” she ad-libbed (or at least seemed to) upon spotting a sign in the hall from a fellow hockey mother, “they say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull - lipstick.”
A deafening roar ensued, as it did over and over throughout her speech. She flubbed no lines, stumbled over no words, and delivered every sentence with the ease and command of a natural politician.
[ . . . ]
But even if the G.O.P. ticket loses, we probably witnessed on Wednesday night the birth of a new future Republican White House contender, a rival for Romney and Huckabee as ‘12 approaches. Her acceptance speech marked the opening for Palin of a two-month window that ambitious politicians dream about - an opportunity to show her party’s base what she looks like on the national stage, going toe-to-toe with the other party (and the media), and to leave them drooling for more.
She provided strong evidence on Wednesday night that she’s up to the challenge - that she’ll more than hold her own in her October debate with Joe Biden (the next highest-profile moment for her) and on the stump between now and November. If she does that, then win or lose, she will finish this campaign as an obvious White House prospect with a large and loyal following on the right.
In the moments after the speech, I told our on-air listeners that this was the kind of speech Zell Miller could have delivered. Palin didn’t deliver it in a shrill manner or sound like she had a chip on her shoulder, though. She sounded like she relished the opportunity to engage. Palin has no intention of allowing herself to get steamrolled by Barack “Sweetie” Obama, Democrats in general, or a mainstream media that suddenly found itself becoming the echo chamber for anonymous Kos diarists.
She didn’t just play the role of attack dog, although her description of hockey moms as pit bulls with lipstick played very well with the crowd. Palin delivered a stirring defense of small-town values and middle America, and told Americans that she’s one of them — just a mother who started off wanting a better education for her kids, then wanted to improve her community, and just kept succeeding all the way up the ladder.
And Ed includes the line I forgot:
In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers.
And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.
They’re the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed presidential seals.
Today she is the most talked-about woman in the world. And with good reason.
Sarah Palin’s sensational performance at the Republican Party Convention may turn out to be the tipping point of this rollercoaster American election.
Obama fans hoping she would fluff her big night were in for a nasty shock.
This speech has turned the election upside down. It was simply stunning.
Democrats and their Lefty media backers had been sneering that she was a small town nobody, a hick from the Alaskan sticks put into a job way beyond an inexperienced woman.
Over half of U.S. voters (51%) think reporters are trying to hurt Sarah Palin with their news coverage, and 24% say those stories make them more likely to vote for Republican presidential candidate John McCain in November
One last thing. You know, if I were Obama and his groupies, after that woman rocked the house and showed that she is, indeed, tough as nails, I wouldn’t respond by whining — then, I wouldn’t try to tar McCain with corruption or ties to lobbyists, or try to label Palin as inexperienced. But I’m not a Disciple of the Church of the One, so what do I know?
It’s 2004 all over again. The election is the whiny children vs. the adults. Last night’s speeches made that clear. But more than 2004, this election is about the weak candidate vs. the strong candidates. If you didn’t see Palin last night, you don’t know what strong is.
But I’m getting ahead of myself — and because this is long, the rest is below the fold.
Nobody’s talking about it because, well, Palin was so phenomenal she made you forget anyone else had been on the stage, but Rudy was really good. Not necessarily better than Fred good, but he worked the crowd and had them out of the seats cheering over and over again. He really was good, and I don’t want to gloss over him, even though Palin, Palin, Palin, my God, what a woman! What a speaker! I’ve been pulling for Palin for a couple of months now, and she knocked me out of my seat.
Watching the tumultuous, ecstatic reaction in the hall, I was reminded of the famous words of the Admiral Yamamoto after Pearl Harbour: “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant, and fill him with a terrible resolve.”
Sarah Palin walked out onto that stage under more scrutiny, with less preparation, and with more at stake, than any candidate in living memory. You’d never know it.
Chris Wallace (on TV) said, “A star is born.”
You want strong woman? You got it. She makes Hillary look like a weak-kneed whiny little Barbie doll. And she showed that she can not only stand up to the slime and the mud, but that she’s stronger than all of the monkey-cage shit slingers. On gaypatriot, cme says:
She just took all the enemies that have been railing against her the last few days, swept them up into a pile, and crushed them under her boot. It was a thing of beauty.
And more than a few women were crying — as they were cheering.
But Rudy first. His slam dunks.
One hundred and thirty times he couldn’t decide whether to vote “yes” or “no.” It was too tough. He voted “present.” I didn’t know about this vote “present” when I was mayor of New York City. Sarah Palin didn’t have this vote “present” when she was mayor or governor. You don’t get “present.” It doesn’t work in an executive job. For President of the United States, it’s not good enough to be present. You have to make a decision.
and
If I were Joe Biden, I’d
get that VP thing in writing.
and
So he changed his position again. And he put out a statement exactly like the statement of John McCain’s three days earlier. I have some advice for Senator Obama. Next time, call John McCain.
Poor Sarah. They just won’t stop cheering so she can start speaking — and nobody is sitting down. Zell Miller really got the crowd worked up in 2004, but this is way beyond enthusiasm. They’re completely in love with her. And as the camera panned past Levi Johnston, Bristol’s fiance, I saw he had tears in his eyes.
Speaking of love, the camera loves her. She’s a strikingly beautiful woman. She’s poised, she’s strong, and she’s confident. She’s comfortable in her own skin, and spoke fluidly. Brit Hume just said she’s obviously no amateur. Flawless diction. (Aside: She has a nephew in the service? I didn’t know that.)
This woman is no ordinary speaker. She’s a powerhouse. And I don’t mean just the text. I mean she’s a magnetic presence. You can’t take your eyes off her. She’s a public speaker, and she’s going to mutilate Biden in any debate. You can take that to the bank.
The whole thing was spectacular — better than I thought she’d be — even the AP admitted it.
How was even the leftist AP left fumbling for talking points?
The media of course gets its talking points from the DNC. They get half of their stores from the DNC, and all of their analysis.
The media trusts the DNC. They like the DNC. The DNC are nice people who do all of their actual work for them, leaving them free to to snort coke and pursue their hobbies of functional alcoholism and sleeping with each other’s spouses; why shouldn’t they like the DNC?
So the DNC and the Obama camp told the media that Palin was stupid and a bumpkin and all of that and the media got ready to write the stories, and analyze the speech, as they had been previously instructed by the DNC and David Axelrod.
And then the speech happened.
And the media was baffled, befuddled, and bewildered — the DNC and David Axelrod had given them the wrong script entirely! Even they could see that somehow their helpful friends in the DNC had badly erred.
But they had nothing to say, because the DNC and David Axelrod hadn’t prepared them for “Plan B” (as the snide/sarcastic line is now being called).
So the media just sat there in stupefied silence wondering what it was they were supposed to say. And not having been well prepared, they could only manage to do the easiest thing possible, which is to say the purely obvious.
And the obvious, as it turns out, was that it was a hell of a speech, and that she hit a grand slam, and certainly seemed ready for high national office, at least, that is, by the criteria established by David Axelrod and the DNC (to wit, that one is ready for high office if one can deliver a hell of a speech).
So why did David Axelrod and the DNC let down their nice friends in the media and leave them with nothing to say?
They just didn’t see it coming, either.
And lost for a reaction because they didn’t see it coming, they’re reduced to idiocy and panic (well, more than usual, that is). The media talking heads and Obama are apparently shocked! that somebody wrote her speech. Ace helps them out here.
Someone wrote Obambi’s speech, too, Hoss.
They were frightened before. After last night, they should be terrified. Many are.
[The] useless drearily liberal Timothy Noah whines, possibly correctly, that the media’s nasty full frontal attack on Palin has set her up to knock it out of the park.
I hope she hits the circuit and speaks and speaks and speaks, because every time she does, she’s going to pull votes.
Here were a few highlights.
Stick the knife in and twist it, Sarah!
A writer observed: “We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty, sincerity, and dignity.” I know just the kind of people that writer had in mind when he praised Harry Truman.
I grew up with those people.
They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America … who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars.
They love their country, in good times and bad, and they’re always proud of America. I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town.
I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids’ public education better.
When I ran for city council, I didn’t need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too.
Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown.
And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves.
I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t listening.
We tend to prefer candidates who don’t talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.
Serious red meat — or maybe I should say moose stew:
And 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.
But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.
And foreign policy as energy independence was really good.
I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history.
And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence.
That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.
The stakes for our nation could not be higher.
When a hurricane strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, this country should not be so dependent on imported oil that we are forced to draw from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
And families cannot throw away more and more of their paychecks on gas and heating oil.
With Russia wanting to control a vital pipeline in the Caucasus, and to divide and intimidate our European allies by using energy as a weapon, we cannot leave ourselves at the mercy of foreign suppliers.
To confront the threat that Iran might seek to cut off nearly a fifth of world energy supplies … or that terrorists might strike again at the Abqaiq facility in Saudi Arabia … or that Venezuela might shut off its oil deliveries … we Americans need to produce more of our own oil and gas.
And take it from a gal who knows the North Slope of Alaska: we’ve got lots of both.
Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems - as if we all didn’t know that already.
But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all.
Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we’re going to lay more pipelines … build more new-clear plants … create jobs with clean coal … and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources.
We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers.
And then she went in for the kill.
I’ve noticed a pattern with our opponent.
Maybe you have, too.
We’ve all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers.
And there is much to like and admire about our opponent.
But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate.
This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word “victory” except when he’s talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed … when the roar of the crowd fades away … when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent’s plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger … take more of your money … give you more orders from Washington … and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy … our opponent is against producing it.
Victory in Iraq is finally in sight … he wants to forfeit.
Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay … he wants to meet them without preconditions.
Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America … he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights? Government is too big … he wants to grow it.
Congress spends too much … he promises more.
Taxes are too high … he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific.
That’s enough. Transcript is here, but you really need to see and hear this woman speak. She’s phenomenal.
So ladies and gentlemen, I present the powerhouse, Sarah Palin.
Fred Thompson is rocking the house (he’s on now). A quotation:
Some Washington punidts and media big shots are in a frenzy over the selection of a woman who has actually governed, rather than just talked a good game on the Sunday talk shows and hit the Washington cocktail circuit.
[Audience erupts]
I say give me a tough Alaskan governor who has taken on the political establishment in the largest state in the Union and won over the beltway business as usual crowd any day of the week.
Everybody had heard the rumors, spread on The Atlantic and DailyKos websites, that Palin’s fifth child, Trig, born last April, was not really hers — that Trig was really Palin’s 17 year-old daughter’s child, and Palin faked pregnancy to cover up her daughter’s condition. None of that was true, they all knew. But the top McCain staffers revealed that a story would be breaking on the wires in a few hours reporting that Palin’s daughter, Bristol, is, in fact, pregnant now. The father is Bristol’s boyfriend, the staffers were told, and she intends to marry him.
The McCain aides’ assignment was to call a list of about 40 top evangelical and other cultural conservative leaders. Each one would get a personal explanation of the story, and each was asked for his or her reaction. The McCain people reached nearly everyone before the story broke, and the verdict was unanimous — all the leaders supported Palin and her place on the McCain ticket.
[ . . . ]
When the day’s business was over, I drifted around the Colorado and Ohio delegations — two critical swing states — to get a feel for the delegates’ reaction. In the Colorado section, I ran into Sue Sharkey, from Windsor. When I asked what she thought, her reaction was not about Palin but herself.
“For me personally, it hit my heart this morning,” Sharkey told me, “because I was a 17 year-old girl, just like Sarah Palin’s daughter, and I had — I was in those shoes. And my son is with me, who will be 35 years old next week, and so I know what a difficult road there is for her.”
“I chose to have my son, and from that point I realized that I was a very strong right-to-life advocate,” Sharkey continued, her voice wavering ever so slightly. Roe v. Wade had been passed just the year before, and I already knew girls who were going through abortions. It wasn’t a choice for me; it wasn’t in my heart to do that. So when I heard the news this morning, it struck close to home for me.”
[ . . . ]
I asked Popma what she thought the larger reaction among evangelicals will be. “Their reaction is going to be exactly as mine,” she told me. “There hasn’t been one evangelical family that hasn’t gone through some sort of situation. Many of us are in this movement because of something that has happened in our lives.”
As for now, at least, evangelicals seem to be completely on Palin’s side. And McCain’s. This is a group that has been skeptical of McCain in the past. Now, it’s probably fair to say that he has never been more popular among evangelicals than he is at this moment. Whether that will last, or whether Palin will cost McCain support among other voters, is not yet clear. But within the confines of the Republican Convention, McCain’s surprising choice of Palin — and the equally surprising news about her family — is paying off.
There is a negative side, but again, it’s not what they think it is.
If these idiots had any clue about conservatives, they’d realize that every smear they spread about Palin or her family is driving voters to McCain.
Tennessee Guerilla Woman, who is no moderate (boy, is that the understatement of the decade) is really pissed off:
The ‘progressive’ men are actually counting the months of the woman’s pregnancies! That’s right folks. The formerly progressive netroots is trying to bring Sarah Palin down by proving that she is a slut! The menz over at Americablog (and followers) fervently hope to prove that one of Sarah Palin’s children was conceived “out of wedlock!”
This story is not to be confused with the ongoing netroots effort to shame the Palin family by proving that Sarah Palin’s teenage daughter is a slut.
A woman enters the presidential race and suddenly the progressive mission is to shame and mortify Sarah Palin, her children, her husband, and every woman who has ever found herself in a similar situation. And then no one will ever vote for Sarah Palin again because she’s a slut!?!?
John Aravosis imagines that we are still living in the Victorian Era when women were so devastated by public shaming that they committed suicide. Way to go John Aravosis! And we thought you already held the record for alienating women voters with your vile misogynistic posts about Hillary Rodham Clinton. There’s just something about ambitious women that brings out the inner misogynistic creep.
And note John Aravosis’ sick and puritanically deranged premise that an “out of wedlock” conception equates to an ‘illegitimate’ child! Many of us thought we had finally retired that sick and child-abusive term back in the 1960s!
And she’s just getting started.
Althouse isn’t happy, although she’s a moderate. But one of her commenters hit the bull’s eye:
When the tallying is completed of the landslide of states that voted for Sarah Palin … the Democrats need to take a good look at the bloggers who blew the election for them.
I guess these idiots just aren’t paying attention. Here’s Dobson’s statement from yesterday:
“In the 32-year history of Focus on the Family, we have offered prayer, counseling and resource assistance to tens of thousands of parents and children in the same situation the Palins are now facing. We have always encouraged the parents to love and support their children and always advised the girls to see their pregnancies through, even though there will of course be challenges along the way. That is what the Palins are doing, and they should be commended once again for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances.
“Being a Christian does not mean you’re perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord. I’ve been the beneficiary of that forgiveness and restoration in my own life countless times, as I’m sure the Palins have.
“The media are already trying to spin this as evidence Gov. Palin is a ‘hypocrite,’ but all it really means is that she and her family are human. They are in my prayers and those of millions of Americans.”
Keep it up, nutjobs. You’re giving us votes on a silver platter.
SAINT PAUL, Minn. - At the recommendation of Sen. John McCain, the 2008 Republican National Convention announced substantial changes to the convention’s program and actions being taken to help with Hurricane Gustav relief efforts. On Monday, all program activities beyond the official business that must be conducted in accordance with party rules will be cancelled. Among the other actions announced today are the formation of the Affected States Working Group, the establishment of an Affected States Information Center, and the chartering of a DC-9 to transport affected delegates.
Rick Davis, campaign manager for John McCain 2008, announced that the upcoming Republican National Nominating Convention is making serious revisions to the convention program and surrounding activities. Davis said, “We are deeply concerned about the safety and welfare of the residents of the Gulf State region. Our top priority is to assist those who will be affected by Hurricane Gustav. This is not a time for politics or celebration; it is a time for us to come together as Americans and assist the residents of the Gulf States.”
Davis also discussed what the changes in the program will mean for the nomination process. “In order for the Republican Party to officially exist and for Senator McCain to qualify for the ballot, we are - by law - required to conduct specific official business. At this point, our program on Monday has been scaled back and will only include what party rules governing the nomination of our candidates for president and vice president require. We will perform the official business as required. In addition, we have set aside time to make delegates and Americans watching our proceedings at home aware of what they can do to assist in relief efforts designed to help those who will be affected by Hurricane Gustav.”
Davis concluded: “At some point between Monday and Thursday evening, we will convene once again to complete the activities needed to qualify Senator McCain and Governor Palin for the ballot in all 50 states. Beyond that, all we can say is that we will monitor what is happening and make decisions about other convention business as details become available.”
Chairman of the Republican National Committee Robert M. “Mike” Duncan added, “The safety and well-being of the people of the Gulf States remains our top concern. We are doing everything we can on the ground in Minneapolis-Saint Paul to ensure that the delegations affected by this storm have the resources and information that they need. As Senator McCain said this morning, we must redirect our attention and efforts. We will act as Americans - not Republicans - to help our fellow citizens in need.”
This morning, at the request of Governor Barbour (R-Miss.), Sen. McCain attended a briefing with the governor about the state’s storm preparation efforts. The briefing was held at the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency offices in Pearl, Miss. Following the briefing, Sen. McCain, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, and Mrs. Cindy McCain toured the emergency management center.
The convention is in continuous communication with all delegates, speakers, and program participants. All parties understand that the schedule for the convention will be dictated by the conditions on the ground in the Gulf States and are, therefore, subject to change. The campaign and the convention’s first priority is the safety and security of those living in the areas where the hurricane will make landfall.
The McCain campaign has also taken several additional steps to assist delegates from the Gulf States, including the formation of an Affected States Working Group, the chartering of a DC-9 to transport affected delegates, and the establishment of an Affected States Information Center.
I pledge that tomorrow night, and if necessary, throughout our convention if necessary, to act as Americans not Republians, because America needs us now no matter whether we are Republican or Democrat.
“What this brings is a spirit of reform and change that is vital now in our nation’s capital. Eighty four percent of the American people think the country’s on the wrong track. In our Party, we have corruption. We have former members of Congress residing in federal prison, so it’s not surprising to me that we’ve seen an incredible invigoration around our Party and around the nation, not just Republicans, but Democrats. By the way, in the last day and a half or whatever it’s been, we have raised $4 million on the Internet. I wish I had taken her a month ago.”
…
“She’s got the right judgment. She doesn’t think, like Senator Obama does, that Iran is a minor irritant. She knows that the surge worked and succeeded and she supported that. Senator Obama still, still to this day, refuses to acknowledge that the surge has succeeded. She’s been commander-in-chief of the Alaska Guard that has served back and back. In fact, as you know, she’s got a son who’s getting ready to go. But she’s had the judgment on these issues that Senator Obama, he’s had all the wrong judgments. Governor Palin understands these issues, and she understands the challenges that we face, so she’s had 12 years of elected office experience, including travelling to Kuwait, including being involved in these issues, and look, I’m so proud that she has displayed the kind of judgment and she has the experience and judgment as an executive. She’s run a huge economy up there in the state of Alaska. Twenty percent of our energy comes from the state of Alaska, and energy is obviously one of the key issues for our nation’s security.”
…
“But the point is, she’s been to Kuwait. She’s been over there. She’s been with her troops. The National Guard that she commands, who have been over there and had the experience, I’m proud of her knowledge of these challenges and issues. And of course as governor, she has had enormous responsibilities, none of which Senator Obama had. When she was in government, he was a community organizer. When she was taking tough positions against her own party, Senator Obama was voting present 130 times in the state legislature. On every tough issue, whatever it was, she was taking them on. That’s the kind of judgment that I’m confident that we need in Washington.”
I didn’t obsessively blog about McCain’s VP choices because for the most part, I found it pointless. McCain was playing it close to the chest, and 99% of the articles in the dextrosphere were based on nothing more than pure speculation or “anonymous sources.” I did lay out my case against Romney, mostly because there was so much Romney cheering at the time, and usually from those who were jeering at Romney when he was in the primaries.
McCain was in a difficult position, and his VP choice was problematic. McCain’s problems with many conservatives, and the Republicans’ largely self-inflicted brand damage made choosing a VP crucial and difficult.
On the political spectrum question, I think he should pick somebody somewhat to his right, but not too far to the right. The “I don’t care about anything except whether he’s like me or not” identity politics voters who form Huckabee’s core are not, for the most part, going to vote for McCain, no matter who he picks, so choosing someone way on the far right is pointless and could hurt his chances come November. Like Reagan, who in the 1980 primaries was getting about the same percentage of votes as McCain is now, he needs to pull from both right and left.
McCain can’t pick somebody ideologically opposed on any of McCain’s strongest issues. That rules out the radical protectionist Duncan Hunter, who is in the wrong party and would be much happier as a Blue Dog Democrat. And Hunter, like Fred, doesn’t have enough of a following to benefit Johnny Mac. Appointing a big porker would have the same effect: An oil-and-vinegar ticket. Picking a free-trade, fiscal conservative is a must. And speaking of musts, McCain can’t afford to alienate hawks. Any of the mealy-mouthed Republicans who suddenly became silent on the war because they were afraid of losing votes would be disastrous. Unfortunately, that rules out most of the Republicans sitting in Congress. In fact, McCain would do well to steer clear of anybody too closely associated with the “compassionate conservative” big government give me my bribe big spenders in the party. Tone deaf idiots like Hastert would not be a good idea.
I posted that in February, and at the time, it was nearly stream of consciousness. I changed my mind about some things, but nothing above. As time went on, it became more and more clear that there was really only one person who could fulfill all the criteria.
And that’s who he picked.
But I will argue that Sarah Palin is far more than a good, or even a great choice. She’s the perfect choice for a number of reasons. And if you’re not up on Sarah Palin, I posted a roundup of Palin links from the day before yesterday. Read through them, so this will make more sense. Rory is on a Palin roll. Head over there to get a local perspective.
Oh. And I’m not even going near the PUMA question, not because I don’t think it’s important, but because it’s been discussed to death, and because it is a comparatively marginal benefit.
She is Johnny Mac’s perfect complement.
Palin strengthens all of McCain’s strongest attributes. She’s a fearless fighter, who fought her state party’s entrenched power structure, and won. Strong and courageous — two of McCain’s greatest strenghs — are also hers. Like McCain, she hates corruption, back room deals, and government waste, and she’s been fighting it since before she was the governor. Also like McCain, she cares less for party line than what she believes is right. By putting her on the ticket instead of a Washington insider, McCain put real teeth in his campaign for change — real change, not insubstantial, undefined change. Like McCain, Palin is an unwavering, unapologetic patriot, and both believe firmly in Reagan’s view of America as a shining city on a hill.
She also shores up McCain’s weaknesses. She’s more socially conservative than McCain, and if you don’t think that’s important, note that seven million dollars in contributions have poured into the campaign since she was announced in Dayton. Of all the primary candidates, her conservatism is most similar to Fred Thompson’s. She takes her oath seriously, and used her veto pen the first time because the law violated the state constitution. She is less favorably disposed to regulation than is McCain, but she’s not afraid to go after powerful businesses when she perceives that it’s in the peoples’ best interests. We know this because she took on the oil companies in Alaska — and won.
No other candidate I can think of would so perfectly have complemented — and strengthened — McCain. Not Romney, not Huck, not Pawlenty. Nobody.
By putting Palin on the ticket, McCain took Obama’s insubstantial “change” agenda away, and offered a real agenda for change. Postpolitical discusses it here.
She is already unifying the conservative coalition.
Since the primaries started, one recurring theme has been the death or fracture of the conservative coalition. Palin kills that discussion, because she brings the coalition back together.
If all Sarah Palin had done was kill the bridge to nowhere, she would be a rock star with fiscal conservatives (and that includes all of the voters who have been disgusted by Republican spending). But she has done muc more. Not only does she energize social conservatives, many of whom have been lukewarm on McCain, but pro-life voters will turn out in droves to pull the lever in November. After all, there is a huge difference between saying you are pro-life on the campaign trail and having a pro-life voting record, but Sarah Palin takes it one giant step forward. She lives it in her personal life with her youngest son, Trig, whom she had even though she knew he would have Down Syndrome.
Unless you’ve been under a rock for the past two days, you can feel the excitement (see here, or for what Christian conservatives are saying, here). Lee at Second Hand Conjecture:
In truth, Palin is of course the ultimate force for unification and it’s why she or someone like her was so desperately needed by McCain and the Republicans. How much of a unifier is she? When the neoconservatives and Ronpaulists like the selection, if you are familiar with the party beyond name, you need say no more.
I think it is a big mistake to assume that McCain picked Palin because she is a woman. No doubt that is a part of it, but it is Palin’s character that has us just smitten with her. She had a problem at school one day so she went to a PTA meeting. She didn’t like the way things were going so she ran for the PTA and won. Then she ran for mayor of her hometown — where she played basketball and met her husband — and won. Then she got disgusted by Alaska politics and GOP corruption, and as a Republican ran against the corruption in her own party — and won. And she never whined or complained. She’s happily married, she’s a tough lady married to a tougher man, and she got there through hard work and sheer determination.
She’s the conservative success story, and that is why men and women on the right just LOVE this pick. Not because she’s a woman, but because she’s Joe, uh, make that JANE Citizen, and she played by the rules and beat corruption . . . I would encourage you to look at Sarah Palin as what we all hope for: a self-made person who seems to want to do the right thing. She’s not a Woman VP — she’s an anti-corruption VP. That’s how we see her. That’s how she deserves to be seen. She has the enthusiastic — actually, incandescent support of every conservative I know — not because she is a political missile aimed at Hillary voters, but because she embodies the American dream of the citizen who decided to make a difference.
By adding Palin to the ticket, he put the stamp of absolute authenticity on his campaign. Make no mistake, Sarah Palin is as real as it gets. She’s not a wealthy insider pretending to be blue collar. She’s as Joe Jane Six-Pack as anyone alive.
She fishes. She hunts. She’s a gun nut. She shops at Wal-Mart. She was raised by a teacher and a school secretary. She rides a Harley and hangs around with Vietnam Vet bikers. Biden can talk all he wants about his “blue collar roots,” but it’s nothing more than bluster when placed against Palin. And understand: Wal-Mart voters have an unerring instict for detecting one of their own.
Speaking of, since Second Amendment issues are one of my major concerns, let me say this. There is a long standing split in the so-called gun community, which waxes and wanes: The hunters, the shooters, and the Second Amendment activists. Democrats have exploited this split to pass gun control legislation, making their appeals to hunters. Unlike many conservatives in office, Sarah Palin is a firm believer in the Second Amendment itself, not in the “rights of hunters,” but as a right spelled out in the Constitution. She may be the first bona fide gun nut on a ticket since Theodore Roosevelt, and Democrats will find it difficult to exploit the split with Palin on the ticket.
First, Governor Palin is not merely, as Jay describes her, “all-American”, but hyper-American. What other country in the developed world produces beauty queens who hunt caribou and serve up a terrific moose stew? As an immigrant, I’m not saying I came to the United States purely to meet chicks like that, but it was certainly high on my list of priorities. And for the gun-totin’ Miss Wasilla then to go on to become Governor while having five kids makes it an even more uniquely American story. Next to her resume, a guy who’s done nothing but serve in the phony-baloney job of “community organizer” and write multiple autobiographies looks like just another creepily self-absorbed lifelong member of the full-time political class that infests every advanced democracy.
[ . . . ]
Governor Palin has what the British Labour Party politician Denis Healy likes to call a “hinterland” - a life beyond politics. Whenever Senator Obama attempts anything non-political (such as bowling), he comes over like a visiting dignitary to a foreign country getting shanghaied into some impenetrable local folk ritual. Sarah Palin isn’t just on the right side of the issues intellectually. She won’t need the usual stage-managed “hunting” trip to reassure gun owners: she’s lived the Second Amendment all her life. Likewise, on abortion, we’re often told it’s easy to be against it in principle but what if you were a woman facing a difficult birth or a handicapped child? Been there, done that.
Her husband is a Democrat and a union member, and from everything we see, it works out well for them. He will be a cultural magnet. In season, he’s a commercial fisherman (he used to work in the oil fields until Palin’s fight with the oil companies, and he resigned due to conflict of interest). He’s a world champion snowmobile racer. Men all over the country are going to see him and admire him. He may not be on the ticket, but he will attract votes.
I’ve said it before. Liberals always ignore or discount the cultural factor until they lose the election, and then further demonstrate that they don’t get it by wondering “What’s wrong with Kansas?” Let’s not make the same mistake. Culture will have as much influence as issues in this election as it always has, and the McCain-Palin ticket stomps all over Obama and Biden. That authenticity is worth more than you might suspect.
Palin deflates the Democratic ticket.
As I said above, adding Palin makes the GOP the ticket of real change, and takes all the air out of Obama’s ethereal “change” platform. She underscores the lack of executive experience on the Obama-Biden ticket because she has more executive experience than both of them put together. She offers real hope to Americans across the country that they can work and succeed just like she has.
She is living, breathing proof that a woman can fight and win against corrupt, entrenched power, all while having four children (now five), and without going on the public dole, or whining about why she can’t get “free” childcare, or bringing ridiculous “sexual harassment” lawsuits, or without riding on her husband’s coattails to get where she is today.
Her story, which is getting out now, will be as inspiring as McCain’s. Forget the Hillary voter question. If Sarah Palin isn’t a strong woman, none exists. However they vote, she will be a heroine for women and girls across the country, and a source of pride for fathers and brothers.
And forget the “chickenhawk” argument. McCain was already immune both by his own service, and his son fighting in Iraq. Sarah Palin’s eldest son Track will deploy to Iraq in September.
She paints the Democrats into a corner.
Romney, the Democrats were ready for. The same is true of Huck, Rudy, anyone they saw coming. But they weren’t, and aren’t, ready for Palin, and really have no line of attack.
They can’t attack her on corruption, since fighting corruption has been her entire political career. They can’t attack her on experience without shooting themselves in the process. Worse, any line of attack risks alienating women voters — not so much because of identity politics, but because the Obama campaign can’t seem to confront female candidates without being insulting and condescending. Look at Hillary and her base of support.
They can’t use her lack of foreign policy experience, at least when it comes out (and it is) how thin and insubstantial Biden’s foreign policy experience is. They can’t attack her as a continuation of Bush, since she has no connection to the Bush White House, and has always been a thorn in the side of the party insiders.
And troopergate? They can’t go there, because, as Gertrude Stein said, “There’s no there there,” and more importantly, because if they do, they ally themselves with a nasty piece of work who has, among other things, tasered his own step-children, beat his wife, and threatened to kill her father.
The Democrats’ hands are tied, and they know it. Even the oblivious Obama campaign, after releasing an obnoxious statement, has backed off and apologized for it. There is absolutely nothing the Democrats can do but watch Palin’s star rise.
Palin is change beyond the ticket.
Because everybody is focused on the election, few have yet appreciated that the change goes much further than just the ticket. If the party nominates the ticket — which they must — they also put their imprimatur to a badly needed change in the party itself.
Sarah Palin has fought the old boys’ club continuously, and won. She is everything Washington insiders hate the most. She’s an uppity citizen, who rather than shutting up, runs for office and beats the party hacks. She’s not the only one; Bobby Jindal is another. But Sarah’s the one on the ticket.
No matter who wins in November, the RNC can’t unring the bell. Her spot on the ticket ushers in a new generation, one that isn’t as respectful of party leadership as the leadership thinks they should be. She is pulling the coalition together, and giving us more voice. She is the embodiment of and the instrument for the change the party needs most badly.
I suspect more than a few Beltway insiders hate her. I also suspect that you don’t hear much of that because they don’t dare. Palin is too much like the average American citizen and far too popular for the insiders to sneer. And the best part is that there’s nothing they can do about it.
Let’s not forget John McCain. He is the man who saw these things in her, and he is the man who asked her to be his VP candidate. He knew exactly what he was doing, and by doing so, he signaled to the insiders that he is as serious about turning the party upside down as she is. John McCain deserves a standing ovation for selecting Sarah Palin.
Unless something unforeseen happens, I believe they will be unstoppable. Sarah is the Deadliest Catch.
Just kidding. But other than pundits and blog readers, the US is just starting to discover who Sarah “Barracuda” Palin is. If you’re one, this is for you. If you know all about her, you’ll appreciate the links.
Note: These are just from yesterday. There are lots more already posted on the blogs I read since then, and the dextrosphere will continue to be all Sarah all the time for a while now.
Here they are, in no particular order (Firefox bookmarks capabilites are surprisingly — and annoyingly — limited):
Many of these names don’t surprise me. Angie Harmon. Robert Duvall. Gerald McRaney. Stephen Baldwin. Wilford Brimley. Gary Sinise. James Caan. Pat Boone. David Zucker. Robert Davi. Lou Ferrigno. Patricia Heaton.
But Dean Cain? Kevin Sorbo? Lorenzo Lamas? Jerry Bruckheimer? Who knew?
Then there’s this:
Duvall, who just finished doing the voiceovers for the McCain videos that will be show next week at the Republican National Convention, points to McCain’s national security experience.
“When thinking about politics and government, do you consider yourself to be 1) Very conservative, 2) Somewhat conservative, 3) Moderate, 4) Somewhat liberal, 5) Very liberal, 5) Unsure/Refuse”
And conflating the categories:
Conservative
Moderate
Liberal
Unsure/Refuse
60%
2%
36%
3%
Bruce Walker has been paying attention since the June 2002 poll. The percentage for conservative has never fallen below 59%, but the percentage for liberal has never exceeded 38%. It’s a good discussion of political polls in general. Read it.
Pastor Rick Warren’s Forum Unfair to Obama
by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace
(2008-08-17) — The Saddleback Civil Forum Saturday night, hosted by best-selling author Pastor Rick Warren, was “utterly and shamelessly biased” toward Republican presidential nominee John McCain, according to a spokesman for the ‘Obama for America’ campaign.
Sen. Barack Obama, one of the two front runners for the Democrat presidential nomination, often seemed to stumble through his answers to Pastor Warren’s questions, continually glancing down to his right, with his head cocked at a 45-degree angle for nearly the entire hour.
Sen. McCain, on the other hand, gave crisp answers, looked directly at the television audience most of the time, and delivered what many pundits acknowledged was his best performance to date.
Pastor Warren asked each candidate the same set of questions, including “At what point is a baby entitled to human rights.?”
Answering that question would be “above my pay grade,” said Sen. Obama, who reported $4.2 million in household income in 2007.
