The personal attacks on both women need to stop, because neither one will be President.

Their husbands will be.

So, on both sides, let's remember that and try to keep this about John McCain and Barack Obama.

This is precisely the crap I don't like to see. And, Mulder, I think these are some of the most sexist statements I've seen since Hillary was thrashed for being a woman. First off, are you claiming that because Palin is a woman, she couldn't possibly have the brains to run a business? You "bet her husband does all the actual running of the business"? Explain what bit of fact you've suddenly come across that the rest of us haven't seen concerning the family business...

And the statement, "a woman who should be caring for her children" is particularly outrageous. So, women can't run businesses and are only good for staying home taking care of children? How do you know how well Palin's children are taken care of? Oh, I suppose it is her fault her daughter got pregnant? Honestly, Palin is no more responsible for her daughter's desires than Hillary was for her husband's.

If I'm mistaken in my perception of your post, please tell me where I've gone wrong. Or is it simply a case of choosing the incorrect words? You've made other sexist statements here so I'm not particularly surprised... But the credibility of your posts suffer a bit when you personally attack people. Are you afraid Palin will attract those of us who are still angry over how Hillary was abused by her party and the media at large?

Sorry, they're NOT sexist at all. The GOP keep spouting "Family Values" and yet Gov. Palin has a newborn son with Down's Syndrome, and went back to work 2 days after having him and now is running for the VP spot with old man McCain. Sorry, she should have her priorities. There's nothing wrong with a woman having a career and being a mother, but it is still WRONG if she's ignoring her children and I believe she most definitely is. The daughter being pregnant is one example. The reason I stated that I bet her husband does all the actual running of the business" is because he most probably does since she's got a full-time job as Governor of Alaska, or at least it should be a full-time job. If she's running the business, than she's not devoting full-time to her Governor duties imho. I think it is partially her fault that her daughter got pregnant yes. She should have been around more and should've taughter her daughter abstinance and/or safe-sex. Sorry I'm not personally attacking anyone just giving my opinions. Calm down, lol.

If the Clintons daughter had got pregnant the GOP would have had a field day. Palin is the one telling everyone else how to live and how to be moral and who can be married and that sex ed shouldn't be taught in schools so her daughter being pregnant very much matters!

Exactly.

First of all saying Palin and Obama have the same level of experience is just absurd on its face. There is no truth to that. He is vastly more experience.

Second to call people Obamaniacs in the same post that includes a tirade about personal attacks is a bit ridiculous.

Third, people on the internet act badly. What does that have to do with this thread? It is not unreasonable to question her credentials or to say she has very very few.

Fourth, she is under investigation and it is not the first time she has used her powers as governor or mayor to fire a political or personal enemy. That is, I guess, her right, but it is also appropriate for conversation. It is also appropriate to ask McCain if he thinks her actions in the firing of her former brother-in-law were appropriate and if he would permit that as president. I think what she did recently is as worthy of discussion as Joe Biden lifting a paragraph from a speech several years ago.

Now Max, in regard to your question: I like Obama because he is going to end the war. McCain can talk all he wants about judgement and the surge. When he does so it is based on two faulty assumptions in my opinion: One that his vote to go to war in the first place demonstrated good judgement and two that there is some point in the future where we can withdraw and there not be turmoil in its wake. I don't think either of those assumptions are correct. Obama voted against going to war and did so with some political risk, but he knew going to war was the wrong thing.

Obama wants to re-deploy troops to Afghanistan. McCain is silent on the issue.

I also prefer Obama's health care plan to McCain's. McCain wants to have to pay taxes on the health insurance my company provides me. Shame on him. He does not think that health care is a right. I do and I think Obama's plan is better.

McCain comes up with gimmicks for dealing with energy. Offshore drilling is a joke. This country needs a comprehensive energy plan and we do not have one and never had. Obama will make that plan a cornerstone of his administration. Personally I wish Obama would sign on to Gore's statement and the 10-year goal.

The taxbreaks. The Bush taxbreaks continue to drive up the deficit. Interest on the national debt consumes 14 percent of the national budget. We need to do away with that tax break. Obama is right.

Obama is also right about the economy. The fundamentals are not good. McCain is wrong.

No Child Left Behind is a problem. Obama will address it, McCain will not.

I support Obama because I agree with his approach to government. I assume McCain's supporters agree too. On a final note, Obama had the guts to hire an extremely qualified person for Veep. McCain hired a nice woman, with few qualifications.

Edited September 1, 200817 yr by Jess

Where were you when I stated multiple times in this very thread that it's wrong, regardless of individual or party affiliation. I don't want Michelle Obama personally slammed any more than I want Sarah Palin personally slammed. I'm not taking a partisan stance on this issue and you would have noted that had you been reading carefully rather than reacting impulsively.

And it's quite clear that Hillary lost for reasons other than just rules. She was personally slammed for reasons that have nothing to do with ideology, and that is the tragedy of politics in America.

Let's see, bringing up comments that Obama's minister made in church is a legitimate issue? Hillary lost because Hillary lost. She fought a very good battle and did not win.

When was Hillary "personally slammed?" Also, are you going to tell me that John McCain, he twisted and took totally out of context a comment about tire pressure, would not have crucified Hillary Clinton?

First of all saying Palin and Obama have the same level of experience is just absurd on its face. There is no truth to that. He is vastly more experience.

Second to call people Obamaniacs in the same post that includes a tirade about personal attacks is a bit ridiculous.

Third, people on the internet act badly. What does that have to do with this thread? It is not unreasonable to question her credentials or to say she has very very few.

Fourth, she is under investigation and it is not the first time she has used her powers as governor or mayor to fire a political or personal enemy. That is, I guess, her right, but it is also appropriate for conversation. It is also appropriate to ask McCain if he thinks her actions in the firing of her former brother-in-law were appropriate and if he would permit that as president. I think what she did recently is as worthy of discussion as Joe Biden lifting a paragraph from a speech several years ago.

Now Max, in regard to your question: I like Obama because he is going to end the war. McCain can talk all he wants about judgement and the surge. When he does so it is based on two faulty assumptions in my opinion: One that his vote to go to war in the first place demonstrated good judgement and two that there is some point in the future where we can withdraw and there not be turmoil in its wake. I don't think either of those assumptions are correct. Obama voted against going to war and did so with some political risk, but he knew going to war was the wrong thing.

Obama wants to re-deploy troops to Afghanistan. McCain is silent on the issue.

I also prefer Obama's health care plan to McCain's. McCain wants to have to pay taxes on the health insurance my company provides me. Shame on him. He does not think that health care is a right. I do and I think Obama's plan is better.

McCain comes up with gimmicks for dealing with energy. Offshore drilling is a joke. This country needs a comprehensive energy plan and we do not have one and never had. Obama will make that plan a cornerstone of his administration. Personally I wish Obama would sign on to Gore's statement and the 10-year goal.

The taxbreaks. The Bush taxbreaks continue to drive up the deficit. Interest on the national debt consumes 14 percent of the national budget. We need to do away with that tax break. Obama is right.

Obama is also right about the economy. The fundamentals are not good. McCain is wrong.

No Child Left Behind is a problem. Obama will address it, McCain will not.

I support Obama because I agree with his approach to government. I assume McCain's supporters agree too. On a final note, Obama had the guts to hire an extremely qualified person for Veep. McCain hired a nice woman, with few qualifications.

I salute you.

Let's see, bringing up comments that Obama's minister made in church is a legitimate issue? Hillary lost because Hillary lost. She fought a very good battle and did not win.

When was Hillary "personally slammed?" Also, are you going to tell me that John McCain, he twisted and took totally out of context a comment about tire pressure, would not have crucified Hillary Clinton?

Is this the same John McCain who, when a man at one of his rallies called her a bitch, he laughed?

Is this the same John McCain who made a very crude joke about Chelsea Clinton, Hillary's daughter?

Is this the John McCain HRC supporters will vote for over Barack Obama?

I guess so.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/01/...in4405023.shtml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...uselections2008

Thanks Wales, I think we know where each other stands on this issue and we're not that far apart on it. I haven't heard racist comments regarding the Obama's, then again I don't frequent places on the web or in person where that stuff is being hurled. Such racist comments, including the sexist comments I DID hear thrown at Hillary and now at Palin, are inexcusible and just discounts whatever points their opponents try to make.

As bad as I felt for how Hillary was treated, I also feel for Palin. People out there, including on the web and even here at SON, who focus on the personal stuff rather than actual qualifications, etc., are as nasty and vile as the accusations they make. I'm glad there are those like us, Wales, who can discuss rationally and find some common ground and agreement in this election.

I visit regular news sites and Huffington Post and I haven't read anything about the incest attacks you mentioned. Besides hearing about it on cable news channels and local news radio stations, I also read about the racist attacks on CNN, ABC News, MSNBC. Yahoo's news and sometimes in this thread. I don't know how you could have missed any of that.

Palin said she was tired of HRC whining so I don't know how much sympathy she can garner if the media comes down on her. Nevertheless, it would be wrong.

I don't agree with you on why HRC lost her bid. Members of the media demonstrated sexist attitudes but that's not what cost her the nomination.

Now I agree with you on the personal attacks no matter who is doing it. To save myself from a separate post I will give my opinion on being a good or bad mother. It's easy for people to stand on the outside of a situation and say that had Palin been home more or even full time that she could have prevented her daughter's pregnancy. The fact is that she could have been at home 24/7 and not prevented her teenager from having sex unless she had a chastity belt on her.

I also wholeheartedly disagree with the brand of logic that says that because Palin is religious she should have practiced what she preached and prevented the pregnancy. Apparently she's practicing what she preaches by neither making her daughter have an abortion and by not hiding her away in some school and giving the baby up for adoption. The most morally upright people can still breed offspring that stray and the most attentive parents in the world can still have an unruly child. If Palin were the one who'd done something immoral (and I don't mean the alleged abuse of power which does speak to her integrity or lack thereof) then I would agree with heaping the stones but she can only guide her children, not control their every action.

Let's see, bringing up comments that Obama's minister made in church is a legitimate issue? Hillary lost because Hillary lost. She fought a very good battle and did not win.

When was Hillary "personally slammed?" Also, are you going to tell me that John McCain, he twisted and took totally out of context a comment about tire pressure, would not have crucified Hillary Clinton?

Hi Jess...

I don't recall personally having discussed Obama's minister here and I'm not clear why you're bring that up in response to my post. I've acknowledged both sides engage in unfortunate tactics in political compaigns... in fact, they have for years and I don't expect it to change. It should, but it won't. No side gets a pass on that behavior. But since you brought up Obama's minister and all of that mess, you will certainly recall that Father Pfleger made extremely foul comments about Hillary, mocking her tears and insinuating that she was disturbed by the emergence of a "black man" stealing her thunder.

Obama stated, "You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out." That isn't a statement he has or will ever use against McCain. Rowr, Hillary the cat, hissing and scratching with her bitch cat claws... Hmmm. "I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal." Some think he was suggesting that, during that time of month, she's particularly aggressive. Would he say that about McCain? Did he use that type of language against any of his other opponents? Jess, if you can find similar types of language against a male political opponent, I'd be happy to see it.

To take it another step further, I haven't seen anyone referring to Senator McCain as a "Bitch". Lots of people have called Hillary that. But why? Do you suggest that it's NOT because she's a woman? Check this one out... it was easy to find... http://www.womenamericans.com/sexismhillary.htm Review all of that and THEN tell me that Hillary has NOT been personally slammed -- and worse still, by members of her own party.

As for your point about what John McCain may have done to Hillary... I guess we'll never know, eh?

She should have been around more and should've taughter her daughter abstinance and/or safe-sex. Sorry I'm not personally attacking anyone just giving my opinions. Calm down, lol.

Hi Mulder... Awww, I'm extremely calm. I'm enjoying chatting with you guys, too. I know it's nothing personal... we can get along and disagree and that's pretty cool.

With regard to Palin's daughter, Obama has spoken on the subject and has seriously shown some real class about the issue. This may speak volumes as to his character and I respect what he has said about it... http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gcpTSUA...JQtCYwD92U3ISG0

His statements probably won't get much play in the media given the hurricane coverage and all, but they should. It's as if Barack has been reading our posts today!!

The most morally upright people can still breed offspring that stray and the most attentive parents in the world can still have an unruly child. If Palin were the one who'd done something immoral (and I don't mean the alleged abuse of power which does speak to her integrity or lack thereof) then I would agree with heaping the stones but she can only guide her children, not control their every action.

Great post, Wales... only a couple of things I take issue with but so much worth going on about it. The only thing is the line concerning Palin's alleged abuse of power... you say "which does speak to her integrity or lack thereof")... Well, I would only say that it is being investigated so, at this point, we can't really say whether or not it speaks to her integrity.

As was pointed out previously... all candidates are going to be gutted and filleted in the media. Just as Obama knows about Biden's tendancies to speak out rather bluntly and perhaps inappropriately at times, McCain probably knows all of Palin's unfortunate issues. I guess I'm just beyond that sort of thing and would much rather look at ideology and discuss and debate candidate positions on issues that are actually important, like health care, the economy, etc.

Hi Jess...

I don't recall personally having discussed Obama's minister here and I'm not clear why you're bring that up in response to my post. I've acknowledged both sides engage in unfortunate tactics in political compaigns... in fact, they have for years and I don't expect it to change. It should, but it won't. No side gets a pass on that behavior. But since you brought up Obama's minister and all of that mess, you will certainly recall that Father Pfleger made extremely foul comments about Hillary, mocking her tears and insinuating that she was disturbed by the emergence of a "black man" stealing her thunder.

I'm not sure why Jess brought this up in reference to you but then I don't get why you're bringing up Father Pfleger either. He certainly didn't cause her to lose the nomination. Besides that, we have the privilege of knowing what he said because people were focused on trying to bring Obama down via public humiliation. Just as none of us wouldn't have known what Dog the Bounty Hunter said in a taped personal voice mail to his son had his son not shared it with the media, the same goes for what Father Pfleger says. We're certainly not privy to what HRC or McCain supporters may have said or being saying about Obama unless someone cares to leak it and what Father Pfleger said was not said in front of Obama so I fail to see the point here. He's not a politician and he's not a member of the press and he was made to apologize and was placed on sabbatical for his actions.

Obama stated, "You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out." That isn't a statement he has or will ever use against McCain. Rowr, Hillary the cat, hissing and scratching with her bitch cat claws... Hmmm. "I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal." Some think he was suggesting that, during that time of month, she's particularly aggressive. Would he say that about McCain? Did he use that type of language against any of his other opponents? Jess, if you can find similar types of language against a male political opponent, I'd be happy to see it.

This is a big reach in terms of interpretation. Obama does not appear to be sexist and I'm thinking his wife would have a go at him if he played with PMS logic period. I don't get how you can take this and stretch it but you completely missed the flak about HRC and her MLK comments and her hardworking white people comments (no matter how interpreted or rationalized). Maybe he's a sexist as she is racist then.

To take it another step further, I haven't seen anyone referring to Senator McCain as a "Bitch". Lots of people have called Hillary that. But why? Do you suggest that it's NOT because she's a woman? Check this one out... it was easy to find... http://www.womenamericans.com/sexismhillary.htm Review all of that and THEN tell me that Hillary has NOT been personally slammed -- and worse still, by members of her own party.

It might not be fair but it's not news that women are called that. Some women even call themselves that. I've only heard gay guys call other guys that so it might be a stretch to hear that said about McCain, though it could happen. It's much more likely that terms referring to old age would be used regarding him. Now Michelle Obama has been called that and a black one to boot but she's not running nor was she.

As for your point about what John McCain may have done to Hillary... I guess we'll never know, eh?

He stood by and listened to someone call her a name and said nothing about it. Sarah Palin listened to someone call her opponent who was suffering from cancer the same thing and laughed, if true.

I'm not Jess but I gave my devalued two cents anyway.

Great post, Wales... only a couple of things I take issue with but so much worth going on about it. The only thing is the line concerning Palin's alleged abuse of power... you say "which does speak to her integrity or lack thereof")... Well, I would only say that it is being investigated so, at this point, we can't really say whether or not it speaks to her integrity.

As was pointed out previously... all candidates are going to be gutted and filleted in the media. Just as Obama knows about Biden's tendancies to speak out rather bluntly and perhaps inappropriately at times, McCain probably knows all of Palin's unfortunate issues. I guess I'm just beyond that sort of thing and would much rather look at ideology and discuss and debate candidate positions on issues that are actually important, like health care, the economy, etc.

I don't think McCain knows all of her issues at all. I think he'll keep on learning as the media uncovers them. If reports are accurate, he only asked about the abuse of power investigation. If what I just read is accurate, there may be emails to substantiate some of the claims.

Just to be clear, it would speak to her integrity if untrue and lack of integrity if true and the only reason I mentioned it was to save someone the trouble of responding that she was under investigation for something that questions her morality.

Republican Party NOW Vetting Palin

Posted by Ashish on 09.01.2008

Nervous party trying to find out whatever else they can about Palin before the media does as McCain puts the entire party at risk...

NBC reports that Republican party lawyers are now doing a legal vetting of VP selection Sarah Palin while ABC reports that Republican operatives are now headed to Alaska to find out whatever else they can about Palin. This, of course, is stuff that the McCain campaign was supposed to do BEFORE picking her. By not vetting Palin enough, the McCain campaign has basically put the party's chances in this election at risk because there is no telling what else is out there on her. Now that the media knows Palin wasn't really vetted, they are going to be very aggressive in researching her with the idea that they could break a major scandal related to her. Very dangerous decision here by McCain to not only pick someone so risky, but to not even vet her properly. And very risky decision by Palin to accept the VP nomination without making all of this known to the party. If something now comes out about Palin that seriously hurts the Republican party, both McCain and Palin will get the blame from the party itself. This is the type of stuff that happens when someone picks a person as VP based on ONE (or, some say, two) meetings. This is also going to put Palin in a very tough position once she finally starts doing interviews with reporters, something she has not done yet on the national scene. Palin has never even been on a Sunday talk show. And now, instead of introducing herself as she'd like to, she will have to defend herself from all kinds of questions including why, as a mother, she would accept a VP slot knowing that her teenage daughter would be put in the spotlight like this, and why she would put her party in a spot like this. And that is besides the obvious questions of her experience on a ticket that McCain has claimed over and over again is all about experience and about being ready to lead on "day one." Anybody who has watched how the media is covering this today, and in particular the hammering Campbell Brown of CNN gave Tucker Bounds of the McCain campaign with these types of questions (I'll post video of the segment if I can find it), knows that this stuff IS coming.

Of course, the McCain campaign claims they DID vet Palin in detail and that they knew all of today's breaking scandals beforehand. But the fact that the Republican party is now going back and vetting Palin themselves indicates that either the party doesn't trust the vetting job McCain did, or doesn't believe that they actually did vet her properly (it's hard to see how McCain would pick Palin while knowing all of the stuff we now know -- there are several other people McCain could have picked that would have excited Republicans).

And keep in mind that the issue here is not how Republicans respond to this. If McCain doesn't get 90%+ of the Republican vote, he will lose anyway. The question here is how will undecided voters respond to this, and how does all of this make John McCain's decision-making and judgment look? This puts a lot of pressure on Palin to deliver a fantastic speech on Wednesday (or Thursday).

Say what you will about Mitt Romney, but he was on the campaign trail for months and was vetted in detail by the media. This type of stuff wouldn't have happened had McCain picked him. Of course, this wouldn't have happened if the McCain campaign had of just done their job of vetting Palin properly either.