Oh, those hot mic’s! Looks like a live mic during a break is causing trouble for some white folks, this time. Equal opportunity comes to stupidity. Or vice-versa. Will they never learn?
Politico is reporting that after Chuck Todd went to break, a free-for-all broke out about McCain’s choice of running mate:
“It’s over,” said Noonan, who then responded to a question of whether Palin is the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have chosen…
…”The most qualified? No. I think they went for this — excuse me — political bullshit about narratives,” she said. “Every time the Republicans do that, because that’s not where they live and it’s not what they’re good at, they blow it.”
Noonan later tried to stuff her words back in her mouth saying:
UPDATE: Noonan tries to explain her remarks, and says that what’s “over” isn’t, she meant, McCain’s campaign, but that what’s over is the truth to the belief that “whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks.”
Huh?
Like I said, equal opportunity stupid.
“I have great passion for this campaign and traveled across the country … arguing the case for the campaign,” Jackson said. “And this thing I said in a hot-mic statement that’s interpreted as a distraction, I offer apology for that. I don’t want harm or hurt to come to this campaign.”
You done good tonight, lady, real good. But you’re no Hillary Clinton. Now, I know that’s not your fault, I mean, who is? It is a problem for you, though.
See, I supported Hillary Clinton because she supports me. She believes in the things I do, and I believe she can accomplish the things I’d like to see done. You seem like the kind of person who can do things too. But…you’re not Hillary.
I want universal health care and the right to chose. I want a responsible foreign policy; compassionate, but firm. Basically, I want the same things Democrats say they want. I’m just not sure the ones selected to lead the party can really do them. Sometimes, I’m not even sure they want to.
I don’t like the way they were selected, either. So, yeah, I’m mad at them, mad enough to not reward their unethical actions with my vote, but that doesn’t mean I’m ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater and vote for you and John McCain, either.
The fact that you’re a woman is a plus, but it’s one plus against a long list of minuses. So, even though you’re the kind of woman I could see myself having lunch with, I won’t vote for you. I won’t vote for Obama, either, even though we’re both black. Gender and race are things none of us can chose or change. But the things youcan chose and change are not the things I want changed or chosen . I guess what I’m saying is, it won’t work out between us, so let’s just be friends and leave it at that.
BTW, good speech (and the no-pantsuit thing was a nice touch.)
Today, I have come back to Springfield to tell you that I’ve found that leader – a man with a distinguished record and a fundamental decency – Joe Biden.
I wonder if they vetted him? MSNBC, among others, doesn’t think Biden’s vice-presidential rival, Sarah Palin, has been vetted at all:
The Washington Post says the news that Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, “Palin’s revelation continued to reshape what Republicans had hoped would be a boisterous send-off for the McCain-Palin ticket. It also left some Republicans privately voicing concern that the campaign may have missed other potentially damaging background information about McCain’s little-known pick… McCain aides pushed back hard Monday night against any suggestion that they had mishandled the selection process. ‘Nothing that has come out did not come out in the vet — she was fully vetted,’ said a senior campaign adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.”
Ya think the Democrats are holding the Republicans to a different standard, just because the Republican vice-presidential candidate is a (gasp!) woman? Oh, no, say it ain’t so, Joe. She’s so good looking!
The Progressive calls Barack Obama’s former mentor, Joe Lieberman, Benedict Joseph. Quoting Lieberman at last night’s Republican convention, they determine he has a fat lot of nerve even calling himself a Democrat.
“What, after all, is a Democrat like me doing at a Republican convention like this?”
There’s an easy answer to that one.
You shouldn’t have been there, Joe, and you certainly shouldn’t be construed as a Democrat.
The AP reports that Joe still wants his Dem cred, though.
Democrat-turned-independent Sen. Joe Lieberman may have lined up with Republicans at their convention in Minnesota to support John McCain, but he’s still writing six-figure checks to help Democratic Senate candidates.
The Connecticut senator gave $100,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee last month, a sign that he may be trying to hedge his bets this election season and hang onto his Senate committee chairmanship. Lieberman also wrote a $15,000 check to the DSSC in March.
In early January of 2007, the Washington Post had this to say about Lieberman’s party affiliation, or lack thereof:
Lieberman was sworn in last week as the chamber’s one and only “independent Democrat,” with the emphasis on “independent.” On most issues, including big domestic priorities, he expects to vote as he has for the past 18 years, as a loyal Democrat. But on Iraq, Lieberman is more in sync with Bush than are many Republicans. He is a passionate defender of the war as a death struggle against Islamic terrorism.
It’s not like this is news. The Democrats have used Lieberman to their advantage all along, as the New York Observer pointed out in June:
Since the ’06 elections, Lieberman’s supposed role as the Senate’s ultimate power broker has been touted endlessly. Rejected by the party that once nominated him for vice president in the August ’06 primary, he nonetheless won reelection in the fall as a self-described “independent Democrat,” promising to caucus with Democrats and to side with them for organizing purposes in the Senate.
When Election Day produced a 49-49-2 split, Lieberman kept his word, joining fellow independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont (whose loyalty to Democrats on this matter was a foregone conclusion) to swing the chamber to Democratic control. Accordingly, Lieberman was handed the gavel of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Without Joe Lieberman, we have heard over and over, the Democrats would lose the Senate.
But Lieberman was the same Lieberman when Obama was stumping for him in March of ‘06, as reported by Boston.com:
U.S. Sen. Barack Obama rallied Connecticut Democrats at their annual dinner Thursday night, throwing his support behind mentor and Senate colleague Joe Lieberman.
edit
“The fact of the matter is, I know some in the party have differences with Joe. I’m going to go ahead and say it,” Obama told the 1,700-plus party members who gathered in a ballroom at the Connecticut Convention Center for the $175-per-head fundraiser.
“I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf,” he said.
“As far as I am concerned he is a Baruk, which means a blessing, he is a blessing to the United States Senate to America and to our shared hopes for a better safer tomorrow for all our families. The gifts that God has given to Barack Obama are as enormous as his future is unlimited. As his mentor, as his colleague, as his friend, I look forward to helping him reach to the stars and realize not just the dreams he has for himself but the dreams we all have for him and our blessed country.”
“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.
Maybe it’s just me, but not all of these poll numbers seem so great for Camp “O.” The headline of a Yahoo News article claims “U.S. Women Turned Off By Palin Pick: Poll” then reports findings like these:
But 52 percent of voters polled in a survey for the women’s activist group Emily’s List said they would vote for the Democrat ticket of Barack Obama and his VP choice Joseph Biden, against 41 for the Republicans.
Okay, so far, so good.
The poll, carried out by random dialing of 800 women on Sunday and Monday, shows that 50 percent of women voters felt McCain picked Palin out of political expediency and not because he believes she has the experience to do the job.
All right! Let’s see, Emily’s List, women voters, got it.
The poll also showed that Palin would fail to sway disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters still angered that she was locked out of the Democratic ticket.
Some 45 percent of Clinton fans thought Palin was not very attractive as a candidate, and 55 percent said they would not be voting for McCain.
So, fifty-five percent of Hillary’s female supporters won’t vote for McCain. Doesn’t that mean forty-five percent will?
Only nine percent of Clinton supporters said they thought they would vote Republican because Palin was on the ticket.
I guess the other thirty-six percent of female Clinton supporters are voting for McCain just for the hell of it. Must be at least a small comfort to the Dems.
Take Obama out of the picture and black voters flock to Hillary Clinton. At least, that’s what a Rasmussen poll about a mythical presidential match up between Clinton and GOP vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin says. Personally, I think polling for somebody’s wet fantasy of a girl-on-girl political smackdown is, well, stupid and kinda icky, when you think about it. It’s not gonna happen for one thing, and, if I had been required to guess who would win before reading the article, choosing Clinton would have been a no-brainer. The pollees agree, 52% to 41%, though it’s impossible to know how many people responded with, “Oh, hell, who the hell cares?” before being cajoled into giving a response more likely to satisfy a hapless pollster.
There are a lot of other uninteresting stats in the article, but the one that jumps out like a mugger from a dark alley, is buried near the bottom.
White voters are evenly divided at 47% each between the two candidates, but African-Americans prefer Clinton by a whopping 83% to eight percent (8%) margin.
Didja get that? 83 freaking percent! Guess it’s a black thing, after all. Meanwhile, Philly.com’s Fatima Ali suggests that Obama better win:
If McCain wins, look for a full-fledged race and class war, fueled by a deflated and depressed country, soaring crime, homelessness – and hopelessness!
I reeeeaaaallly hope she meant that race war thingy metaphorically. I think I have a prior commitment on Obama Riot Day that I’m pretty sure I can’t get out of.
Oh, those hot mic’s! Looks like a live mic during a break is causing trouble for some white folks, this time. Equal opportunity comes to stupidity. Or vice-versa. Will they never learn?
