…and this is a 
This is how we will lose
Category: Politics • Weblogs
Posted on: September 4, 2008 8:25 AM, by PZ Myers
Palin scares me, but what worries me more is that we will screw up again and hand the executive office over to another gang of losers, and we can't afford that anymore. Now look at the open thread I set up last night, and you'll see why I'm concerned. What did people do? They got distracted by irrelevancies, such as the opportunity to exercise a little macho sexism, and then that turned into a nasty, full-blown knife fight with everyone snarling at each other. This is exactly what the Republicans want, writ small on this little tiny island of the blogosphere.
That's not how we're going to beat back the troglodytes.
Palin is a stalking horse for failed social and economic and military policies. We don't want to get drawn away from the important message of defeating those bad policies by the temptation of cheap shots at her appearance and sex, especially because those cheap shots make her look like a sympathetic victim and help advance the Republican agenda.
So please, think. Casual sexism plays into the hands of the bad guys on both sides. What frightens me most is that Palin got up and lied and said nothing of substance, and people are so distracted by the fact that she has breasts that the lies were allowed to slide by. This is how the Democrats can self-destruct, once again.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Joel | September 4, 2008 8:47 AM
Thank you for recognizing it, although the sexism was wrong for more reasons then it's bad for our team.
Posted by: I am so wise | September 4, 2008 8:50 AM
With all do respect Mr. Myers, nobody cares that she lies, is unable to control her kids, is a hypocrite, ..etc. People have already made up their minds about they feel about her and nothing short of a revelation that she left the DNA on Lewinsky's blue dress is going to make a difference.
Posted by: Lana | September 4, 2008 8:52 AM
I thought, "Oh, no. She's good." She's perky, spunky and down to earth. She's like a younger Katie Couric. People can't help but like her and identify with her. Unfortunately, they won't notice the lies or the out-of-whack policies.
Many people vote based on emotion and feelings, rather than reason and facts.
The whole election became even more scary last night.
Posted by: Tabby Lavalamp | September 4, 2008 8:52 AM
The problem is that misogyny worked so effectively against Clinton that fauxgressives just can't help themselves now.
Posted by: Renee | September 4, 2008 8:52 AM
Never commented before PZ, but as a MN native, watching Palin last night scared the shit out of me. I really hope that more than 50% of us have come to our senses. As an 18-year-old woman, I am absolutely terrified of McCain/Palin in the WH.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | September 4, 2008 8:54 AM
GOP Convention lies
Posted by: Sigmund | September 4, 2008 8:54 AM
Well she's convinced me.
Palin for President ! Woohoo!
USA! USA!
Seriously, someone should ask her what will happen to the US leadership if the rapture happens within her term.
Since McCain's gone born again Southern Baptist, and she's a raving fundie, who will be left to run the government when those two fly up to heaven?
Are there any contingency plans drawn up?
Posted by: TSC | September 4, 2008 8:54 AM
Palin ain't no peach...whether man, woman or beast.
Posted by: Bad Albert | September 4, 2008 8:55 AM
We Canadians are depending on you guys south of the border to fix this problem. If you fail, it's only a matter of time before fundies up here demand the same type of theocracy.
Posted by: Rhysz | September 4, 2008 8:56 AM
Excellent point sir, Whining about details is just going to make Palin immune to more constructive criticism. Although I'm quite the fan of some chauvinism, this clearly isn't the time to show it. We need to focus on the issues. In my mind the most important would be her stance in the dominionist movement. I couldn't even actually make it through the comment section on Palin, too much nonsense and non-important drivel. Actually, I was quite surprised at the low standards of the comments, I've been lurking here for quite some time and was very surprised. Petty comments like this should be beneath us.
Regards,
Rhysz
P.S.
Keep up the good work PZ
Posted by: Amber Culbertson-Faegre | September 4, 2008 8:57 AM
PZ,
Thank you for putting into words my personal response to the previous thread.
Palin scares me. But it has nothing to do with her sex.
(Although her stance on sexuality is certainly terrifying.)
Posted by: Hank Fox | September 4, 2008 8:58 AM
Palin's keepers are casting her as a victim of attacks by sexists, just as McCain defends himself against each and every hard question by being a former Prisoner of War (TM).
They each have their own invincible armor -- everything will be swept under the rug by Republican whining about how the evil media is attacking their poor, downtrodden candidates.
It'll be nasty if they skate into office on our own reluctance to deal with the real issues.
Posted by: Faithful Reader | September 4, 2008 8:58 AM
I pass no judgment on her as an individual person. But she will never be anyone I want leading my country and representing me to the world.
Posted by: Aaron | September 4, 2008 8:59 AM
What, are you taking notes from Blaise Pascal now?
Come on PZ...
Posted by: Paul Lamb | September 4, 2008 8:59 AM
It seems to me that in this election we can make history . . . or we can repeat it.
(That means Mr. Obama has my vote.)
Posted by: Paul Lamb | September 4, 2008 9:01 AM
It seems to me that in this election we can make history . . . or we can repeat it.
(That means Mr. Obama has my vote.)
Posted by: Boosterz | September 4, 2008 9:05 AM
That's one of my pet peeves with the democratic party. That almost supernatural ability of theirs to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Posted by: jls | September 4, 2008 9:05 AM
How can Democrats (or anyone for that matter) defeat 'proud ignorance'? Its been the driving force for the Repugs for that last 8 years? These people have no use for facts, evidence, reason, or logic. The very mention of such concepts disgusts them.
Posted by: Bogans | September 4, 2008 9:06 AM
I'm glad you made this post PZ. I would add that even though there are valid criticisms of the Democrats, such as the religious pandering you brought up earlier, that can't be allowed to divide people of reason against McCain/Palin.
Bad Albert is right, Canadians like me are just as concerned about your political downward spiral as you guys.
Posted by: secularguy | September 4, 2008 9:07 AM
Ha, ha, good question! :-)Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:08 AM
people are so distracted by the fact that she has breasts that the lies were allowed to slide by
That itself is sexist, intellectually dishonest, and displays a very shallow (mis)understanding of the political and social forces of the world we live in -- the reason that Bush's, McCain's, and so many other lies have slid by isn't because they have breasts. And if you're talking about her lies sliding by in the previous thread, that's just ridiculous -- they didn't.
Posted by: Rhysz | September 4, 2008 9:09 AM
[quote] what will happen to the US leadership if the rapture happens [/quote]
Maybe she'll be 'left below'.
Posted by: Orion77 | September 4, 2008 9:09 AM
I agree with PZ,
I think the Democrats & the leftwing media would be better served attacking Palin on her foreign policy credentials in news conferences & the VP debate, that they will have. And, move away from her sex, family and religious beliefs.
The line between criticism & shrill "hate" can get blurred pretty quickly, helping to nullify valid concerns. Trying to paint her as a religious loon, won't work. It didn't work against Reagan, GWB or to a lesser extent John Howard in Australia or Tony Blair in Britain.
It doesn't work because they arn't loons, they are rational political operators, who sadly also believe in the sky fairy, just as most of their constituents do.
Posted by: wazza | September 4, 2008 9:11 AM
You think they're going up?
Lying scumbags like the current crop of republicans?
"If there is a hell, it waits for them, not us!"
and... yeah. I thought the Democratic party was the party of equality. Seeing that thread go to shit in the first 20 comments made me question that belief, though.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:11 AM
That's one of my pet peeves with the democratic party. That almost supernatural ability of theirs to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
PZ is referring to his own commenters, who are not "the democratic party". Like him, you're just sloganeering, not thinking.
Posted by: Josh | September 4, 2008 9:12 AM
So please, think.
Good luck. We don't teach how to do that here anymore.
Posted by: Steve in MI, Sfs/PZM | September 4, 2008 9:13 AM
Hear hear, PZ. Exploiting gender issues embarasses the attacker, not the target.
There is a very, VERY real fork in the road ahead. One presidential campaign slate is pro-science; the other is firmly anti-science. The vice-presidential candidate who spoke last night suggests correcting climate change by ignoring it, thinks that praying for children is an adequate substitute for teaching them, and belives thaqt the American military is a tool for advancing Christian influence.
Folks, IF that scares you, please join me at the campaign office of your choice.
Posted by: Nan | September 4, 2008 9:14 AM
It would also be nice if more attention was focused on the fact she supports raising taxes on business. She pushed through increased taxes on the oil companies in Alaska (which I personally think was a good thing, but I'm not a Republican) -- ergo, by Republican standards, she's anti-business.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:14 AM
Seeing that thread go to shit in the first 20 comments made me question that belief, though.
It was just two sexist jerks. Too many people here, including PZ, operate based on subjective mental impressions rather than facts just like any believer in ID or the paranormal.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:17 AM
I think the Democrats & the leftwing media would be better served attacking Palin on her foreign policy credentials in news conferences & the VP debate, that they will have.
Does anyone here even know that both Obama and Biden quickly declared families -- specifically Palin's family -- off limits? All the criticisms of Palin coming from official Democratic sources are substantive and issues-related.
Posted by: roadrider | September 4, 2008 9:17 AM
The reason that the Democrats might lose is the same reason they lost with Gore and Kerry - failure to offer a convincing difference in policy and ideology to the delusional, batshit crazy Republican agenda. At best, both Obama and Clinton, the only candidates the Democratic Party establishment, media and big donors allowed to compete for the nomination, offered nothing more than a more competent administration of a watered down version of the same corporatist, militarist and theocratic agenda that both parties have endorsed for the last several decades.
Now with Palin becoming an info-tainment star, it's certain that the scared of their own shadow Dems will not attack her delusional beliefs and subservience to corporate interests and outright corruption for fear of looking like bullies. Oh, yes. There's also that "post-partisan" thing where you're not supposed to call bullshit on any idea, no matter how stupid, dangerous or counter to the Constitution (see under Obama, FISA, faith-based charities).
Even worse, the Democrats have little credibility on taking on the extremist religious views of Palin because they appointed a CEO of their convention who speaks in tongues, believes in faith healing and sees nothing wrong with teaching creationism in public schools and made a point of excluding secular organizations from their God-fest in Denver.
As long as the Democrats think they can win by being only a little less repulsive than the Republicans they will continue to lose.
I was a Democrat, and supported their candidates in every election since I became eligible to vote in 1976 until, in disgust, I recently changed my registration to unaffiliated. I'm tired of the Dems taking my vote for granted. If they don't want to compete for my support I'm staying home this year.
Posted by: wombat | September 4, 2008 9:20 AM
Obama supporters would do well to listen to PZ's message here. Snide attacks on Palin's personal life or her appearance will make her a sympathetic figure. The McCain camp picked Palin for several reasons, all of them politically motivated. She is a giant land mine at the feet of partisans who can't help but make politics personal. That may fly with your average male WASP, but if a similar tone develops around Palin, it will appear particularly mean-spirited and sexist. My advice to Democrats: stay as far away from Palin's personal life or any references to her gender at all. You have a VP nominee that has a history of foot-in-mouth disease who will be debating a mother of 5 who has an infant with Down's Syndrome. Stick to the issues. They're on your side this election. The other personal junk won't work.
Oh and I would stay away from the "she's from a small town" talk. Presidential elections aren't won in Manhattan. They're won in rural Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida. Dissing small town America won't help you win their votes.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:21 AM
If they don't want to compete for my support I'm staying home this year.
How hypocritical that someone who talks about the Democrats possibly losing talks about withholding their vote -- Voltaire warned that the perfect is the enemy of the good, but morons continue to fail to heed it.
Posted by: Woozle | September 4, 2008 9:24 AM
Regarding the irrelevant shenaningans by which we will lose... non-threaded fora* (*for elitist points) seem to be especially prone to that kind of thing. Any thoughts, PZ, on setting up something a little more sophisticated?
A wiki, for example, allows debates to be structured (some sample debates: sacred wafers, our favorite president, abortion), so I'd be up for assisting with or piloting a Pharynguwiki project if there was both interest and blessing from the squid overlords.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 4, 2008 9:26 AM
I just hope the GOP keeps the strategy they way that they are doing. Its how we lost four years ago. They are making the race about Obama, just like the last one was about Bush.
Posted by: Greg | September 4, 2008 9:26 AM
PZ, my thoughts exactly. Thanks for so eloquently stating it.
roadrider wrote:
I was a Democrat, and supported their candidates in every election since I became eligible to vote in 1976 until, in disgust, I recently changed my registration to unaffiliated. I'm tired of the Dems taking my vote for granted. If they don't want to compete for my support I'm staying home this year.
While I agree with your sentiment that they should not take your vote for granted, staying home is giving your vote to McCain/Palin. It really is. Please think about that.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 4, 2008 9:26 AM
Oh, reminds me, is there a convention going on somewhere? :)
So, what about Troopergate?
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:27 AM
Oh and I would stay away from the "she's from a small town" talk.
So many people insist on misconstruing and misrepresenting things. It's not that she's from a small town, it's that she was mayor of a small town, and is governor of very low population state. That's about the sort of experience that she brings ... and the polls show that people are very wary of her lack of experience, which they are more aware of than her extremist positions, which she and the Republicans are remaining silent about.
Posted by: BMcP | September 4, 2008 9:27 AM
You're right, I have noticed in the blogosphere that many of the attacks on Palin have the stain of overt sexism covering them because the fact she is a woman is always brought up in the criticism.
Basing her gender, her looks, her family life, her daughter being pregnant is only going to push people to support her because essentially ti is basing her for being female and being imperfect, which is just another term for being human.
Posted by: jim | September 4, 2008 9:28 AM
Actually, I didn't see a lot of misogyny in that thread. What I did see was a few people make off-colour jokes, get told to knock it off, knock it off, and then the thread degenerate into a nasty flame war because, well, frankly, because this is the Internet. If it can be seen of proof of anything, it's Gabe and Tycho's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory...
Of course, there's already a huge media circus of the OMG A WOMAN! variety, and I agree that we shouldn't be making it any worse, particularly since the religious right will no doubt try to cast any criticism of Palin as an attack on women in general, without in any way desisting from their own very real attacks on women in general...
I've seen a lot of people threatening to move to Europe if these loons get in. Speaking from Europe, if those loons get in I'm considering moving to Mars. You buggers had better vote Obama, that's all. First black president would be cool and all, but right now a president who's not completely batshit insane looks a whole lot cooler...
Posted by: Blaidd Drwg | September 4, 2008 9:31 AM
She seriously does not care. After all, she'll be in heaven, and those who are 'Left Behind' deserve whatever happens.
Posted by: Jag | September 4, 2008 9:31 AM
I too am dissapointed by the current state of direction this country is taking. With that said...
The one thing that always keeps me going is that progressive thinking, in the end, always wins. We may have temporary setbacks, but it is inevitable that conservative thinking will ultimately lose.
The world is a ever changing system and static/conservative processes fail. Look at history. This country would not exist if the conservatives/loyalists had won. Slavery would still be acceptable, civil rights would be non-existant, women would not have the right to vote.
When you are on the side of progressive change, victory is always assured.
That's all for now, I have to feed my unicorns and butterflys. :-)
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:32 AM
You're right, I have noticed in the blogosphere that many of the attacks on Palin have the stain of overt sexism covering them because the fact she is a woman is always brought up in the criticism.
Your hyperbole is not the truth. The vast majority of the criticism of Palin has nothing to do with her gender, except when liberal/feminist/pro-Hillary women note how offensive it is that the McCain seems to think that just any woman will do.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:35 AM
Actually, I didn't see a lot of misogyny in that thread.
Indeed there wasn't, but facts don't trump impressions for many people.
Posted by: scooter | September 4, 2008 9:35 AM
Howling from the wolf pack works both ways. She was obviously using charm and her feminine newscaster skills judging from the responses, even here.
I listened to her on radio, and she sounded like a sleazy moron, with half decent timing.
There's no way she could have scored that position if she looked like Madeline Albright, and I am not being sexist, that's realistic, they were looking for a salesperson, non a statesperson.
If you INTENTIONALLY dangle a piece of meat in front of the boys, you get a predicable reaction.
I'm sure Arnold Schwartzenegger will retire with the most comments in major media about his weight. Let's face it, if you got to where you are by starting out as a piece of meat, or a pretty face, dogs will howl, especially the unattractive ones.
Not everybody can be a sex symbol Adonnis like me, and that's why all you frumpy wallflowers and skinny beach nerds are jealous of us, the beautiful people.
I kick sand in all your faces
/arnoldVoice
That being said, I'm scooter, and I agree with PZs message.
Posted by: Dervin | September 4, 2008 9:36 AM
Oh, we all know the truth, it wasn't the true readers of Pharyngula who were sniping with the petty little insults and sexism, Pharyngula readers are free thinking-rationalists they've transcended that type of behavior. It's really the Christians who poisoned your website with the sexist drivel, I bet if you do an IP trace 30 accounts will be linked to an address on Madison avenue in Manhattan.
Posted by: Brain Hertz | September 4, 2008 9:39 AM
I really don't know how this is going to play out, but I think we'll know in the next few days (and especially after McCain's speech).
Palin did a pretty good job of reading a speech from a teleprompter that was admittedly written for her by speechwriters, much of it before they even knew who the nominee was.
It'll be interesting to see how much that gets mentioned. I've seen plenty of analysis so far that talks as if she was speaking her own words.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:39 AM
the religious right will no doubt try to cast any criticism of Palin as an attack on women in general, without in any way desisting from their own very real attacks on women in general...
They have already done this quite explicitly, but this intentional tactic is beyond the ken of political unsophisticates. It's ironic to see all the concern trolling, which plays right into the Republicans' hands, issuing forth from PZ and others.
Posted by: LB | September 4, 2008 9:40 AM
You're absolutely right, PZ.
I am deeply worried about this election, and I'm not even a U.S. citizen. I have worked hard to get into a good U.S. university and achieve my dream of having a career as a scientist. Next year I'm hoping to start a Biophysics grad program.
Now, it seems plausible that we may have a YEC sitting in the Oval Office within the next couple of years. I cannot even begin to imagine what Palin could do to the already weak NSF/NIH funding for science. Last night, I could almost hear science being one those "budget cuts" and "innecessary spending" in her speech.
I like this country, but I'm very nervous about this election, and so are many of my peers. If the U.S. loses its ability to draw would-be scientists from all over the world, I think the deficiences of its education system in science will begin to show. When that happens, expect it to lose the scientific edge it currently has, probably within a decade or so.
Come on, America.
Posted by: William | September 4, 2008 9:45 AM
I was already planning to vote Democrat, but I'd like to thank Governor Palin for hardening the choice, in one smugly delivered line of her speech. From the transcript, in which the "he" is Barack Obama:
Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he's worried that someone won't read them their rights. (Boos, cheers, applause.)
Exactly here is where I stopped listening politely. I listened all the way through, responding now and then to this or that charge talking out loud, but here is where I stopped respecting the McCain/Palin ticket.
Neither barackobama.com nor johnmccain.com has any place I can find where it says word One about the horror that the kangaroo courts of Gitmo have inflicted on America's vision of rights and the law, and what it says about our understanding of America's dedication to human rights. This was the first clear thing I've heard said on the stump, and it confirms for me what I suspected: somehow, John McCain was tortured for five years and still thinks it's okay for us to do it to "them."
We face a world in which our moral standing and our effectiveness depends on a respect for the law and basic human rights, and to the McCain/Palin ticket those things are a laugh line.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:45 AM
Palin did a pretty good job of reading a speech from a teleprompter that was admittedly written for her by speechwriters, much of it before they even knew who the nominee was.
It was written by Bush's speechwriter (a man), and was written for a man. It was then adjusted and tailored to fit Palin. Also, Fred Thompson's speech was actually Arnold Schwartzenegger's speech, retooled for Thompson's "tone".
I've seen plenty of analysis so far that talks as if she was speaking her own words.
Consider how many people reach conclusions, based on demeanor, as to whether witnesses are lying on the stand in crime dramas. Again, impressions trump facts.
Posted by: scooter | September 4, 2008 9:47 AM
Calling all Feminists and their sympathizers
Tahira Abdullah on Alternative Radio.
http://archive.kpft.org/mp3/080903_130001ar.MP3
She's from Pakistan, and this is about Fundie Islam gone insane, honor killing, outrageous subjugation of women. My brane fell out when I heard this, it has all the facts and figures and stats you need to for battle.
After listening to this, I realized that I have made posts here that were in error, being ignorant of the scope of this problem.
If I owe you an apology, well
you know who you are.
So much for 'moderate Islam' in Pakistan, this is horrific.
Posted by: heddle | September 4, 2008 9:47 AM
Brian Hertz,
Like, OMG, there are speech writers? Used by politicians? Who knew that?
The things we bumpkins who can only dream of being in Biden's IQ stanine learn while lurking!
Posted by: Ryan F | September 4, 2008 9:47 AM
Hear Hear, PZ! The Breasts of Injustice must be defeated!
But seriously, does anyone else think that the erosion of religion in the popular forum is imminent? People have now lambasted Romney for being Morman, Huckabee for being theocratic, Obama for aligning with an extreme minister, and now Palin for preaching about God's plan for our military and economy. Atheist blogs arent the only places this has been occurring, either; major press has dealt with these issues. I think more and more people are awakening to the fact that religion + politics = disaster.
Posted by: JB | September 4, 2008 9:49 AM
Reading this thread I see that most democrats here put themselves on a high horse, basically saying; "We're better than the democrats, we are smart, they are stupid, we are moral, they are not, we are truthful, they lie etc. etc. etc."
So many of you show absolutely no respect for other human beings, and absolutely no empathy or understanding for why people see the world different than yourself.
I read this site because I'm an atheist. And therefore I would also have a hard time voting for the republicans, if I were an american that is. But reading comments from many of the democrats here makes me loose sympathy for your side as well. Because what is my choice? Voting with the "religious idiots" or voting with the "self rightous idiots"?
I think you guys need to calm down, start showing some respect for your fellow man and woman, stop thrashing the "enemy" and start arguing for your actual political views. It might be less fun, it might demand more of you and your arguments, but it will win your side much more support in the long run.
Believing in a political philosophy, without argument or reason, is just as bad and dangerous as believing in a religion.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 4, 2008 9:50 AM
Fact check on Palin's speech (Hilzoy at Political Animal)
Posted by: llewelly | September 4, 2008 9:51 AM
Darth Vader, #34:
That was true until the Sarah Palin pick was announced. Now the race is about Sarah Palin. Until the Democrats can move it back to being about Obama, they'll be at a disadvantage.
Posted by: Joel | September 4, 2008 9:51 AM
Well said JB @ 55.
Posted by: raven | September 4, 2008 9:53 AM
PZ is right. Irrelevancies are Palin's gender and most of the culture war crap.
There are some serious issues facing the USA today and if we don't face them, we will end up like the old Soviet Union. A banana republic.
1. It's the economy stupid. We are in a recession or close to it. Something like 3 million families will lose their houses due to the subprime mess. Unemployment up. Huge deficits everywhere.
2. Related to that, the basis of our economic lead is our lead in science and technology. We are losing our edge in this due to budget constrainst and the ignorance of our current leaders.
3. Our military has been mined out and bled out in a stupid war that accomplished nothing much. The world has always been one of constant shifting threats and dangers. Nothing new here. We need the ability to defend ourselves if necessary and right now, we are overextended and couldn't do much if we really needed to. When Russia invaded Georgia, all Bush could do is make some vague comments and then Putin called him a moron.
4. The energy crisis. This is arguably the greatest challenge our civilization faces, which is based on cheap energy. It is solvable, but not by doing nothing.
I would put global warming and roe versus wade near the bottom. These are problems alright, but not the major ones.
People will have their own lists but Bushco created more problems than they solved and PZ is correct. We can't keep screwing up forever. Already in the foreign media, the USA is occasionally referred to as a "former superpower".
Posted by: Tim Fuller | September 4, 2008 9:53 AM
I too caught only a couple sentences of her speech as I surfed past the abomination. Like PZ, I was immediately put off. I don't even remember what canard she was railing on, but it immediately hit me as 'stock Republican nonsense'.
The Republican party is toast. They were toast when the election began. I couldn't believe there were that many Republican idiots willing to waste their time and money on the delusion that the American public would fall for their nonsense again.
I'm not afraid of losing the election. Less now than ever. I am still fearful that the Republicans will try to steal it.
Have you guys seen the memo Palin wrote to the city council bragging about all the earmarks that she got for Wasilla. It's out there.
Enjoy.
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 4, 2008 9:53 AM
Nother Fact Check (San Diego Tribune)
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 9:55 AM
Neither barackobama.com nor johnmccain.com has any place I can find where it says word One about the horror that the kangaroo courts of Gitmo have inflicted on America's vision of rights and the law, and what it says about our understanding of America's dedication to human rights.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamal-dajani/whitewashing-gitmo_b_99865.html
Obama:
We need to bring to a close this sad chapter in American history, and begin a chapter that passes the might of our military to the freedom of our diplomacy and the power of our alliances. And while we are at it, we can close down Guantanamo and we can restore habeas corpus and we can lead with our ideas and our values.
McCain:
I would close Guantanamo Bay. And I would move those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth. And I would proceed with the tribunals.
Posted by: varlo | September 4, 2008 9:56 AM
One entry on the open thread had it exactly right: Negative ads work, and God (or Odin or Thor) know that both McSame and his book-burning, knows-gods-mind, VP choice have plenty of negatives to choose from.
Posted by: Tired and Frustrated | September 4, 2008 9:56 AM
I really did not expect the readers of PZ's blog to be sexist. Surely we're better than that?
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | September 4, 2008 9:56 AM
And more of the same (at justmoreofthesame.com)
Arm yourself with the facts and deal iron out that convention bounce McCain hopes for.
Posted by: frog | September 4, 2008 9:57 AM
It's all about class & culture - not classiness, but identity politics.
Palin is the representative of "white trash". That's the way McCain's campaign is playing her, that's what they want to restoke - what they called a culture war (Kulturkampf?), but meant class warfare. You know this, because they say that they hate "class warfare" -- aka, it's their principal tactic.
What is Palin's "intriguing narrative"? That with a BA in journalism and little to no experience she has rocketed up from a "hockey mom" to the presidency. In other words, leadership is available to anybody -- they're "as good as the elites". It's the same meme as ID - that those with no education, no experience, no training whatsoever have as much "right" to determine the "Truth" as those who have spent a lifetime preparing for responsibility.
Outright class warfare. It's the same game played by the fascists - grab a dialectic and turn it inside out for no good reason other than as a power grab. It also happens to be the MO of vulgar deconstructionism. It's a great way to avoid the underlying issues that lead to the original conflict, but take advantage of the energy in that tension.
It's insane -- but it's pretty clear that sanity is a very thin veneer in human beings. If they succeed, Bush is going to look very good indeed - just like he's made Nixon seem like a stable, competent administrator.
Posted by: Brain Hertz | September 4, 2008 9:59 AM
@ heddle,
of course they use speechwriters... mostly. Obama writes most of his own stuff. What I'm interested to see is the proportion of pundits who seem to operate on the basis that that isn't the case. It just strikes me as a little weird.
Posted by: Darth Wader | September 4, 2008 10:01 AM
At first I thought Palin was the worst choice ever. But now I see she could be the smartest decision ever.
A radical nut job you have to don the kid gloves to talk about.
A hypocrite and liar, but if you call her on it your attacking the poor hockey mom.
The GOP put up the least qualified person ever as a running mate hoping people would talk about it, so they could beat them over the heads for attacking her.
Thats cynical, even for the GOP.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 10:01 AM
I couldn't believe there were that many Republican idiots willing to waste their time and money on the delusion that the American public would fall for their nonsense again.
Not being able to believe something that is actually true is a hint that you're doing it wrong. It's that sort of thing that can lead to losing.
I think more and more people are awakening to the fact that religion + politics = disaster.
And that.
Posted by: Steven Dunlap | September 4, 2008 10:03 AM
There is no shortage of material criticisms. Maybe if the left can hammer them home enough from now to election day something may sink in. A few highlights that I have found so far:
Wasilla Mayor Palin asked the librarian of that town about banning books then fired her when the librarian stood up to her. The townspeople expressed their outrage, forcing Palin to re-hire the librarian. Palin then tried to claim she never fired the librarian at all.
Same story with the town police chief.
As governor she had her ex-brother-in-law state trooper fired. When his boss wouldn't stand for it she had him fired first. Here's a link to a video of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan giving his side of the story.
She was up to her neck in the "bridge to nowhere" pork scandal (if you can call pork a scandal anymore, given how much of it the Republicans spread around for each other).
We can see patterns of evasion, abuse of power, to say nothing of policy failures. I realize that most of the GOP loyalists do not care about facts, but then do we care about them? If there are any "swing voters" then by definition they are open to hearing something that might change their minds.
Even the talking heads on the evening news have demonstrated that they have not fallen for this "don't attack Palin or you're a bad liberal conspirator" crap. And Glenn Greenwald at Salon is pressing the McCain/Palin campaign to finger the "liberals" in the media who have made criticisms of Palin based on her being the mother of small children. The right has referenced without naming these nefarious critics. At the end of a recent post he stated: "The Right and many of their media allies are simply inventing attacks on Palin, dishonestly attributing them to "liberals," and then gallantly defending her from them."
Greenwald's entire post on Palin is a good read which provides more detail on the important points above.
Also, keep in mind that a bogus list of books that Palin allegedly wanted banned has started circulating. Be careful before you forward, as a bogus list is all we need to fuel the "bad liberals" fire. Chances are a repub operative is behind it anyway. (For example, at least one bogus list includes the Harry Potter books although the incident took place before the first one was published).
Posted by: Ouchimoo | September 4, 2008 10:04 AM
Thank you PZ. I couldn't even stomach reading the Palin Open Discussion board. That said, the more I look about Palin's stance is just terrifying. Starting with her stance on pro-life/anti-contraceptive. Even worse is that there is a telling result on how well that works (it doesn't) and yet the fundies are praising her daughter's choice. The other story about how it's Sarah's autistic child is even worse IMO. Running all over the country while going into labor, 8 hour trip to Alaska, pop's the kid and just leaves again. To me that's not very pro-life. I don't know a single person that if they had a disabled child, even if it was just missing a FINGER, they would be all over that baby watching it very closely. Not dropping it on your family and expecting them to take care of it. She completely takes the wilderness and her lifestyle for granted. How she wants to plow up Alaska for oil; send aerial flights out to kill packs of wolves, in one of the few states that's supposed to be untouched by human fuck ups. I've read also that in business practices, she's very much like Bush. By saying, I don't like you because you don't agree with me so I'm going to replace you with all my friends. Now I am not fully sure which ones of these may be correct or if any of them. But I'm certain that the mass public will never learn of any of this.
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 10:07 AM
The GOP put up the least qualified person ever as a running mate hoping people would talk about it, so they could beat them over the heads for attacking her.
It wasn't "the GOP". McCain wanted Lieberman, but Rove nixed that and tried to force Romney on him, whom McCain doesn't like. McCain went with Palin at the last minute, catching everyone -- including the GOP hierarchy -- by surprise. But people thrive on post hoc explanations, whether it's God's plan or the GOP's.
Posted by: John C. Randolph | September 4, 2008 10:07 AM
I was expecting to see Obama win in a landslide, and I was quite surprised to see how much of his lead had evaporated before McCain announced his VP pick.
I see a couple of major mistakes that he's made, and they can both be chalked up to overconfidence. First, there was that trip to Europe: it came across as presumptuous. The message was that everyone should treat him as if it was a foregone conclusion that he'd win.
The second big mistake, was beating that "national service" drum. The people are not the property of the state, and it is not the business of the state to command us to contribute our labor to any cause, whether it's fighting foreign wars or sweeping floors in nursing homes. He may have meant that he wanted people to volunteer more, and that's all fine and dandy, but there was a pretty strong hint of "volunteer or else".
Beyond that, although I don't think it's really hurting him much since McCain is making the same mistake, he's basically ignoring our upcoming fiscal meltdown, and pretending that minor shifts in budget priorities will make it all right.
I do see a way for him to regain the lead, and that would be by calling for a major change, like bringing our troops home as Ron Paul recommended. Do we really need to still be in Japan? How about Belgium?
-jcr
Posted by: frog | September 4, 2008 10:07 AM
Brain Hertz: of course they use speechwriters... mostly. Obama writes most of his own stuff. What I'm interested to see is the proportion of pundits who seem to operate on the basis that that isn't the case. It just strikes me as a little weird.
It's not weird at all. It's all part of the spectacle - the pundits know perfectly well it's a fake, but they support it. They're the shills in the audience - it's their job to "pretend", since they're part of the show.
It's like the fake counting of delegates on the floor - of course it's irrelevant, but it keeps the pretense up that this is a political convention instead of a show.
Haven't you noticed that watching the news is almost indistinguishable from Pravda yet? Why do you think they hate bloggers so viscerally?
Posted by: Kryth | September 4, 2008 10:09 AM
I can only stand watching the RNC for about 2-5 minutes at a time. It makes me sick and angry. My wife wonders why I yell at the TV.
Posted by: dave | September 4, 2008 10:10 AM
Actually, the problem may not be with the democrats. The problem is with the people in this country. The democrats should be ahead by a mile. All this vacuous right-wing trash talk and acting wouldn't work if our population had any brains. The debt is soaring and the dollar is plunging, but the country wants more of the same, because less face it - we're just not very bright. And morons tend to reproduce at faster rate. Watch the movie "Idiocracy", which lampoons practically all of fox news' customer base. I'm afraid that's where we're headed.
Posted by: Brain Hertz | September 4, 2008 10:10 AM
...but I think that may have gone out of the window as of yesterday. Notwithstanding Cindy McCain's pre-emptive softening up of the pundits to that angle with complaints of "sexism" directed at any criticism, after Palin came out last night as an attack dog, I think all bets are pretty firmly off.
MSNBC was just now replaying highlights, and particularly pulled out the "community organizer" swipe for multiple plays. Removed from the context of the rapturous* welcome it really came across as pretty smug and spiteful. The Obama camp seems to have selected it as a line for its surrogates to attack too (was addressed last night, and referenced in on the email disti list this morning).
Overall, there's plenty to attack, and unlike the last cycle, this time I actually have some confidence that the Obama/Biden crew have their shit together enough to know how to use it. I certainly hope so...
* interesting choice of words now I read it back ;)
Posted by: Kate | September 4, 2008 10:11 AM
PZ, most people can barely have an intelligent conversation about politics as it is, once you throw a vag and some tits in the mix all hope is lost.
I run smack into misogyny on a daily basis in my workplace, at the store, the bank, the tattoo studio, the mechanic, the dry cleaner... It's not going away, and I doubt it will in my lifetime.
You know, if only these sexist idiots would take a step back and see just how much power women really have over them they'd all die in fits of apoplexy! After all, put a woman in front of them and they're all foaming at the mouth.... instantly.
Kinda funny, no?
Posted by: BaldApe | September 4, 2008 10:11 AM
Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain.
Asimov
Posted by: truth machine, OM | September 4, 2008 10:12 AM
Also, keep in mind that a bogus list of books that Palin allegedly wanted banned has started circulating. Be careful before you forward, as a bogus list is all we need to fuel the "bad liberals" fire. Chances are a repub operative is behind it anyway. (For example, at least one bogus list includes the Harry Potter books although the incident took place before the first one was published).
It wasn't a Repub operative, it was confusion. The list is a list of all books that have been banned in the U.S.