Bizarrobama
As a child, one of the more amusing and yet disturbingly frightening characters for me in the cartoon pantheon was Superman’s strange doppelganger from the Bizarro world. This image is what finally helped to identify something which has been tugging at the back of my mind for nearly two weeks; I finally remembered where it was that I’d seen Sarah Palin before. It was the 2004 Democratic presidential convention, only at that time she was a tall, lanky black man with a funny-sounding name. If you squint your eyes a bit, reverse party affiliation in your Bizarro mirror, swap out a Y chromosome for an extra X and vacuum out most of the melanin, he becomes Sarah Palin. When looking for political opinion, I rarely turn to the Chicago Sun Times and even less frequently to movie critic Roger Ebert, but he may be on to something today.
Obama first burst onto the scene like an A-List celebrity who strolls in and suddenly ignites the passions of the otherwise listless crowd in a definitely D-List dive. Rational observers looked askance at a political resume which could only charitably be described as “thin” to be sure; community organizer, state legislator and less then one term in the United States Senate. (Substitute PTA, small town mayor and less than one term as state Governor and you should feel the tingle of your first Bizarro moment.) Dual camps of supporters quickly formed, with some saying that such experience was certainly enough to qualify one for the Oval Office and others claiming that experience was overrated anyway.
Most of us who don’t live in or around Chicago had never heard of Obama, but that didn’t dampen the enthusiasm of a quickly massing body of supporters. We are observing the same phenomenon with Palin. There are a small handful of people who continually obsess over political news – not only the news that is happening, but also contemplating what might happen. Those people knew who Sarah Palin was for several months. As to the rest of you, (at least those in the lower 48) let’s just admit that you’d never heard of the woman beyond perhaps knowing she was a governor before the day of John McCain’s announcement. In the ensuing thirteen days you’ve been flooded with information at a rate too fast to process. On the one hand you’ve been deluged with a narrative about Palin’s compelling life story… the small town mother of a rather large brood, toting a hunting rifle and vanquishing the corrupt influences in an entrenched power structure. From the other side you are showered with troubling tidbits. An ongoing investigation into possible abuse of power, a record of “porkbusting” and fiscal responsibility which looks to be anything but and a penchant for personal vendettas executed from positions of high power are only a few.
As in most areas of life, timing seems to be everything. The various questions surrounding Obama weren’t enough to slow down his loyal army of acolytes until he had finished slogging through the primary process. Now, though, after nearly two years of seeing him on the trail, there is a growing sense of an electorate who might be tiring of his unique, compelling story and soaring speeches. We’re still in the white hot blaze of Palin’s unveiling and there are roughly eight weeks to go until the election. Will that initial burst of energy be enough to carry her over the line, or will the flames die down enough for voters to realize that there is sometimes less to the movie than a good trailer might lead you to believe?
Empty suit, meet empty pants suit.
83 Responses to “Bizarrobama”
Yeah Jazz, Sarah is just like Barack EXCEPT she came out wearing a LIE… And seems to like how it fits.
Agreed, Steve, but in all fairness, Obama has been caught stretching the truth a time or two himself. But they're all politicians.
In fairness, I agree, Obama and all politicians do stretch the truth. What Palin and the McCain campaign have done is (IMO) different.
Instead of changing their story when caught “stretching the truth” they have simply continued pushing the same line. So much so that the MSM is actually using the word “LIE”… and that boundary of political correctness doesn't get crossed very often.
That's the point. They're all politicians. And Palin appeals to mainstream America; Obama and his media helpers now have their work cut out for them; it's now a real contest.
Bizarre, I don't think so — rather, this morning I realized Obama's latest blunder hints at elitism or at least to the extent it shows a separation or disconnection from most of society in the same way he used Greek columns to frame television images of him behind him when he made his acceptance speech at the highlight of the Dem convention. It's as if some people in their own little world conceived the Greek columns to frame the television images — it was truly weird and left normal people puzzled. Similarly, it's as if the people telling Obama to use the “lipstick” comment, something that had been said before, were totally clueless to how it would be interpreted at this point in the campaign. They need to get (back?) in touch with the real world and with society if they want to complete with the appeal Palin offers (no matter how envious you are or now frustrating the “Teflon” phenomenon is to date with criticism of Palin). They need to be careful how they attack Palin — they're no angels themselves and adding vicious behavior will only offend people. Same for any elitist contempt for the public that they find Palin appealing at all (not only are angry people out of touch with the mainstream, but starting to engage in the kind of elitism or at least base ideology and partisanship that offends people, the kind of behavior that we've been entreated to already, including on this Web site).
It's similar to the liberal media who were polled and reported a high opinion among them of the public's judgment and wisdom when Clinton was elected, but in 2000, were criticial and discounted the public's judgment and wisdom. It's just like the similar nonsense I've seen on this Web site recently regarding the 2000 and 2004 elections. It's transparent as well as ridiculous.
Good for you, Jazz. Apparently Steve is proof that Obama supporters must show a medical certificate that they have selective cognizance abilities before they can register as one.
Here is just one website, chock full……….
http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/the-lie…
For a less selective Reading Experience:
http://people-press.org/report/449/mccain-image…
And, you Cognitively Challenged people need to forego the ad hominem knee-jerk response to the following guy and pay attention to what he says. It points the way for the Obama campaign to regain its footing, if it can stop its current blundering.
“If Mr. Obama wants to win, he needs to remember he's running against John McCain for president, not Mrs. Palin for vice president.”
“If Mr. Obama keeps attacking Mrs. Palin, he could suffer the fate of his Democratic predecessors. These assaults highlight his own tissue-thin résumé, waste precious time better spent reassuring voters he is up for the job, and diminish him — not her.”
`In Mrs. Palin, Mr. Obama faces a political phenomenon who has altered the election's dynamics. Americans have rarely seen someone who immediately connects with large numbers of voters at such a visceral level. Mrs. Palin may be the first vice presidential candidate since Lyndon B. Johnson to change an election's outcome. If Mr. Obama keeps attacking her, the odds of Gov. Palin becoming Vice President Palin increase significantly.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108935141721…
[...] post by WP-AutoBlog Import 62612 Add to del.icio.us Digg This Subscribe to RSS feed Leave a [...]
It's the bottom of the 7th and it's all tied up……….
McCain is now viewed favorably by 56% of the nation’s voters while Obama earns positive reviews from 55% (see trends). Sarah Palin is viewed favorably by 56%, Joe Biden by 53%. Other key stats of Election 2008 can still be seen at Obama-McCain: By the Numbers.
Data released last night shows John McCain up by two in New Mexico, up by double digits in North Dakota, and up by an overwhelming margin in his running mate’s home state of Alaska. The Palin surge in Alaska has even helped pull embattled Senator Ted Stevens back to a competitive position in his bid for re-election.
Wow, what an inane post. Bizzaro applies to this article much more than it does to Obama. Any one with half a brain can get copies of the bills Obama has sponsored in Washington and Illinois. You can check his voting record. You can download detailed policy papers from his web site. Obama has a documented history that allows any intelligent person to make a good guess at what he will do as President. And yet instead you pull out the same tired junk about “celebrity” and “empty suit”. Nor is Sarah Palin an “empty pants suit”. Her record is short but clear and gives a good indication of her future behavior. In fact, her quick rise indicates her skill as a politician and – just like Obama – shows she is a force to be reckoned with.
You dismiss her and McCain's lies with “All politicians stretch the truth”. Yes, that is true that all politicians stretch, skew, spin and otherwise slant the truth to make their case. But that is not what is happening here. McCain and Palin are flat-out lying. Whether its the Bridge to Nowhere or sex-education for kindergartners, the Republicans continue to continue to make false claims even after the press points out their lies. When Obama and Biden were shown that McCain voted with Bush only 90%, not 95%, they changed their speeches to match this. In other situations as well the Democrats stopped making a claim when it was shown to be false. When Republicans are caught lying they just repeat it louder. And you just help them along.
the writer is soooo off base.
Obama was not dropped into the public eye as the heartbeat from the president like Palin.
On top of that, Obama has ran for almost 2 years and has been vetted by the people and in public opinion.
Obama had to pass the test of Iowa voters who are not easily fooled. They take the full measure of a person and are skilled in spotted the empty suit.
Obama worked for 8 years as a state senator, 10 as a constitutional professor before he became a US Senator.
Obama has been published in the wonkier journals with pieces on National Security to domestic policy.
obama has a very detailed issues section on the policies.
Obama has a record much longer then many suspect of bills and legislation that can be viewed at the Library of congress site.
Obama built from scratch an organization that beat the most feared and strongest political machine of the past 25 years.
Obama graduated at the top of his Harvard law class and was president of the law review.
Palin has been dropped out of nowhere on the public with the idea that in a few months this unknown, unvetted, attended 5 colleges in 6 years and became a broadcaster. Several years later was in the PTA. She has a record of dubious claims as a mayor of a town smaller then many high schools and a governor of a small state for two years and 2 weeks of pathological lying and we are suppose to vote for this person to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?
Please!
Give me a break!
SteveK and bill_k –
When 'our' politician says something untruthful, it was an inadvertent mistake, a slight exaggeration, a stretch, a misstatement, etc.
When 'their' politician says something untruthful, it is a LIE!
SteveK and bill_k –
When 'our' politician says something untruthful, it was an inadvertent mistake, a slight exaggeration, a stretch, a misstatement, etc.
When 'their' politician says something untruthful, it is a LIE!
Jazz, I think your post is very fair and a great topic for discussion. Whether you agree with their positions or not Palin and Obama are very similar. But they're also very different.
Obama actually had to appeal to people, he had to sell himself and fight (and win against the mainstream Democratic Party and the Clintons. Obama didn't initially appeal to African-Americans because many thought he would never make it. But once he was viewed as a serious candidate then even more steam picked up for him.
Palin doesn't really have to “sell” herself to the crowd. She's on the ticket. She just has to look pretty (and to be fair some people think Obama is attractive) and as you pointed out she has to generate enthusiasm. I don't think it matters what her positions are… McCain is at the top of the ticket and Palin never would have made it to first base had she been running for president in the GOP primaries. In fact her positions would have been picked apart and since Hillary was on the Democratic side, people would have laughed Palin out of town. (I bring up Hillary because Palin would not have been anything new and Hillary would have won the women's vote given Hillary's superior positions on women's issues.)
So the main differences between Obama and Palin are that Obama had to (and still has to) sell himself and Obama has his positions known on every conceivable subject. To me (and this is why McCain's choice is such smart politics) it seems that the GOP gets to cherry-pick the best traits of Palin and McCain. One of those “traits” is Palin being a woman and generating a lot of energy. As I mentioned Palin doesn't actually have to sell herself…. and many voters won't care about Palin's positions because they see her as a symbol that women can advance to VP (and by implication to P) but they're looking at McCain's to lead as P.
So while Obama had to work at generating enthusiasm (remember Hillary generated enthusiasm at the same time and she was the forgone conclusion as P from day one) Palin is on the ticket and doesn't have to overcome many of the problems that Obama did, including explaining every single position she ever took.
To answer your question about Palin continuing her momentum…. I don't know but the Dems need to slow it down if they want to have a chance at the WH. Palin will not be subjected to the same standards as Obama (or McCain) because she's VP, time is short and she's seen more of being an inspiration then a leader. Obama might have been inspirational, but he had to prove that facing Hillary's inspiration and he had to prove he could be a leader.
Jazz, I think your post is very fair and a great topic for discussion. Whether you agree with their positions or not Palin and Obama are very similar. But they're also very different.
Obama actually had to appeal to people, he had to sell himself and fight (and win against the mainstream Democratic Party and the Clintons. Obama didn't initially appeal to African-Americans because many thought he would never make it. But once he was viewed as a serious candidate then even more steam picked up for him.
Palin doesn't really have to “sell” herself to the crowd. She's on the ticket. She just has to look pretty (and to be fair some people think Obama is attractive) and as you pointed out she has to generate enthusiasm. I don't think it matters what her positions are… McCain is at the top of the ticket and Palin never would have made it to first base had she been running for president in the GOP primaries. In fact her positions would have been picked apart and since Hillary was on the Democratic side, people would have laughed Palin out of town. (I bring up Hillary because Palin would not have been anything new and Hillary would have won the women's vote given Hillary's superior positions on women's issues.)
So the main differences between Obama and Palin are that Obama had to (and still has to) sell himself and Obama has his positions known on every conceivable subject. To me (and this is why McCain's choice is such smart politics) it seems that the GOP gets to cherry-pick the best traits of Palin and McCain. One of those “traits” is Palin being a woman and generating a lot of energy. As I mentioned Palin doesn't actually have to sell herself…. and many voters won't care about Palin's positions because they see her as a symbol that women can advance to VP (and by implication to P) but they're looking at McCain's to lead as P.
So while Obama had to work at generating enthusiasm (remember Hillary generated enthusiasm at the same time and she was the forgone conclusion as P from day one) Palin is on the ticket and doesn't have to overcome many of the problems that Obama did, including explaining every single position she ever took.
To answer your question about Palin continuing her momentum…. I don't know but the Dems need to slow it down if they want to have a chance at the WH. Palin will not be subjected to the same standards as Obama (or McCain) because she's VP, time is short and she's seen more of being an inspiration then a leader. Obama might have been inspirational, but he had to prove that facing Hillary's inspiration and he had to prove he could be a leader.
Stockboy………your “stock” just went up in my book. Imagine that, an Obama supporter who can still render an objective analysis………kudos
Stockboy………your “stock” just went up in my book. Imagine that, an Obama supporter who can still render an objective analysis………kudos
CO, thanks for a post that isn't insulting. +1 point for you sir.
CO, thanks for a post that isn't insulting. +1 point for you sir.
CO, thanks for a post that isn't insulting. +1 point for you sir.
The MAJOR difference is that Obama has had 4 years to learn about the issues and to become ready to be President. Ms Palin has had 2 weeks of highly sheilded limelight.
No one can doubt that had Obama been chosen to be Kerry's running mate four years ago, the Right would have (quite correctly) gone crazy over his minimal experience. The fact that he has spent four years in hard study makes him a credible candidate for the Presidency.
Ms Palin should check back in four years.
The MAJOR difference is that Obama has had 4 years to learn about the issues and to become ready to be President. Ms Palin has had 2 weeks of highly sheilded limelight.
No one can doubt that had Obama been chosen to be Kerry's running mate four years ago, the Right would have (quite correctly) gone crazy over his minimal experience. The fact that he has spent four years in hard study makes him a credible candidate for the Presidency.
Ms Palin should check back in four years.
The MAJOR difference is that Obama has had 4 years to learn about the issues and to become ready to be President. Ms Palin has had 2 weeks of highly sheilded limelight.
No one can doubt that had Obama been chosen to be Kerry's running mate four years ago, the Right would have (quite correctly) gone crazy over his minimal experience. The fact that he has spent four years in hard study makes him a credible candidate for the Presidency.
Ms Palin should check back in four years.
Mr. Jazz Shaw has so fallen in love with his Bizzaro metaphor that he has allowed all critical thinking to fly out the window.
Did you even bother to make a cursory review of these candidates two records? Yes, they both , in their own times, did make rather sudden appearences on the national stage but the similarity ends there. Obama's actual time spent in politics and his actual record of achievements far outweigh Ms. Palin's.
Furthermore, it makes no sense at all to compare the two candidates at this point in time. Obama has been thoroughly vetted by the press, his colleagues and the public in the four years since that famous speech at the Dem convention. Governor Palin is still an unraveling package to most of us. Worst of all, the more that becomes known of her, the less likeable as a person and less qualified as a vice presidential contender she becomes.
Sloppy thinking, Mr. Shaw. Very sloppy thinking.
Mr. Jazz Shaw has so fallen in love with his Bizzaro metaphor that he has allowed all critical thinking to fly out the window.
Did you even bother to make a cursory review of these candidates two records? Yes, they both , in their own times, did make rather sudden appearences on the national stage but the similarity ends there. Obama's actual time spent in politics and his actual record of achievements far outweigh Ms. Palin's.
Furthermore, it makes no sense at all to compare the two candidates at this point in time. Obama has been thoroughly vetted by the press, his colleagues and the public in the four years since that famous speech at the Dem convention. Governor Palin is still an unraveling package to most of us. Worst of all, the more that becomes known of her, the less likeable as a person and less qualified as a vice presidential contender she becomes.
Sloppy thinking, Mr. Shaw. Very sloppy thinking.
Mr. Jazz Shaw has so fallen in love with his Bizzaro metaphor that he has allowed all critical thinking to fly out the window.
Did you even bother to make a cursory review of these candidates two records? Yes, they both , in their own times, did make rather sudden appearences on the national stage but the similarity ends there. Obama's actual time spent in politics and his actual record of achievements far outweigh Ms. Palin's.
Furthermore, it makes no sense at all to compare the two candidates at this point in time. Obama has been thoroughly vetted by the press, his colleagues and the public in the four years since that famous speech at the Dem convention. Governor Palin is still an unraveling package to most of us. Worst of all, the more that becomes known of her, the less likeable as a person and less qualified as a vice presidential contender she becomes.
Sloppy thinking, Mr. Shaw. Very sloppy thinking.
Mr. Jazz Shaw has so fallen in love with his Bizzaro metaphor that he has allowed all critical thinking to fly out the window.
Did you even bother to make a cursory review of these candidates two records? Yes, they both , in their own times, did make rather sudden appearences on the national stage but the similarity ends there. Obama's actual time spent in politics and his actual record of achievements far outweigh Ms. Palin's.
Furthermore, it makes no sense at all to compare the two candidates at this point in time. Obama has been thoroughly vetted by the press, his colleagues and the public in the four years since that famous speech at the Dem convention. Governor Palin is still an unraveling package to most of us. Worst of all, the more that becomes known of her, the less likeable as a person and less qualified as a vice presidential contender she becomes.
Sloppy thinking, Mr. Shaw. Very sloppy thinking.
Obama's been in the spotlight for 4 years… Palin has been in the spotlight for 2 weeks. And without any actual interviews, we're supposed to trust her with the Presidency in 2009.
Talk about false equivalency.
Read this post (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/indiv…) from Steve Bennen if you want to see what kind of campaign Obama would be running if he was stooping to the level of John McCain.
Obama's been in the spotlight for 4 years… Palin has been in the spotlight for 2 weeks. And without any actual interviews, we're supposed to trust her with the Presidency in 2009.
Talk about false equivalency.
Read this post (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/indiv…) from Steve Bennen if you want to see what kind of campaign Obama would be running if he was stooping to the level of John McCain.
Obama's been in the spotlight for 4 years… Palin has been in the spotlight for 2 weeks. And without any actual interviews, we're supposed to trust her with the Presidency in 2009.
Talk about false equivalency.
Read this post (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/indiv…) from Steve Bennen if you want to see what kind of campaign Obama would be running if he was stooping to the level of John McCain.
Obama's been in the spotlight for 4 years… Palin has been in the spotlight for 2 weeks. And without any actual interviews, we're supposed to trust her with the Presidency in 2009.
Talk about false equivalency.
Read this post (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/indiv…) from Steve Bennen if you want to see what kind of campaign Obama would be running if he was stooping to the level of John McCain.
“Empty suit, meet empty pants suit.”
*********
Yes.. I thought Hillary Clinton filled out her pantsuits quite well though.
Too bad she's not on the ticket, eh?
“Empty suit, meet empty pants suit.”
*********
Yes.. I thought Hillary Clinton filled out her pantsuits quite well though.
Too bad she's not on the ticket, eh?
“Empty suit, meet empty pants suit.”
*********
Yes.. I thought Hillary Clinton filled out her pantsuits quite well though.
Too bad she's not on the ticket, eh?
“Empty suit, meet empty pants suit.”
*********
Yes.. I thought Hillary Clinton filled out her pantsuits quite well though.
Too bad she's not on the ticket, eh?
I am not an Obama supporter by any means, but I agree that this is a false equivalency.
Yes, both Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin are celebrities. The MSM obsession with her is as annoying as it was with Obama. But that is as far as the similarity goes.
Remember:
(1) Obama has demonstrated political skills in the big game. He took down the Clinton machine; a achievement thought to be impossible. Read magazines from a year or so ago, and it is like another world: HRC was depicted as progressing irresistably to her coronation as President. She had an overwhelming PR and money advantage . . . and she failed against Obama.
(2) Through the test of fire and exposure in the primaries, Americans have developed a comfort level with Obama. Republicans might not like his policies (as Democrats might not like McCain's) but folks are reasonably secure about the prospect of his tenure in office (as they would be about McCain's).
This is the great beauty and value of the American system of primaries & caucuses. They impede flash-in-the-pan candidates.
Had Obama lacked substance — i.e., had he been merely a celebrity — he would have gone down in flames. Instead, like McCain, he survived and won the nomination.
Gov. Palin is certainly no dumb bimbo or crypto-religious fundamentalist. She seems very popular with Alaskans. She is certainly a good speaker.
But there is no equivalence between Obama and Palin.
I am not an Obama supporter by any means, but I agree that this is a false equivalency.
Yes, both Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin are celebrities. The MSM obsession with her is as annoying as it was with Obama. But that is as far as the similarity goes.
Remember:
(1) Obama has demonstrated political skills in the big game. He took down the Clinton machine; a achievement thought to be impossible. Read magazines from a year or so ago, and it is like another world: HRC was depicted as progressing irresistably to her coronation as President. She had an overwhelming PR and money advantage . . . and she failed against Obama.
(2) Through the test of fire and exposure in the primaries, Americans have developed a comfort level with Obama. Republicans might not like his policies (as Democrats might not like McCain's) but folks are reasonably secure about the prospect of his tenure in office (as they would be about McCain's).
This is the great beauty and value of the American system of primaries & caucuses. They impede flash-in-the-pan candidates.
Had Obama lacked substance — i.e., had he been merely a celebrity — he would have gone down in flames. Instead, like McCain, he survived and won the nomination.
Gov. Palin is certainly no dumb bimbo or crypto-religious fundamentalist. She seems very popular with Alaskans. She is certainly a good speaker.
But there is no equivalence between Obama and Palin.
I am not an Obama supporter by any means, but I agree that this is a false equivalency.
Yes, both Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin are celebrities. The MSM obsession with her is as annoying as it was with Obama. But that is as far as the similarity goes.
Remember:
(1) Obama has demonstrated political skills in the big game. He took down the Clinton machine; a achievement thought to be impossible. Read magazines from a year or so ago, and it is like another world: HRC was depicted as progressing irresistably to her coronation as President. She had an overwhelming PR and money advantage . . . and she failed against Obama.
(2) Through the test of fire and exposure in the primaries, Americans have developed a comfort level with Obama. Republicans might not like his policies (as Democrats might not like McCain's) but folks are reasonably secure about the prospect of his tenure in office (as they would be about McCain's).
This is the great beauty and value of the American system of primaries & caucuses. They impede flash-in-the-pan candidates.
Had Obama lacked substance — i.e., had he been merely a celebrity — he would have gone down in flames. Instead, like McCain, he survived and won the nomination.
Gov. Palin is certainly no dumb bimbo or crypto-religious fundamentalist. She seems very popular with Alaskans. She is certainly a good speaker.
But there is no equivalence between Obama and Palin.
I am not an Obama supporter by any means, but I agree that this is a false equivalency.
Yes, both Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin are celebrities. The MSM obsession with her is as annoying as it was with Obama. But that is as far as the similarity goes.
Remember:
(1) Obama has demonstrated political skills in the big game. He took down the Clinton machine; a achievement thought to be impossible. Read magazines from a year or so ago, and it is like another world: HRC was depicted as progressing irresistably to her coronation as President. She had an overwhelming PR and money advantage . . . and she failed against Obama.
(2) Through the test of fire and exposure in the primaries, Americans have developed a comfort level with Obama. Republicans might not like his policies (as Democrats might not like McCain's) but folks are reasonably secure about the prospect of his tenure in office (as they would be about McCain's).
This is the great beauty and value of the American system of primaries & caucuses. They impede flash-in-the-pan candidates.
Had Obama lacked substance — i.e., had he been merely a celebrity — he would have gone down in flames. Instead, like McCain, he survived and won the nomination.
Gov. Palin is certainly no dumb bimbo or crypto-religious fundamentalist. She seems very popular with Alaskans. She is certainly a good speaker.
But there is no equivalence between Obama and Palin.
I am not an Obama supporter by any means, but I agree that this is a false equivalency.
Yes, both Sen. Obama and Gov. Palin are celebrities. The MSM obsession with her is as annoying as it was with Obama. But that is as far as the similarity goes.
Remember:
(1) Obama has demonstrated political skills in the big game. He took down the Clinton machine; a achievement thought to be impossible. Read magazines from a year or so ago, and it is like another world: HRC was depicted as progressing irresistably to her coronation as President. She had an overwhelming PR and money advantage . . . and she failed against Obama.
(2) Through the test of fire and exposure in the primaries, Americans have developed a comfort level with Obama. Republicans might not like his policies (as Democrats might not like McCain's) but folks are reasonably secure about the prospect of his tenure in office (as they would be about McCain's).
This is the great beauty and value of the American system of primaries & caucuses. They impede flash-in-the-pan candidates.
Had Obama lacked substance — i.e., had he been merely a celebrity — he would have gone down in flames. Instead, like McCain, he survived and won the nomination.
Gov. Palin is certainly no dumb bimbo or crypto-religious fundamentalist. She seems very popular with Alaskans. She is certainly a good speaker.
But there is no equivalence between Obama and Palin.
My God, what is happening to America?
Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record… yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.
Bizarro America.
My God, what is happening to America?
Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record… yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.
Bizarro America.
My God, what is happening to America?
Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record… yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.
Bizarro America.
My God, what is happening to America?
Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record… yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.
Bizarro America.
My God, what is happening to America?
Palin has yet to answer questions from a serious reporter about her beliefs and her record… yet she's Presidential material because she's a great liar and a hockey mom.
Bizarro America.
Casualobserver- thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I do try to be objective, but it's difficult and more so when I have a particular point I want to get across. In those instances I know I can come across as non-objective most (if not all) of the time. Despite my posts I do struggle to be more objective and approach the issues from the other side of the fence. Occasionally I can.
At any rate, I think Jazz's post (and my opinion) is what I am terming “post-initial Palin reaction” where we have gotten over our initial reactions (for better or for worse) to Palin and looking at her (and the dynamic) from other angles. I was wondering who would be the first to post something along these lines. I also wonder what “post-initial Palin reaction” will look like in the media and how the American public will react to it….
Casualobserver- thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I do try to be objective, but it's difficult and more so when I have a particular point I want to get across. In those instances I know I can come across as non-objective most (if not all) of the time. Despite my posts I do struggle to be more objective and approach the issues from the other side of the fence. Occasionally I can.
At any rate, I think Jazz's post (and my opinion) is what I am terming “post-initial Palin reaction” where we have gotten over our initial reactions (for better or for worse) to Palin and looking at her (and the dynamic) from other angles. I was wondering who would be the first to post something along these lines. I also wonder what “post-initial Palin reaction” will look like in the media and how the American public will react to it….
Casualobserver- thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I do try to be objective, but it's difficult and more so when I have a particular point I want to get across. In those instances I know I can come across as non-objective most (if not all) of the time. Despite my posts I do struggle to be more objective and approach the issues from the other side of the fence. Occasionally I can.
At any rate, I think Jazz's post (and my opinion) is what I am terming “post-initial Palin reaction” where we have gotten over our initial reactions (for better or for worse) to Palin and looking at her (and the dynamic) from other angles. I was wondering who would be the first to post something along these lines. I also wonder what “post-initial Palin reaction” will look like in the media and how the American public will react to it….
Casualobserver- thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I do try to be objective, but it's difficult and more so when I have a particular point I want to get across. In those instances I know I can come across as non-objective most (if not all) of the time. Despite my posts I do struggle to be more objective and approach the issues from the other side of the fence. Occasionally I can.
At any rate, I think Jazz's post (and my opinion) is what I am terming “post-initial Palin reaction” where we have gotten over our initial reactions (for better or for worse) to Palin and looking at her (and the dynamic) from other angles. I was wondering who would be the first to post something along these lines. I also wonder what “post-initial Palin reaction” will look like in the media and how the American public will react to it….
Casualobserver- thanks! I appreciate the feedback. I do try to be objective, but it's difficult and more so when I have a particular point I want to get across. In those instances I know I can come across as non-objective most (if not all) of the time. Despite my posts I do struggle to be more objective and approach the issues from the other side of the fence. Occasionally I can.
At any rate, I think Jazz's post (and my opinion) is what I am terming “post-initial Palin reaction” where we have gotten over our initial reactions (for better or for worse) to Palin and looking at her (and the dynamic) from other angles. I was wondering who would be the first to post something along these lines. I also wonder what “post-initial Palin reaction” will look like in the media and how the American public will react to it….
Oh, by the way…. The facts about someone do not win an election. I've had my say on Palin and I'm ready to move on. I might continue to harp on disagreeable stuff about her, but now it's in the hands of the media and public. Because the media is pointing out some of the deficiencies of Palin there's nothing more (really!) that I can add to the debate. Hence the “post-initial Palin reaction” phase. I didn't post much yesterday because I knew I needed to step back and take stock of the election situation. What's interesting is that Obama is being attacked in some quarters for not taking a stronger stand against Palin, while others say he should disregard her. I dediced to do what Obama has been doing… playing it cool… and see where it got me. I will tell you that it has gotten me a lot of peace. But I think most of that is due to my earlier venting…..