Electorate Shifting to the GOP?
September 5th, 2008 at 06:42pm Mark Noonan
If true, this will be the most surprising bit of news for 2008:
During August, the number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans increased two percentage points to 33.2% while the number of Democrats was little changed at 38.9%.
That gives the Democrats a net advantage of 5.7 percentage points, down two points from a month ago and down significantly from the double digit advantage they enjoyed in April and May.
That poll was released September 2nd, which means it was pre-Palin speech, and one does wonder just how many people out there are saying, “If John McCain and Sarah Palin are the GOP, then I’m a Republican, too”? The Democrats still have a big advantage (and Rasmussen points out that over the past year the Democrats have maintained this strong advantage), but it does seem to be drifting downwards, and the effect of the past few days might have started to force it downwards quite fast - though we won’t know until Rasmussen puts out next month’s party ID result.
The GOP is being rebranded as the party of reform - and just as successful as that rebranding is by November will determine if the GOP - and not just McCain/Palin - comes out a winner. The GOP, as McCain pointed out, lost its way and was captured by the Washington ethos…now we have a chance to reclaim our outsider, insurgent reputation and really get to work on changing the way things are done.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
57 Comments
1. cam | September 5th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
The key word in this article is rebranded. Its not about true reform. Its about marketing.
2. Jeremiad | September 5th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
As a lifetime Christian, I find the appointment of Sarah Palin to a candidate for Vice President to be an abomination against my faith.
The Bible is clear on these things and cannot be picked and chosen from like the grapes of the vineyard.
For it is written:
15:19 And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her
shall be unclean until the even.
15:20 And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean.
15:21 And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
15:22 And whosoever toucheth any thing that she sat upon shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the
even.
15:23 And if it be on her bed, or on any thing whereon she sitteth, when he toucheth it, he shall be unclean until the even.
I fail to see how a woman unclean for seven days of any month is suitable for such an important job. The Bible says it, I believe it and that settles it.
3. clilly | September 5th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
is it true that Mcain spoke last night in front of a picture of a California middle school that his aides thought was the Walter Reed Hospital?
4. Timestar | September 5th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
The GOP is being rebranded as the party of reform September 5th, 2008 at 06:42pm Mark Noonan
Eight years of utter destruction of our economy and foreign policy by the neocons is called reform?
5. kmg | September 5th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Mark,
I know comment #2 is trolling, but it brought to mind a question for you. Why do you believe a woman is fit to lead your country and the military, but unfit to lead a congregation in your church?
6. Obama08 | September 5th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I guess you are going into the deep woods and finding those illiterate “I married my first cousin” moonshiners that think “skul” is for those “cosmopolitans” who can’t clean a semi-automatic machine gun and not spill their glass of southern comfort at the same time.
Wow, did you go to Alaska and get those Alaska Independent Party members that wanted to secede from the union and not be buried under that damned U.S. flag to sign up promising more unwed virgins to impregnate and free guns to go huntin’ Ruskies and commies?
I guess a few more poor folks that sold their last broken down tractor in the midwest before the big federally subsidized agribusiness bought their family farm in a forclosure deal cam out for you to stick one to the “Eastern Elites,” eh?
Maybe a few more Fred Phelps followers who want American soldiers to get shot and burn in hell for gay tolerance of society signed up when you put that right wing hypocrite Palin on the ticket because shes a God fearing Christian
A few more right wing nuts who think we deserved the 9/11 attacks because we allow women to have control over their womb and allow pagans to worship as we see fit probably did join your ranks after Palin.
Yeah, you got some more.
More of the same.
And if you manage to drag the dead rotting carcass of your ideas over the finish line in the likes of unqualified VP nominee and a suspiciously tired looking and old relic who cannot even remember how many houses owns you guys will only make the following words immortal:
“This Election is Not About Issues”
Which after November may well very be the epitaph we put on gravestone marking the end of the American experiment in self government.
7. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I guess you are going into the deep woods and finding those illiterate “I married my first cousin” moonshiners that think “skul” is for those “cosmopolitans” who can’t clean a semi-automatic machine gun and not spill their glass of southern comfort at the same time. - Obama08
Just the other day, many of our resident liberals were parroting the KOS talking point that Palin made a huge blunder “dissing” community organizers. Yet they no compunction themselves to diss anyone at anytime, as Obama08 takes a swipe at a good cross section of the country in his post above. Then of course, we have the bashing of motherhood the last few days claiming Palin is irresponsible to have a career and a family. The nerve of her.
8. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Obama08,
I just finished reading the rest of your drivel and can only come to one conclusion: The wheels are coming off.
Good luck with that.
9. kimberly4victory | September 5th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Oh my, look at all the static on this thread! Do any of you have a real job (besides being paid by the Obama camp)?
I would be very interested in seeing next month’s total and next month’s posts from our new dailykos posters on the topic.
10. FactCheck | September 5th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
The key word in this article is rebranded. Its not about true reform. Its about marketing.
Precisely–and stupid marketing at that. “The GOP has been screwing things up for the past 8 years–trust the GOP to bring reform and save you from the lousy policy of, uh, the GOP!”
The sad statement about this country? It could actually work.
11. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Jeremiad,
If you’re going to assume anothers identity, have the brains enough to spell his name right.
Just saying. I am surprised we even let these people vote.
12. Obama08 | September 5th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Neocon:
I am surprised you are OK with women and blacks being allowed to vote.
13. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
FactCheck,
You only have yourselves to blame. All the Democrats had to do was put up a credible candidate, be civil and breathe. That’s it. And they would’ve won.
Instead, you arrogantly appointed the least qualified, and one of the most unelectable candidates in our nations history. Then, to top it off, you have bashed everyone that doesn’t think you’re brilliant and agree with you. And the includes the MSM.
Therefore, you will lose in November.
14. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Yeah I am not sure about that either. And great sense of sarcasm.
15. FactCheck | September 5th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
I am surprised you are OK with women and blacks being allowed to vote.
I think he would prefer to murder them, seeing as how women and blacks tend to vote Democratic.
16. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
My little melo dramatic liberals. Don’t cha jus luv em. Everyone should have a pet liberal.
17. FactCheck | September 5th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
If you’re going to assume anothers identity, have the brains enough to spell his name right.
…and yet again, the joke goes flying way, way over poor little neocon’s head. How…predictable.
Hint: Look up the word “jeremiad.” (Did you know it’s an actual word? Really, it is!) Now, compare the definition you just learned to Jeremiah’s typically unhinged writing style. Understand the wordplay now?
Enjoys these freebies while they last. If I have to continue giving you remedial tutoring, I’ll have to start billing you.
18. Dasein Libsbane | September 5th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I’m not surprised by the movement; this is a center-right country.
Factcheck, can’t you just feel it all slipping away? Do you suppose this was how Hillary felt when she thought the Whitehouse was hers.
The desperation is palpable.
19. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
My bad FactCheck,
I guess I underestimated you. I didn’t think you were that deep.
20. Mark Noonan | September 5th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
kmg,
The establishment of the all-male priesthood was done by Our Lord, and we are not about to gainsay him on the subject. Meanwhile, there is no injunction against a woman President in the Gospels…
21. clilly | September 5th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
it is true. C’mon. if you’re gonna use injured soldiers as props at least get it right!
22. Obama08 | September 5th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Voting for the GOP is like……..
Giving your retirement money to Ken Lay….
Voting to end Social Security while cashing your Social Security check.
Vote to reduce taxes on millionaires with more houses than Bill Gates while filing your bankruptcy papers.
Paying $5 a gallon for gas and signing the rest of your disposal income over to Exxon.
Denouncing actors and wealthy elites while you hoot and holler when Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney denounce actors and elites.
Ignore the fact that Palin lied about the Bridge to Nowhere and denounce any new tax to repair actual bridges in need of repair.
Vote to reduce funding for aid to single mothers and outlaw all forms of birth control while gushing at the sight of Palin’s daughter.
Reading the Bible where Pontius Pilate questions Jesus while mumbling about how lame are those community organizers and how much you like governor Palin.
23. Mark Noonan | September 5th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Obama08,
Are you seriously comparing the work of the Christ, the Son of the Living God, to the work Obama did as a community organizer?
24. steinerla | September 5th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Seriously, this site is too much fun! You guys are never going to change each other’s minds but the comments are endlessly entertaining. Thanks Mark!
25. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Obama08,
You really need to be a stand up comedian. I think you’re missing your calling.
26. kmg | September 5th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Mark,
I know that is the church’s position, I’m just trying to understand the logic behind that position. I may be wrong, and I defer to you on Catholic tenets, but it’s my understanding that women priests are forbidden because of scripture stating that a woman must not be placed in a position to lead men. Why is there a difference between a woman’s ability to lead in spiritual and secular matters?
It’s a serious question and I’m not just picking on Catholicism. I find the same disconnect in Judaism and Islam.
27. Nate | September 5th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
if anyone is shifting to the gop they’ll shift back when they learn that palin lied during her rnc speech —
the truth about the bridge to nowhere….
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN3125537020080901
By Yereth Rosen
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - It garnered big applause in her first speech as Republican John McCain’s vice presidential pick, but Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s assertion that she rejected Congressional funds for the so-called “bridge to nowhere” has upset many Alaskans.
During her first speech after being named as McCain’s surprise pick as a running mate, Palin said she had told Congress “‘thanks but no thanks’ on that bridge to nowhere.”
In the city Ketchikan, the planned site of the so-called “Bridge to Nowhere,” political leaders of both parties said the claim was false and a betrayal of their community, because she had supported the bridge and the earmark for it secured by Alaska’s Congressional delegation during her run for governor.
The bridge, a span from the city to Gravina Island, home to only a few dozen people, secured a $223 million earmark in 2005. The pricey designation raised a furor and critics, including McCain, used the bridge as an example of wasteful federal spending on politicians’ pet projects.
When she was running for governor in 2006, Palin said she was insulted by the term “bridge to nowhere,” according to Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin’s campaign coordinator in the southeast Alaska city.
“People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I’m for this’ … and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting,” Weinstein said.
28. phnx | September 5th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Its interesting that our leftists trolls are quick to cite the affiliation that Palin’s husband had in 1994, with the Alaska Independence party, but they fail to tell the rest of the story.
1. Lynette Clark, the party chairman, was an OBAMA supporter, up until Palin was nominated.
2. In addition, Obama is a supporter of S 310 RS, introduced in May 2007, which grants autonomous status to Native Hawaiians, restoring the Kingsom of Hawaii. As the author of the bill admits, could pave the way for the sucession and independence of Hawaii.
So much for the leftists talking points.
29. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
kmg,
Do you not believe in seperation of church and state? I think Mark does and therein lies your answer.
30. phnx | September 5th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
What the leftists don’t want to face is the fact that 26% of Hillary’s supporters have decided NOT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA.
They will vote for McCain/Palin, not because they support the ticket…but because they know that an Obama defeat will give Hillary another shot in 2012.
Hillary has already given the signal to her supporters that while she will attack McCain, she will not attack Palin.
Obama is toast.
31. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Now the liberals think that the bridge to nowhere flip is enough to hand the election to the cocaine using Harvard educated lawyer.
DL is right, the desperation is palpable.
I love the smell of liberal anxiety.
32. dickvee | September 5th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Oh man, i’m loving this. The libs are in full throttle shout mode. America is standing up across the wide spaces and saying enough is enough. Liberalism coursing through the veins may have numbed the giant, but arise it must to eat its liberal offal. As they scream America will teach them another lesson. Today I heard a caller to a local talk show scream and rant as if she was under control of some Obama demons. They let her talk and talk, and finally they laughed and suggested it was just Michelle protecting her man. This while he was out trying to play the race card again. As I said…Sarah has given us the best fun possible…the squirming lib being placed on her fishing hook!!
33. FactCheck | September 5th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
cocaine using Harvard educated lawyer.
the desperation is palpable.
It sure is. You should at least try to cover it up a little, you know? Poor little guy.
34. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Sarah the Savior
Palin the Punisher
President 2012
35. kimberly4victory | September 5th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
OMG! Did anyone watch Greta interview Major General Campbell, head of the Alaska National Guard tonight? It was wonderful! He respects Governor Palin and is not happy with the news reports. I was more than impressed with his overview of Governor Palin. Mark, if you can video on it, that would be great to post.
36. Retired Spook | September 5th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Wasn’t he great, Kim? All three Alaskan officials, the NG Commander, the present Mayor of Wasilla and Palin’s press secretary were all dynamite. What a great campaign ad.
Mark, any idea why my previous post has been “awaiting moderation” for 90 minutes? It contained no links or foul language — just curious.
37. rich | September 5th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Funny none of you libs posted any polls today, I wonder why? Also funny, last week we were told Obama had a historic speech watched by millions, it was the dawn of a new era because so many tuned in. Haven’t heard much hay from CNN and MSNBC that both Palin and McCain had more viewers. This is the second thread in a row Obama08 has posted racist rants against white people. from here on out Obama8- instead of writing another one just write Obama08 rant #3. We will know you are venting and you can save yourself sometime. I don’t think many are reading your posts anymore anyways. I enjoy arguing with a few of our libs here, but with you i am really starting to feel like you are headed towards a nervous breakdown. Do you have anyone to give you a hug? I think maybe you should just take a few days off from blogging and get some fresh air.
38. Kahn | September 5th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
You liberals lost the election when you went after Palin’s kids. Simple as that.
39. Retired Spook | September 5th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
You liberals lost the election when you went after Palin’s kids. Simple as that.
Kahn, as O’Reilly noted tonight, they realize it; they just can help themselves.
I think maybe you should just take a few days off from blogging and get some fresh air.
Or he could just jump in front of a bus — pretty quick and painless. Well, maybe not painless — but quick.
40. kmg | September 5th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
neocon,
Thanks for the unsolicited input, but unless you are Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim, I’ll wait for Mark’s answer. If you do belong to one of those religions I’d be happy to hear your answer to the question.
Also, you asked the other day why someone had a problem with you calling Obama “cocaine using” when he admitted to it in his book. The problem is that you are intentionally writing it in a way that reads as though he is a current cocaine user. That’s the same as a lie.
41. Kahn | September 5th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
kmg, so the article in US and the stories in the media about Palin’s husbands DUI that fail to mention it was 22 years ago are ALSO lies? Correct? I mean, using your standard.
Or could neocon been using Obama’s cocaine use during that same time period to demonstrate that you were lying about Palin?
Which of THESE lies you think is worse?
a. Palin is not the mother of her baby - her oldest daughter is.
b. Palin wanted her ex-brother-in-law fired (failing to mention drinking in his state police car, death threats, and tasering a child with a police taser).
c. or maybe the unsubstantiated affair rumors - take your pick -against McCain or Palin.
Or do you think the attacks and vile statements about Palin’s 17 year old were worse?
42. neocon | September 5th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
kmg,
You mean it’s wrong now to lie about political candidates? I didn’t get that DNC/MoveOn.org memo.
43. Retired Spook | September 5th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
The problem is that you are intentionally writing it in a way that reads as though he is a current cocaine user. That’s the same as a lie.
kmg, Obama also said he quit smoking, but we now know that was a lie. So saying he “might” still be using cocaine isn’t that much of a stretch. Besides, the Left has been calling Bush a cokehead for over 8 years without any proof whatsoever. Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it?
I didn’t get that DNC/MoveOn.org memo.
I got it, neo, but there was a smiley face at the end, so I took it with a grain of salt.
44. Kahn | September 5th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
I didn’t realize what memo it was until it was almost down the drain. It was covered with stuff by then.
45. Thrower | September 6th, 2008 at 12:07 am
If we are looking for the worst smear directed at any of the four candidates on the major tickets it would be that Obama is the Antichrist. Read this and other talking points at o.bamapost.com. Hard for the dems to go under this crap.
46. Mark Noonan | September 6th, 2008 at 3:38 am
kmg,
I may be wrong, but I am aware of no stricture in the Bible prohibiting a woman from ruling. In point of fact, other than one Egyptian monarch, it was only in the Christian era of western civilization where you find women running anything - Empress Theodora, Eleanor of Aquitaine, St. Joan of Arc, St. Catherine of Siena…these and scores of others, diverse as they are, have in common the fact of being forceful women who dominated their times and also being of the Christian theology. In our own time Margaret Thatcher, Mother Theresa and Condi Rice give us excellent examples of women strongly in the Christian tradition who forced the world to take note of their ideas and desires.
The Church recently gave consideration to the prospect of female priests and came to the inescapable conclusion that Jesus chose no women to be his Apostles - and there were plenty of women, starting with the Blessed Virgin, who rated high in Christ’s esteem and yet he still chose none of them for the unique task of being a priest. As to exactly why this should be, we don’t know - but my supposition is that Our Lord was giving us a view of the very different but absolutely complementary roles men and women play in the Body of Christ. God didn’t make men and women the same, and it stands to reason that he didn’t make them to perform the exact same roles.
47. Mark Noonan | September 6th, 2008 at 3:43 am
Nate,
You should learn a few things:
1. That the media will distort things.
2. That a lie, to be a lie, has to be a knowing attempt at transmitting to other people something which is false.
The media distorting what is simply a different way of stating a truth is not the same as a lie…which, for a good example, would be something along the lines of “I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski”.
48. Danish Artist | September 6th, 2008 at 7:32 am
The resident leftists are still on the “bridge to nowhere” talking point?
Their candidate voted against the Coburn amendment S11690 to HR3058 which would have diverted funds from the “bridge to nowhere” to rebuilding the I-10 twin span across Lake Pontchartrain damaged by Hurricane Katrina. A major highway and evacuation route.
Obama’s vote to divert funds from the earmark to the stricken area - NAY!!! OOPS!!!
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00262
But, mindless lemming Obamatons, please continue with that talking point. It shows your desperation and blind support of a candidate who rarely saw an earmark he did not like.
49. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Thanks for the explanation, Mark. I don’t agree with it, but I can see the reasoning.
50. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Kahn,
kmg, so the article in US and the stories in the media about Palin’s husbands DUI that fail to mention it was 22 years ago are ALSO lies? Correct? I mean, using your standard.
Or could neocon been using Obama’s cocaine use during that same time period to demonstrate that you were lying about Palin?
Please provide links to news articles about Todd Palin’s DUI that did not state when it happened.
Which of THESE lies you think is worse?
a. Palin is not the mother of her baby - her oldest daughter is.
Once that rumor was debunked, have you seen anyone still repeating it?
b. Palin wanted her ex-brother-in-law fired (failing to mention drinking in his state police car, death threats, and tasering a child with a police taser).
Palin did try to get he ex-brother-in-law fired and the police disciplined him for those acts. No one is saying he’s a great guy, but Palin overstepped her bounds in trying to get him fired.
c. or maybe the unsubstantiated affair rumors - take your pick -against McCain or Palin.
The story of Palin having an affair is no more unsubstantiated than the Sinclair stories you and others keep repeating. I have also only seen it in the National Enquirer. That’s hardly a respectable news source, but they did get the scoop on Edwards’ affair. I can’t see anyone arguing with a straight face that McCain did not have an affair with Cindy. He got a marraige license before he even got divorced.
Or do you think the attacks and vile statements about Palin’s 17 year old were worse?
What “attacks and vile statements” were made against Palin’s daughter? Saying that she was the mother of Palin’s baby? Only if you think it is shameful for an unmarried 17 year old to be pregnant. I saw that as an attack on Palin’s honesty because I think a pregnant 17 year old is nothing to be ashamed of. It happens.
51. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 9:34 am
neocon,
Good to know that you are a full supporter of lying about other people. I’ll keep that in mind when you post.
52. kimberly4victory | September 6th, 2008 at 9:36 am
kmg smirks: “The story of Palin having an affair is no more unsubstantiated than the Sinclair stories you and others keep repeating. I have also only seen it in the National Enquirer. That’s hardly a respectable news source, but they did get the scoop on Edwards’ affair. I can’t see anyone arguing with a straight face that McCain did not have an affair with Cindy. He got a marraige license before he even got divorced.”
So when the blogosphere discovered today (via an online court docket) that Scott Richter, a Palin associate, personally filed a sealing motion in Alaska Superior Court, well, conclusions were jumped to. Was Sarah Palin named as the other woman in a messy divorce action?
Well, since Richter’s September 3 motion, a copy of which you’ll find below, was denied yesterday, his divorce filings remain open to the public. And a TSG review of the 98-page file shows that the Palins are only mentioned in Richter’s sealing request.
According to the filing, Richter wanted the documents deemed confidential in a bid to cloak details about his home, workplace, and phone numbers because “reporters and news agencies” were using that information to contact him.
Richter, a 39-year-old contractor, noted that he is “friends and land owners in a remote cabin” with the Palins and, as a result, journalists were intruding on the “cabin life and private life” of him and his 11-year-old son.
Isn’t that an extra dollop of irony? Mr. Richter wants to protect his son from lunatics. What happens? The lunatics use that as “evidence” that Palin had an affair with Richter and descend on him to get the dirt.
The desperation of Obama supporters keeps becoming ever more clear. We’ve now had them smear Palin and her daughter as sluts, notably Conan O’Brien and his crude “crease” reference on his show last night. Palin’s mothering quality has also been slandered, and her decision to have a successful career derided by those who would normally sneer at stay-at-home moms.
53. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Retired Spook,
Palin lied when she said she was against the Bridge to Nowhere. By your logic we can automatically assume she is lying about anything else.
54. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Kimberly,
Where did you cut and paste that from? BTW, I agree that the Palin affair story is BS, just as the Sinclair story is BS. So why is it okay for the right to keep bringing it up? You said last week that Mark should delete the Sinclair posts, but he didn’t. Have you changed your mind?
55. kimberly4victory | September 6th, 2008 at 9:56 am
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/05/another-palin-smear-bites-the-dust/
Forgot to post the link (with the link to the documents).
“That’s hardly a respectable news source, but they did get the scoop on Edwards’ affair.”
So, since they got the Edwards’ affair right, you assumed they might go two for two?
And, you’re right. It isn’t a respectable news source and I’ll add Us Magazine, dailykos, and others to the list.
Where did I say Mark should delete the Sinclair posts? Which Sinclair posts are you referring to?
I think Obama’s cocaine use should be dropped, myself. It happened years ago. Same goes for McCain’s affair. He talked about it at Saddleback. It happened over 30 years ago. We need to move away from those stories.
My main beef is these terrible rumors about Palin get started and then are debunked almost immediately. I mean, come on, if you’re going to start a rumor, do a couple minutes of research first. Otherwise, you end up looking like a complete fool.
56. kmg | September 6th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Kimberly,
It was in a thread last weekend. Mark was deleting comments about Palin’s baby, calling them slanderous. I said if Mark had any integrity he would also delete FmrMarine’s slanderous posts about Obama having a gay affair and using drugs. You then said that you believed Mark would delete them and Obama must denounce the Palin rumors. I went back and tried to find the exchange and it appears that Mark did finally delete all of the comments. But, he has let stand the comments about the Sinclair slanders since then. If he is going to threaten to ban posters who repeat slanders against Palin, the right thing to do is do the same for those who slander Obama.
57. FactCheck | September 6th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
That a lie, to be a lie, has to be a knowing attempt at transmitting to other people something which is false.
Right. So Sarah Palin has been lying about the Bridge to Nowhere. And she was rather flagrantly caught lying about Troopergate, which is why she is presently under investigation (and showing that she was lying about how “open” she was going be regarding that investigation). She’s been lying about a bunch of stuff, and you eat it up, applaud, and beg for more.
So…why are you such a fan of lies, Mark? Do they comfort you? Do they make you feel better about your candidate? Are you just happy to hear what you want to hear, no matter if it’s a lie?