They tried to use his Church against him.
They said that he was too inexperience for the job.
Now they are saying that he hangs-out with terrorists.
The pitbull in lipstick is on the loose. It’s time to bite somebody! Didn’t Senator John McCain say that he would fight a fair fight?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here’s an interesting article to go with it and accompanying video and if you view the video you’ll find another video where she repeated the same the next day.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081005/ap_on_el_pr/palin_s_words_analysis
Fair fight bollocks.
The ‘Republican decision-makers’ including big boy Dick Cheney are pulling the strings.
Anything for power lads?
Just not cricket, the way these people play.
Jolly bad sports.
May the Almighty give the American voters some sense for at least one day, to put the Democrats in place.
Peace.
What this does show, is the complete contempt that the Republican machinery has for the American citizens, that it could bring two such inappropriate characters to the voters and expect them to have a chance at the Presidency.
That indicates the level of control it has, over much of the media etc, that it can expect such an outcome.
Interesting indeed.
I’m NOT just any a stupid old girl. I’m the governor of Alaska.
Obama has decided to fight back with the keating scandal which many of us have forgotten. The difference is that it is about economic affairs.
Don’t fool yourself David. As we draw nearer to election day the fight is going to get nastier.
So brace your self.
Carson C. Cadogan // October 6, 2008 at 6:53 am
Don’t fool yourself David. As we draw nearer to election day the fight is going to get nastier.
CCC, you are so right.
—————————————————————————————————————————————
The McCain camp is catching at straws and will go to the scruff of the earth to do whatever he and his camp can, even if it comes back to haunt them; they will take the risk. McCain is showing up his true colors – nasty behavior more and more each day. More likely than not, the smears that came up during Obama’s primaries, will be resurrected. However, my gut feeling tells me that even though the smears will be a reminder to some, I’m not so sure that they will do any significant damage, if any at all, to Obama. Since the bailout fiasco, people tend to be more concern about the economy, job lost, etc.
Obama had said from the inception of his running for President that he would not go down in the mud (not his words) — run the traditional election campaign with dirty/personal attacks. Therefore, it might be somewhat hard for him to renege, especially so late in the game. I do think however, he needs to respond but in a way that still keeps him above the fray. Obama needs to spend his time on the issues that are of concern to the masses, keep focus and do not be side-tracked by McCain’s camp or others. Time is of the essence. It will be over sooner than we can imagine.
I am more than ever convinced that Palin is simply being used to the fullest. She is being played like a fiddle. There is none so blind as those who cannot see. She was not even aware and was caught by surprise when she heard on the stump that McCain had pulled out of Michigan.
This leads me to believe that she is only being told what she NEEDS to know, and apparently, not being kept abreast of what is going on in terms of the electorate.
Where is it written that the President and VP of the US have to be particularly intelligent?
Shight, they’ve survived with Reagan and his VP for 8 years, they’ve done the Bush thing for twelve, and the Democrats like Kennedy, Johnson and Clinton have proven themselves to be bed specialists. Nixon with all his talent was found to be a cheat; Carter was too fair (neither of the two completed two terms) and now here we are. The truth is as was said earlier, that presidents do not call the shots
I’m surprised, up to now, you people just don’t get it. You think big time politics and business is a girlie, sunday school picnic?
Not even locally.
Why don’t you wise up?
You ever heard of a man called Mr. Money? He’s the REAL king who rules.
Well, you don’t know until you know.
Problem is, – some people never get to know.
That’s why they sit around waiting for manna to drop from heaven; waiting for Jesus to “come again;” looking for a “saviour;” believing “‘someday soon’ the wicked and the greedy are going to get their just desert,” etc. etc.
OK then – keep waiting and go along with the popular ideas. (The masses have never been right… )
In the meantime, the one-eyed man who governs in blind man country, laughs all the way to the bank.
I am now convinced that Obama will clinch it, even with the Badley effect.
All polls point in one direction!
The Republicans can only survive if conjur up a good scandal.
On a day when the stock market is free falling, Sarah “Pitbull” Palin is trying desperately with her lies and manufactured stories to link Barack Obama to terrorists and terrorism….the Republicans are indeed desperate, and it is apparently clear, that they do not want to address the economic issues and the financial crisis which they themselves created. They are more interested in changing the central subject of the campaign which is economics.Indeed,the Republicans are history ,and the future is definitely looking good for the Democrats in terms of the White House. Nonetheless, with thirty days to go, anything is possible, and the Democrats need to be extremely vigilant in relation to the tactics and strategies of the Republicans. Be careful of Republican swiftboating!!
The current economic crisis demands that we understand John McCain’s attitudes about economic oversight and corporate influence in federal regulation. Nothing illustrates the danger of his approach more clearly than his central role in the savings and loan scandal of the late ’80s and early ’90s.
John McCain was accused of improperly aiding his political patron, Charles Keating, chairman of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association. The bipartisan Senate Ethics Committee launched investigations and formally reprimanded Senator McCain for his role in the scandal — the first such Senator to receive a major party nomination for president.
At the heart of the scandal was Keating’s Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which took advantage of deregulation in the 1980s to make risky investments with its depositors’ money. McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating with federal regulators tasked with preventing banking fraud, and championed legislation to delay regulation of the savings and loan industry — actions that allowed Keating to continue his fraud at an incredible cost to taxpayers.
Youtube video: “Keating Economics – John McCain and the making of a financial crisis”, watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g72BuIvMbWY
or at http://www.keatingeconomics.com
@ESTEBAN AGOSTO REID
The terrorist slur by Pailin is an obvious diversionary tactic. However the economic meltdown maybe the issue which could still propel Obama into the White House. It is the one issue which the Americans seem unwilling to trust McCain and Pailin to manage.
It is a bitter pill for Obama because the current economic state favours him and it is likely to continue for awhile, on the flip side he will have the herculean task to try to turn it around.
Hi David:
Did anyone actually listen to her speech? The New York Times wrote about Obama’s association with the unrepentant terrorist, Ayers. Palin simply referred to information in the NYT article. Rather than examine the article and scrutinise Obama more carefully given this revelation, the article is ignored, and Pailin is attacked. Was Hillary attacked when she publicly expressed her concerns about Obama’s relationship with the same Ayers? No.
Regards,
Researching
The only problem I got wid de whole ting is… if Obama does not win, the talk is going to be: “he lost because he is black” and for no other reason.
The public can expect personality attacks on candidates. In the last election Kerry was attacked unmercifully. Obama will/is hitting back with shots at McCain too. I dont know to what extent character assassination influences a large number of voters.
In the end THE TRUTH IS most voters vote for the person they like… the person who is more ‘personable.’ Thus the popularity of both Obama and Pailin.
But Snake,
If Obama does not win, even a blind man could see that it WAS because of “race”
Is this relevant to the issue at hand? This was posted on a mailing list of ‘old Harrisonians’ and for whatever reason just didn’t go anywhere. I wonder why…
Posted by John Blackman ~ ~ ~ ~
This matter of race has fascinated me from a boy. When I read Ebony magazine, for example, I wondered how was it that people of a certain complexion who in Barbados were considered white, proudly called themselves and were described by others as black in the US. Of course, Uncle Sam don’t play. If one drop out of 32 of your blood is black, then you are black. So they would get away with that down here, but not stateside. Historian Ronnie Hughes wrote an interesting article a few years ago in which he said that there are a number of Barbadians who pass for white who have black ancestors in their immediate past.
All I care about is the truth. In a society like hours, colour, a light one, brings with it certain privileges. My father, who was from Richmond Gap, (near St. Leonards) often told me about his walks through nearby Strathclyde with the strict divisions. That was 50 short years ago. If those Presidents and some who live among us had “negro” blood, as it was then called, and did not wish to acknowledge it for fear of ostracism, loss of prestige whatever, it shows me how powerful this phenomenon called race can be.
I know that there are going to be as many views as people on such issues.
——————————————————————————–
From: VICTOR GOODING [mailto:vgooding@rogers.com]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 9:08 PM
To: Ian Estwick; Harewood, Raymond; SMOKEY BURKE; etc.
Subject: Black U.S. Presidents before Obama?
Don’t recall if we had this on before but how do you feel about all this ‘strange’ research? Do you even care?
Ever since the nation first met Illinois Sen. Barack Obama in 2004, his race has been called into question more times than Michael Jackson’s. Obama is clearly a black man, but is this really a breakthrough? Some blacks say Obama isn’t “black enough,” which seems ironic because for many blacks, former President Bill Clinton was “black enough.” In 2001, Clinton was honored as the nation’s “first black president” at the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) Annual Awards Dinner in Washington, D.C.
Were there other “black” presidents? Some historians have reason to believe people don’t really understand the genealogy of past U.S. Presidents. Research shows at least five U.S. presidents had black ancestors and Thomas Jefferson, the nation’s third president, was considered the first black president, according to historian Leroy Vaughn, author of Black People and Their Place in World History.
Vaughn’s research shows Jefferson was not the only former black U.S. president. Who were the others? Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge. But why was this unknown? How were they elected president? All five of these presidents never acknowledged their black ancestry.
Jefferson, who served two terms between 1801 and 1809, was described as the “son of a half-breed Indian squaw and a Virginia mulatto father,” as stated in Vaughn’s findings. Jefferson also was said to have destroyed all documentation attached to his mother, even going to extremes to seize letters written by his mother to other people.
President Andrew Jackson, the nation’s seventh president, was in office between 1829 and 1837. Vaughn cites an article written in The Virginia Magazine of History that Jackson was the son of an Irish woman who married a black man. The magazine also stated that Jackson’s oldest brother had been sold as a slave.
Lincoln, the nation’s 16th president, served between 1861 and 1865. Lincoln was said to have been the illegitimate son of an African man, according to Leroy’s findings. Lincoln had very dark skin and coarse hair and his mother allegedly came from an Ethiopian tribe. His heritage fueled so much controversy that Lincoln was nicknamed “Abraham Africanus the First” by his opponents.
President Warren Harding, the 29th president, in office between 1921 and 1923, apparently never denied his ancestry. According to Vaughn, William Chancellor, a professor of economics and politics at Wooster College in Ohio, wrote a book on the Harding family genealogy. Evidently, Harding had black ancestors between both sets of parents. Chancellor also said that Harding attended Iberia College, a school founded to educate fugitive slaves.
Coolidge, the nation’s 30th president, served between 1923 and 1929 and supposedly was proud of his heritage. He claimed his mother was dark because of mixed Indian ancestry. Coolidge’s mother’s maiden name was “Moor” and in Europe the name “Moor” was given to all blacks just as “Negro” was used in America. It later was concluded that Coolidge was part black.
The only difference between Obama and these former presidents is that none of their family histories were fully acknowledged by others. Even though Obama is half-white, he strongly resembles his Kenyan father. And not only is Obama open about his ancestry, most people acknowledge him as a black man, which is why people will identify Obama, if elected, as the first black president of the United States.
—– Original Message —–
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: Black U.S. Presidents before Obama?
Alrightee then. Let’s see if the kolidge scholars can solve this thorny enigma. Perhaps there are 4 Qs that need to be resolved before a final conclusion can be reached. I propose we settle ~
1. How many shades of black are there?
2. How many shades white are there?
Question: is it possible a certain shade of black may be identical with a certain shade of white? If so, is there a word that identifies this?
3. Does ‘black’ or ‘white’ refer to the color of ones blood? or to a gene that may be floating around in the stream?
If it’s a gene, is it identifyable? If all of Mankind came from a single root stock that migrated out of Africa, then all ‘races’ would have this gene. If the single root was ‘black’ – then all of Mankind is black despite any ‘appearences.’ ? ? ?
(Have you ever seen a naked woman in a yellow dress?) ?? ?
4. Does ‘black’ or ‘white’ refer to ones behavioral style, or a particular point-of-view? OR to pin point: what does ‘being black’ actually mean???
OK ~ horses off 🙂
Facts // October 7, 2008 at 1:00 pm
But Snake,
If Obama does not win, even a blind man could see that it WAS because of “race”
__________________________-
No truer words have been spoken!
JC // October 7, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Facts // October 7, 2008 at 1:00 pm
…If Obama does not win, even a blind man could see that it WAS because of “race”
————————————————–
Facts, although you are 125% right on this, trust me; the Republicans, Democrats, and many others all over the spectrum would say things like, “it was to do with his character”; “people did not know enough about him.” Basically, there will be excuses after excuses.
There is none so blind as those who cannot see. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out – plain and simple.
Hello Facts // October 7, 2008 at 1:00 pm and Sapidillo // October 7, 2008 at 2:21 pm …
What evidence have you to support your contentions?
Seeing it was the ‘whites’ who put Obama where he is – i.e. heading the Democratic ticket, and presently have him running out front in the ‘race’ … I can’t see where ‘race’ is going to be THE reason, should he lose.
BTW ~ since you feel this is a ‘race’ issue, should he win, will you come here and say “it was the whites who put him in” ? ? ?
JC/Spidillio,
Thanks for your comments.
I think I have to correct you on this, Sapadillio.
You mentioned that “there is none so blind as those WHO CANNOT SEE”. I’d like to rephrase it as follows; “There is none so blind as those who REFUSE to see”
Over and out – Facts
I watch all the grimaces, the looks away and heard the reference “That one” and the direct third person “He”. To end it all, the refusal to offer a hand shake and leaving the hand standing. There has been an obvious disdain followed the next day by some very steamy provoking platform talks. But with all said and done Barack won the debate yet there are so many intellect that refuse to accept this. For me this means that and this Presidency is going to bring about some serious ill feelings in America, with people behaving very extraordinarily bad.
That One Voted
There have been name calling and calling no name
Have been mud slinging and Palin’s disgusted shame
A role of attack pit-bull wearing lipstick
This hairdo, designer lens politician is John McCain’s trick
Obviously she’s placed there to be a catch your eye
No stunning beauty, it’s just that she’s not a guy
Elegance questionable with her repeated blink
Voters looking on don’t know what to think
On debate night MaCain laid the worst blow
Though it seems unnoticed you and I know
Executive positions like the Presidency you must understand
Don’t call people “That one” or refuse to shake their hand
For more Acrostic Poetry about Barack Obama see a copy of
Path To The White House
Sarah Palin crashed and may cost McCain severely after this story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7662820.stm
I see that the Replican VP Candidate, Sarah Palin, is now attacking the media, i.e. with her ‘Liberal Media’ vocalisations etc.
I guess not everyone can have a Republican (or is it Reptilian?) bias as does Fox News, does that automatically target one for attack?
The thing is here, you do understand that she is also attacking Freedom of Speech?
George Bush’s ‘if you are not with us, you are against us’, spoken by a right-wing conservative.
Very worrying indeed.
And these people actually have a chance of getting into the White House with such a ‘cultish’ outlook?
More than worrying!
Ah. According to reports in the media, absentee voters is upstate New York have received ballots with the Democrat candidate named as ‘Barack Osama’.
Claimed by authorities to be ‘human error’.
Hey, if you believe that, I’ve got a bridge to sell you!
Only after being proof read 3 times I may add.
Hi Snake @7/10/08,
If Obama wins, yes, it would be the Whites who put him there.
Surprise surprise Colin Powell throws his support behind Barack Obama. Will this have an influence you think? We think that ordinarily it wouldn’t but there seems to be sense that the rats are jumping ship.
After his UN “authoratative” WMD assessment of Iraq, I don’t know whether his endorsement is good or bad for Obama.
I think that he distanced himself from Bush may help his cause.
I think it is a great move by Powell and Obama this will eat up another 3 or 4 days of press and TV time thereby cutting down on the time that Mccain will get in the press which he so badly needs to build a positive image and to make gains in the polls, just another nail in his coffin, this is masterful timing and planning.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.