Althouse: "Why is Obama so vapid and hesitant and gutless? Why, to put it another way, does he risk going into political history as a dusky Dukakis?"

September 23, 2008

"Why is Obama so vapid and hesitant and gutless? Why, to put it another way, does he risk going into political history as a dusky Dukakis?"

Christopher Hitchens has some questions.

238 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 238 of 238

Roberto said...: Stoddard: You're full of shit.

September 22, 2008

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's hometown required women to pay for their own rape examinations while she was mayor, a practice her police chief fought to keep as late as 2000.

A former Alaskan lawmaker says it seems unlikely that Gov. Sarah Palin was unaware of Wasilla's policy.

Former state Rep. Eric Croft, a Democrat, sponsored a state law requiring cities to provide the examinations free of charge to victims.

He said the only ongoing resistance he met was from Wasilla, where Palin was mayor from 1996 to 2002.

"It was one of those things everyone could agree on except Wasilla," Croft told CNN. "We couldn't convince the chief of police to stop charging them."; 9/24/08, 12:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Why go through Big Media when you can go around it? Campbell Brown, whoever the fuck you are (and I honestly have no clue), your time is past. You don't get to set the terms of the debate.

So, yeah, suck it. Bitch.; 9/24/08, 12:32 AM
John Stodder said...: "Food fight?" A Governor misuses their office for a vendetta, illegally uses personnel files, and then squashes an investigation.

The governor fired an at-will employee. She didn't have to give a reason, and at the time she didn't. She offered him another job. There is no evidence that his firing was related to the tasering brother in law, only innuendo. The whole story is built on an assumption that can't be proven.

Illegally uses personnel files? Wooten signed a waiver which made his files public. There is no evidence, none, that Palin herself looked at them. Given this guy's record, did it not behoove officials in Alaska to find out what kind of person they were dealing with?

There is a dispute over whether the investigation is legitimate. The Reeps up in Alaska have filed a suit accusing the legislature of exceeding its constitutional authority. Given the aforementioned facts, there is reason to think the investigation is an abuse of power. It will be litigated, and we'll see.

Your statement is presented as fact, but every word of it is biased conjecture with little to no evidence to support it.

The reason I say your food fight is boring America is because it is evident to anyone not already a fervent Obama supporter that this investigation is political and the outrage over her behavior is phony. You will no doubt reply disingenuously, sobbing crocodile tears into your hankie over that poor, poor trooper who just tased his kid for good, clean fun. But you know you're just spinning, and you're not fooling anyone.

Attack Palin on her inexperience. Attack her for her views on abortion. Attack her because she favors ANWR and you think it's an abomination. Attack her because you've got a dual man-crush on Frank Murkowski and Tony Knowles. Attack her to protect Hillary's path to the White House. But this trooper crap is tiresome and wholly unpersuasive.; 9/24/08, 12:34 AM
Donn said...: Michael,

That's OLD news....here's an update for you; 9/24/08, 12:36 AM
John Stodder said...: Michael, that CNN story is full of holes. Only your bias blinds you to them.

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's hometown required women to pay for their own rape examinations while she was mayor, a practice her police chief fought to keep as late as 2000.

There hasn't been a single documented case of a rape victim paying the town for a rape exam. So, therefore, no women were "required" to do this. At worst, the sentence should read that the city had a policy that could have resulted in a victim paying for such an exam.

A former Alaskan lawmaker says it seems unlikely that Gov. Sarah Palin was unaware of Wasilla's policy.

Wow. I mean, wow. The story hinges on what somebody thinks is unlikely to have been the state of someone's awareness? What's his proof for this assertion?

Former state Rep. Eric Croft, a Democrat, sponsored a state law requiring cities to provide the examinations free of charge to victims.

He said the only ongoing resistance he met was from Wasilla, where Palin was mayor from 1996 to 2002.

There is no contemporaneous account of this alleged "ongoing resistance." And, obviously given the vague sourcing, nothing whatsoever to tie Palin to any such resistance. If they had a quote, a memo, a legislative position document, anything, it would be quoted and the PDF would be all over the country. Where is it? This must have been a very subtle campaign of resistance with no paper trail.

"It was one of those things everyone could agree on except Wasilla," Croft told CNN. "We couldn't convince the chief of police to stop charging them."

This legislator, a Palin opponent, is taken at his word that he knows that the chief of Wasilla police was charging victims for rape exams. But there isn't any documentary evidence of anyone actually being charged. Or of someone at the time complaining about it.

This story is gossamer-thin. All we really know is:

1. The legislature passed this law.

2. After it was passed and signed, the police chief of Wasilla complained about it what it would cost the city, citing figures that, however, had no basis in fact.

Everything else is political puff. Puff you like, so you're spreading it around because you want it to be true.; 9/24/08, 1:04 AM
Revenant said...: Attack Palin on her inexperience. Attack her for her views on abortion. Attack her because she favors ANWR and you think it's an abomination. [...] But this trooper crap is tiresome and wholly unpersuasive.

I disagree. I think Obama's fanboys should keep harping on "troopergate" as much as humanly possible.

After all, there are plenty of Americans who don't like Palin's views on abortion. There are plenty of misguided souls who think caribou are more important than oil. There are very few who want dirty cops on the police force -- mostly just other dirty cops, and they're probably all voting for Obama anyway. :); 9/24/08, 1:07 AM
Mark said...: News flash: michael is here for noise. Play with the bot if you want. I skim past for non-programmatic content.; 9/24/08, 1:19 AM
John Stodder said...: News flash: michael is here for noise.

Oh, I know. He's a nothing. He makes alphaliberal look like John Kenneth Galbraith.

But I thought it was time to probe the rape exam allegation and compare what facts are known with what outlets like CNN are presenting as news. I was surprised at the percentage of the story that is horseshit.

I think media bias is my personal biggest issue this campaign. I don't even know who I'm going to vote for, but I'm going to undress the media every time I see them try this kind of crap.; 9/24/08, 1:31 AM
Donn said...: JS:
I think media bias is my personal biggest issue this campaign.

Totally agree!; 9/24/08, 1:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Come to the dark side, John Stodder! We need people like you.; 9/24/08, 1:38 AM
Alex said...: But Victoria, Palin isn't a real woman. Didn't you get that memo?; 9/24/08, 1:42 AM
John Stodder said...: Come to the dark side, John Stodder! We need people like you.

Hah. According to my wife, my son and two of my best friends, I'm already there!

It's funny, because I know Althouse gets this too. "Oh just admit it, you're voting for McCain. You're a right winger. Stop denying it."

You get this if you are anything less than worshipful of Obama and even slightly critical of the Democratic party. It's weird b/c I started identifying with the Dems in my youth in part because I thought they were better on freedom of speech and expression.; 9/24/08, 1:45 AM
vbspurs said...: I think media bias is my personal biggest issue this campaign. I don't even know who I'm going to vote for, but I'm going to undress the media every time I see them try this kind of crap.

It's not in my personal Top 5 even, but I do have to say that in 2004, I voted with relish for Bush knowing that it was a big F-U to ALLL those people who tore into Bush then.

Perhaps this campaign was the most exciting in American presidential history, but 2004 was by far the nastiest I recall. I mean, Michael Moore got a freaking Palme D'Or for his anti-Bush "documentary" for Chrissakes.

I suppose the media and entertainment establishment thought that if the traditional route of op-eds, celebrity rock-the-vote campaigns, and a phalanx of anti-Bush books on the NYT's best-seller list wasn't enough to convince the American people not to vote Republican in 2004, then they had to fight even dirtier in 2008.

That's the only explanation I have for the media and internet meltdown we have witnessed this year. It's not short of disgraceful.; 9/24/08, 1:48 AM
Alex said...: Palme D'Or? Is that some hemorrhoid ointment?; 9/24/08, 1:51 AM
vbspurs said...: because I thought they were better on freedom of speech and expression.

Only if you agree with them, as you say.

Conservatives DO have to worry about their tendency to want to over-control things. It's an historical trait to wish to prevent or circumscribe rather than to enable.

This is why artists often are of Leftist politics. Offensive self-expression and outlandish creativity are positive traits in their milieu.

But it's not 1860 anymore. The Communist Revolution showed Leftists that the most powerful way to implement their outré ideas or to combat dissent against them was for stringent rules and regulations in both speech and behaviour.

It's not anything goes anymore. It's what we say goes, and everything else is intolerance and your -ism of choice.

Cheers,
Victoria; 9/24/08, 1:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Both sides have their totalitarians. The difference, to me, seems to be that the entire left these days is totalitarian. You have to subscribe to a certain set of ideas, or you are committing apostasy.

I see a much greater range of expression on the right. The people at Reason, National Review, Commentary, and Protein Wisdom aren't exactly all in lockstep with each other. But they're voting the same way.; 9/24/08, 2:01 AM
vbspurs said...: The difference, to me, seems to be that the entire left these days is totalitarian. You have to subscribe to a certain set of ideas, or you are committing apostasy.

The winning Left faction of the Democratic Party is certainly that.

I've been reading the various Hillary Clinton forums, and though she may be a snake in the grass, her supporters sound level-headed.

Sure, they are Democrats in every way -- but they do not hate America, nor think she has been force of more bad than good, needing not just correction, but punishment.

THAT is the precise faction that Obama embodies personally by his own philosophy and associations, as well as enabling in his followers.

I tell you, I would've preferred Hillary Clinton any day. Ugh, I feel dirty saying that but it's true.; 9/24/08, 2:06 AM
vbspurs said...: Case in point:

The Diggbats have updinged this story unto the front page. It purports to claim that Dubya will declare martial law on October 1st, and cancel the Presidential Elections.

US Under Martial Law Starting October 1st!!

They base this on the fact that an Army Brigade has been recalled from Iraq to handle "domestic terrorism" starting on October 1st.

Like they helped out during Hurricane Katrina.........

Cheers,
Victoria; 9/24/08, 2:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Michael: "Put up or shut up."

Why should I put up anything? I have given you two chances to explain why the press failed to vet Obama over the Rev. Wright issue and both times you have ducked the issue, preferring to write about Palin's lack of press conferences. That might be a fascinating subject for you but it doesn't address the issue I raised in my post--why did Obama get a free ride on Rev. Wright from the press until it was too late for Hillary to win?; 9/24/08, 2:45 AM
Anonymous said...: There's a lot of astro-turfing by Michael on this board. Like I've been told by countless others "Don't feed the trolls."; 9/24/08, 6:15 AM
Simon said...: Campbell Brown:
"By treating Sarah Palin different from the other candidates in this race...."

Whiny little brat. If the media hadn't treated her differently to the other candidates in this race, maybe they wouldn't have found themselves shut out. This is a situation that the media has 100% brought on themselves, and the fact is that the media needs Palin to play their game a lot more than she needs to play it. They know it, and it kills them.; 9/24/08, 7:17 AM
Unknown said...: Here is an article about the alleged Davis payouts that should shed more light on the subject. It calls the charges in the NY TImes article "demonstrably false."

Of course, since it comes from the McCain campaign itself, Michael and AlphaLiberal will completely ignore it, no matter how objective or verifiable any of the content may be. More reasonable partisans, though, it should be informative.; 9/24/08, 8:26 AM
Unknown said...: That's OLD news....here's an update for you

Donn, haven't you learned by now? Michael ignores all exculpatory evidence concerning charges against conservatives.; 9/24/08, 8:28 AM
Henry said...: Michael said: Read the transcript.

Ah, I did. He's on board with the Senatorial status quo. Okay with the plan if it has a few extra oversight bells and whistles and throws a little money off to voters. Sounds rational, but hardly memorable.; 9/24/08, 8:41 AM
dick said...: Interesting video of the Fannie Mae CEO calling Obma and the Dems the "Family" and "conscience" of Fannie Mae - and this is one of Obama's biggest supporters and advisors:

mhtml:{F13FC907-ED16-4625-B99F-FC7402DA3B1C}mid://00000032/!x-usc:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0; 9/24/08, 8:45 AM
Unknown said...: Well blow me down. Evidence that the city of Wasilla paid for at least two rape kits after the law was passed but before it went into effect. In other words, the city spent money they weren't obligated to spend.

Watch the left spin this as an irresponsible use of city funds.; 9/24/08, 9:23 AM
Unknown said...: I take that back. I don't think the left will spin this as a misuse of city funds. Instead, I think that they'll claim that fiscal conservatives have no business supporting someone who would be so doggone liberal in their spending practices.; 9/24/08, 9:27 AM
Joe said...: Back to the original point of this post; Hitchens is entertaining, but he's out to lunch on this one. The moment he spoke at the Democratic national convention in 2004, his fate was sealed. Power brokers saw a charismatic empty suit who was black no less and ran with it. The amount of flattery and ass kissing Obama received stoked his ego to incredible proportions--you don't see as much of it now, but a year ago, messianic words would flow from the fool's mouth.

To an extent, this applies to all politicians--they spend so much time with sycophants, they project this onto the larger populace. Hence, Dodd really did think he had a chance of becoming president (and, truth be told, if all his opponents died of the flu, he could have been.); 9/24/08, 12:20 PM
Joe said...: Few politicians win by simply attacking their opponent. This past week we've had warnings of complete financial collapse. This was a chance for Obama to shine--to not just say things, but to sponsor a bill in congress--yet he's been AWOL on this issue. It's one of the most astonishing displays of political cowardice I've ever seen.; 9/24/08, 12:24 PM
Joe said...: Hell, Obama could have sewn up the election by announcing that saving the country came first and taking over the creation of a congressional solution to the wall street crisis. Assuming his ideas weren't dumb as shit (a dubious proposition), Obama's credentials as a leader would have become so indisputable, he could have wrapped himself in the flag and canceled half the debates.

Instead, he's so "vapid and hesitant and gutless" that he's letting his lapdogs do nothing but attack McCain.; 9/24/08, 12:29 PM
Shanna said...: To put it a touch more precisely, what I suspect in his case is that he had no idea of winning this time around.

I don't know if this is the truth or not, but I think this explanation is fundamentally an attempt to be CHARITABLE to Obama on his motives. This guy has very little experience and has been running for president since day 1, even though he himself said he wasn't ready for that.

So, to say that he was really not the arrogant guy he would have to be to think he was ready, we posit that he really thought he'd have time to learn some more and build up his resume before he really ran. I would think much more highly of him to think that this is something that got out of hand, then if I really believe that he thought in 2006 that he was totally ready to be president.

In a related note, I think better of Sarah Palin (compared to Obama) that she didn't run for President with only 2 years experience at a high office.; 9/24/08, 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael: "I asked before and will ask again:

Name one candidate who never faced the press for questioning after this period of time from nomination.

Put up or shut up."

I don't know why you keep refusing to answer my original question. If the press had vetted Obama the way they did Palin, Hillary would have gotten the nomination, not Obama. Obama got a free ride with wacko Rev. Jeremiah Wright till it was too late for Hillary to win. Deal with that point, will you? Everyone I raise it you talk about Palin.

I've raised the issue three times now. The press simply didn't vet Obama.

As for your contention that Palin has never talked to the media, she has. She has given interviews to Gibson, Hannity and, currently, Katie Couric. Plus there have been at least a 1,000 investigative or reportorial pieces about her. Why didn't the press do that to Obama 18 months ago? Everyone in the blogosphere knew about the Rev. Wright. Except the media. That went over their heads. The truth is they didn't want to know. Early on they decided Obama was their guy. No one wanted to be the first mainstream reporter to bring up Jeremiah Wright (and thus bring down Barack Obama.); 9/24/08, 2:57 PM
Joe said...: Wow, McCain just did what I suggested Obama do. In a time of crisis, act presidential. In overwrought drama, McCain "suspended" his campaign and rushed back to Washington. Obama now looks like a complete tool.

This only furthers my point that Obama is a true empty suit who has to be told what to do and what to say by his handlers who are, in turn, so consumed with hate that they've lost all sense. Expect a criticism of McCain (and for Biden to say something stupendously dumb--besides President Roosevelt talking on TV in 1929 and asking someone in a wheelchair to stand up and be recognized.); 9/24/08, 3:06 PM
former law student said...: There hasn't been a single documented case of a rape victim paying the town for a rape exam.

At a thousand bucks a pop, I'm not surprised.; 9/24/08, 10:58 PM
former law student said...: If the press had vetted Obama the way they did Palin, Hillary would have gotten the nomination, not Obama. Obama got a free ride with wacko Rev. Jeremiah Wright till it was too late for Hillary to win.

I disagree.The press is giving Palin a complete pass on her wacky faith-healing, tongue-speaking, "pray away the gay," "Jews for Jesus"-inviting church.

What the press is investigating is what Palin did, or ordered to be done, not what her pastor said.; 9/24/08, 11:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael: "Put up or shut up."

Why should I shut up when three times now you refuse to deal with my point? The media failed to vet Obama over Rev. Wright until it was too late for Hillary to win the nomination.; 9/25/08, 2:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Former Law Student: "What the press is investigating is what Palin did, or ordered to be done, not what her pastor said."

Obama did plenty. He sat in the pew week after week while Jeremiah Wright preached anti-white whacko racism from the pulpit. He asked Wright to marry him and Michelle. He had Wright baptize their daughters. He called Wright his spiritutal mentor. Then he threw his white grandmother under the bus to defend Wright.

Obama was awash in Wright's racist ways. Must have been. He has the most leftist voting record of anyone in the senate (when he actually bothered to vote that is).; 9/25/08, 2:22 PM
gordontaylor said...: If the Fifth Estate was even nominally doing its job, Sen Obama would already be toast, based entirely on his associations with scummy figures. Obama OWNS this financial meltdown because of his ties to Fannie and Freddie.

The YouTube video on this article is just about the best I have seen yet to demonstrate that the Democrats OWN this crisis.; 9/27/08, 3:34 PM