New Sherwood

Palin praises Clinton – again

Sarah Palin is booed at a rally in Pennsylvania for praising Hilary Clinton.

Is a pattern emerging already?

I wonder if McCain’s thinking goes like this: “By choosing Palin I have energized the base without having to bother anymore with social conservatism. Now that I finally have the conservative base locked up, Palin can concentrate on winning the Clinton Democrats.”

If that’s the McCain-Palin plan, it’s a big mistake. A liberal campaign will lose the election for the Republicans – Palin or no Palin.

About these ads

August 31, 2008 - Posted by | Uncategorized

16 Comments »

  1. I watched this – The speech in which the booing came for Clinton was actually the exact same speech Palin gave when she accepted the VP position after McCain’s announcement on Friday. She referred to Clinton’s cracking the “glass ceiling”. No doubt her pick was an attempt by McCain to lure disgruntled women Clinton supporters, but Palin did not praise Clinton’s politics. Since what she said was the same thing she said after the announcement Friday morning: if it was a problem Saturday, it should have also been a problem from the time of her announcement on Friday.

    Comment by Alan Phipps | August 31, 2008 | Reply

  2. “…if it was a problem Saturday, it should have also been a problem from the time of her announcement on Friday.”

    It was a problem for me on Friday, but not a deal killer. It’s one thing to mention it in an acceptance speech; another thing to build a campaign around it.

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  3. Perhaps she just needs more speechwriters…

    Comment by Alan Phipps | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  4. I am delighted. :)

    Sarah Palin is an unabashedly pro-life, pro-family, pro second amendment fiscal conservative. There is no way, no how that Obama will nominate any but the most liberal candidate for Supreme Court justice, and that’s an important consideration. Obama is dangerous, and dangerously anti-life.

    McCain/Palin may not be perfect, but sometimes the old adage that the perfect is the enemy of the good makes good sense.

    Comment by annabenedetti | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  5. Campaign stump speeches are in constant evolution. If a particular line bombs repeatedly, it will be removed. At this point, it seems they’re still experimenting with the various lines of attack. I’ve seen no evidence whatsoever that they’re positioning Palin as a liberal. They won’t get the hard core gender feminists, and they won’t try. Their real target is the disaffected blue collar types in PA-OH-WV who went with Hillary over Obama.

    Comment by Chris | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  6. “I am delighted. :)”

    And not without reason. Maybe I’ll be just as delighted in a couple of weeks.

    “Sarah Palin is an unabashedly pro-life, pro-family, pro second amendment fiscal conservative …”

    She has been thus, ’tis very true. Will she remain so? Here’s what I’m looking for. I want to know whether Sarah Palin, on her own (that is, without being asked by a reporter), is going to bring up the pro-life issue even once in this campaign. That will tell us something more about the “unabashedly” part of your statement.

    “There is no way, no how that Obama will nominate any but the most liberal candidate for Supreme Court justice, and that’s an important consideration. Obama is dangerous, and dangerously anti-life.”

    You’re right about that.

    “McCain/Palin may not be perfect, but sometimes the old adage that the perfect is the enemy of the good makes good sense.”

    Also true. But I have yet to be convinced that a McCain administration is, on balance, going to be truly “good”. His willingness to destroy innocent human beings for stem cell research, and his enthusiasm for reckless foreign wars, are big strikes against him. His pro-life position is so incoherent as to seem driven by politics rather than conviction. The events of last week were encouraging, but for my part the deal isn’t sealed.

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  7. “Their real target is the disaffected blue collar types in PA-OH-WV who went with Hillary over Obama.”

    Those are liberal voters, are they not? In order to win those votes you have to run a liberal campaign. “Bait and switch” – a campaign with zero integrity. I can’t vote for that.

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 1, 2008 | Reply

  8. I want to know whether Sarah Palin, on her own (that is, without being asked by a reporter), is going to bring up the pro-life issue even once in this campaign. That will tell us something more about the “unabashedly” part of your statement.
    Her voting record is what is important, to this point. Her pro-life words would be empty unless they were acted upon. Her five children stand as beautiful reminders of her pro-life and pro-family ideals and will be a reminder every time they are seen, and a condemnation to all those who have aborted.

    As I write this, it has been announced that her daughter is pregnant, will be having the baby, and is marrying the father. Now, this is very sad, but it can be a witness to all other young girls, and to parents with daughters in this situation that there is another choice besides abortion, that instead of being “punished with a baby”, as Obama says, they can be blessed with a baby, as God writes straight with crooked lines. THERE IS A CHOICE FOR LIFE.


    But I have yet to be convinced that a McCain administration is, on balance, going to be truly “good”

    I have no hope for “truly ‘good’”. I can only hope for the staying of evil. I am not so much voting for McCain as I am voting against Obama. Did you see the letter to the editor from Saul Alinsky’s son in which he praised Obama for adhering so closely to the Alinsky method? Obama is dangerous for this country. McCain at least slows the pace – Obama will send us leaping and bounding into marxism such as we have not yet seen in this country.

    Comment by annabenedetti | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  9. The blue collar voters in WV-OH-PA I had in mind are not necessarily “liberal” as you and I think of that term. They have real anxieties about the culture and the economy, and their identification with the Democratic party is often rooted deeply in their family histories. They don’t usually trust Republicans, because they’ve been told the GOP is the party of corporate elites and country clubbers. In fact, it’s now more the other way around; the super-wealthy and the super-educated have been trending Democratic. Sarah Palin has an opportunity to break through and talk to these blue collar voters in a language and style they understand, and to win a fair hearing for GOP solutions.

    Comment by Chris | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  10. “Sarah Palin has an opportunity to break through and talk to these blue collar voters in a language and style they understand, and to win a fair hearing for GOP solutions.”

    If true, Chris, it will be a conservative campaign ahead. I hope you’re right. Time will tell. No more talk of breaking “glass ceilings” these non-liberal WV-OH-PA blue collar workers can’t even dream about.

    But let’s keep something else in mind. Ideological liberalism – not just blue collar unionism – permeates the working classes as well. Liberalism isn’t restricted to blue state elites by any stretch. Feminists run the corporations, HR departments, and union halls who hire these people, and a large percentage of their workers have assimilated their political convictions. This was true even back in the 80s during my brief stint as a Teamster working for UPS.

    These are Hilary’s people. If Palin is going to appeal to them on their own terms, she’ll need a liberal, feminist message.

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  11. These are Hilary’s people. If Palin is going to appeal to them on their own terms, she’ll need a liberal, feminist message.

    I beg to differ. All she needs to do is be a woman and she has done that well. :)

    I say this because I read many reaction comments from Hillary supporters who feel (note, feel – not necessarily think) betrayed because Hillary was not selected to be VP. They are out for blood and want to get back at the Dems. So – they say they’ll vote for Palin.

    I don’t vote on gender, I vote on issues and credentials and I admit, sometimes I hedge my bets. But if THEY want to vote for Palin simply because she’s a woman? Well, I think we should take that vote. Because four years from now, when Hillary is back, they’ll take it back. Might as well use it while we can.

    Comment by annabenedetti | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  12. “I beg to differ. All she needs to do is be a woman and she has done that well.”

    If you’re right, dear Annabenedetti, then she’ll campaign on the principles she’s always believed in and will not modify her message to appease the Hilary camp. Let’s wait and see what happens …

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  13. As I wait with you, I will hope and pray! I just received this today – what do you think?

    http://www.ninevehjourney.org/

    Comment by annabenedetti | September 2, 2008 | Reply

  14. Jeff -
    Hope you noticed that in the big speech last night there wasn’t a single mention of Hillary or the glass ceiling. I think the campaign got the message.

    Was that a barn-burner of a speech or what?

    Comment by Chris | September 5, 2008 | Reply

  15. Annabenedetti: The Ninevah Journey looks great. We’ll try to participate!

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 6, 2008 | Reply

  16. “Hope you noticed that in the big speech last night there wasn’t a single mention of Hillary or the glass ceiling. I think the campaign got the message.”

    Yes, I was grateful for that, although there was still this ridiculous little gem:

    “And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity.”

    Whatever.

    “Was that a barn-burner of a speech or what?”

    As political speeches go these days, it was top-notch. She’s a marvelous speaker and an endearing personality. Coming of age in the Reagan era, though, I miss the days when political speeches had actual content.

    Comment by Jeff Culbreath | September 6, 2008 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers

%d bloggers like this: