I have to disagree with Roland Martin…
because he doesn’t go far enough.
The game, if you can call it that, of politics is a hardball game - it means that peoples feelings are going to get hurt and it mean that public humiliation is a part of the package.
You go into politics if you have a back made of iron and a stomach made of steel. If you make the wrong choice you should be held more accountable because almost invariably you made the choice for others.
If you are in government it is even worse for you. I agree that politicians should be fully scrutinised - why not, they are the ones who are going to be spending your money - it isn’t theirs - it’s yours. Even those who are peskily unemployed pay taxes - maybe not direct taxes but indirect taxes - so it is their money, too.
So why should Joe Biden treat Sarah Palin with kid gloves? Why? She said she didn’t blink when asked to be VP - patently stupid on her part but the more people see of her they wonder at the intellect of the Alaskan people who put her into power - more so now those in the US who actually back her as some sort of leader. She is a scripted stage comedienne! And not that good at that.
That may come over as confidence - it really isn’t, it means you have someone else writing your stuff.
If her quips had been off the cuff and were hers - I may have a little respect for her. But alas, no.
Why has the bar been lowered so much to accommodate her? This is the world of politics as I said - I despise Maggie Thatcher but you can bet if there had been some for of public debate the bar would not have been lowered for her - you can add to that, do you think that people would sofen their approach if it has been Hillary Clinton? You know the answer is no, so why Palin?
Hell - she can kill a wolf from a plane, skin a moose and walk in the Arctic snow - so she is tough.
Let her be? We know they won’t - and I will admit I could be wrong and she could do a good job - I can’t see it, but it is possible. She indicates that Biden has been in congress a long time - yet her running-mate has been there a long time, too. Was she in 3rd or 4th grade when McCain began spouting his bile?
She claims to be the new thing, the youth, something new that Washington needs. No she isn’t - she is an ill-educated sheep who will be thrown to the side if McCain wins. She is too stupid to realise that she is on the ticket for no other reason than a political stunt. Yes - that is how stupid Sarah Palin is - she was brought in to pick up some women voters and appeal to what else she could.
Some say she is as straight talking as John McCain - as if that is a seal of approval. Man, this woman can’t even say what newspapers she reads! I know if you had Condi Rice up there she could answer that question. If you had Hillary Clinton not only could she tell you she could say that she knew the person she was talking about and how he/she felt while giving that interview. Palin? She could tell you what? If you vote for John McCain you are voting for Sarah Palin - and that says more about people than anything else.
Sarah Palin, Roland, is an idiot! That is what you forgot to add.
Will Rhodes
alisonrhodes
Julie P
ReyMac
The nation already is skeptical about the fairness and objectivity of the mainstream media regarding election coverage … so, why in the world is Gwen Ifill the debate moderator, when she is writing a book about Obama? The moderator in a debate … especially one of this importance and magnitude … should be seen as completely fair, objective and above reproach. This is a terrible choice, and could easily have been remedied by choosing from hundreds of other more objective potential moderators. I can imagine the outcry if Michelle Malkin, or Ann Coulter was chosen as the moderator for the first Vice Presidential debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden. FURTHER MORE … Everyone knows that Roland Martin is in the tank for Obama … and regarding his call for Palin to either ‘put up, or shut up’ … for millions of Americans, we still feel that Obama never adequately explained why he chose to spend TWENTY YEARS in Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American, racist, black liberation church, which gave a life time achievement award to Louis Farrakhan, and Obama only quit the church due to public outrage and personal ambition.
Howard
1 Oct 08 at 12:05 PM
Howard,
Please, Mr. Martin is accurate and most Americans feel the same way. So what change the moderator, it won’t change Palin’s answers to any questions. Also, unless you are a black man and have had to struggle and know anything about being black in this sometimes dark America you would know those that do feel negative about the past, have lived it. Rev. Wright, Mr. Farrakhan has only responded to what has been dished out for some time now and in a less obvious way, it still exists, prejudice. Just like your last post. Get ready for change!
Gary
1 Oct 08 at 12:26 PM
For those that are constantly bringing up the irrelevant Church Factor- gets no credibility—- 1.) Did he go to church every Sunday 2.) The church is a white dominance church and this is a sub division of that, so to believe that it was a racist church is absurd- 3.) Have you been there to judge for yourself? or you just basing your opinion on the 30 seconds clips of 2 sermons? 4.) Barack is half white- and was raised by his white grandparent/ mother— so you are assuming he hates his own? Loosers
smith
1 Oct 08 at 12:39 PM
No one really knows whats going on. You’ve got Middle Class people on one side screaming NO-Bail OuT!!
And you’ve got politicians on the other side trying to make us feel that a bail-out is necessary in order to keep the economy moving and stop it from grinding to a screeching halt.
George Bush comes out to make an announcement to tell us that the sky is falling 10 days into a major economic crisis, after having said that “the economy is fundamentally sound” and that the “economic condiitons were only in our heads.”
No one has a clue, because they NEVER had a clue. They road a wave and provided the impression that they knew what they were doing. But now, when the shit hits the fan, they point fingers, and no one is willing to step up to the plate to take the heat for substantive error at a time when we truly need to find out what is precisely the qoute/un-qoute “problem.”
I think it reeks of political posturing in a GOP blackmail attempt to make us all vote Republican this year, or else the sky will fall.
I have an idea… let’s all just keep debating back and forth and fighting about what we should do for the next four months… and when Barack Obama walks into office on January 20, 2009, CONFIDENCE IN THE AMERICAN CONSUMER WILL BE IMMEDIATELY RESTORED, BECAUSE THE LOOMING THREAT OF THE IMCOMPETENT BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND THE FAILED CONSERVATIVE GOP REGIME WILL BE GONE FOREVER!
Daniel
1 Oct 08 at 12:41 PM
Yeah, well when is someone going to FINALLY ask Obama hard questions and give him the cold glare? Please, I want to know. Bill O’Reilly sure didn’t. All this fuss about Palin is so we don’t focus on asking Obama about Rezko. About Auchi. Remembering that Rev Wright’s church awarded Louis Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award. Who is Farrakhan and what does he stand for? What is the history of Nation of Islam. Why does Obama get away with this baggage? Why? Why do I have to learn about him from the New York Times archive, the London Times and the BBC? It’s like the Wizard of Oz commanded Dorthy, the Lion and the Scarecrow “Don’t pay any attention to the man behind the curtain!” I guess that makes me Toto.
George
1 Oct 08 at 5:25 PM
While I agree to an extent that Obama hasn’t been fairly scrutinized, the relationships he has (the Church, the so-called “terrorists” he’s been friends with) are irrelevant. Just because he associates with those people doesn’t mean that his ideology is the same as theirs — to think so is to be naive.
But, as for the next debate: will somebody please ask both candidates what exactly the bailout is supposed to do?
leapsecond
1 Oct 08 at 7:42 PM