The Republican Thread

[Controlled Chaos]

The Real Obama: Part III

Thomas Sowell

Thursday, October 09, 2008

 

What about those "real issues" that Barack Obama's supporters in the media say we should get back to, whenever some new unsavory fact about his past comes out?

 

Surely education is a real issue, with American school children consistently scoring below those in other countries, and children in minority communities faring worst of all.

 

What about Senator Obama's position on this real issue? As with other issues, he has talked one way and acted the opposite way.

 

The education situation in Obama's home base of Chicago is one of the worst in the nation for the children-- and one of the best for the unionized teachers.

 

Fewer than one-third of Chicago's high-school juniors meet the statewide standards on tests. Only 6 percent of the youngsters who enter Chicago high schools become college graduates by the time they are 25 years old.

 

The problem is not money: Chicago spends more than $10,000 per student.

 

Chicago teachers are doing well. A beginning teacher, fresh out of college, earns more than the city's median income and that can rise to more than $100,000 over the years.

 

That's for teaching 6 hours a day, 9 months of the year. Moreover, a teacher's income is dependent on seniority and other such factors-- and in no way dependent on whether their students are actually learning anything.

 

Obama has said eloquent and lofty words about education, as he has about other things-- for example, how it is "unacceptable in a country as wealthy as ours" that some children "are not getting a decent shot at life" because of the failing schools.

 

In a predominantly black suburb of Chicago, where the average teacher's salary is $83,000 and one-fourth of the teachers make more than $100,000, Barack Obama noted that the school day ends at 1:30 PM.

 

In his book "Dreams from My Father," Obama said candidly that black teachers and administrators "defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before."

 

It is not a question of Obama's not knowing. He has demonstrated conclusively that he knows what is going on.

 

But, for all his eloquent words, he has voted consistently for the teachers' unions and the status quo.

 

"I owe those unions," he has said frankly. "When their leaders call, I do my best to call them back right away. I don't consider this corrupting in any way."

 

Only other politicians' special interests are called "special interests" by Barack Obama, whose world-class ability to rationalize is his most frightening skill.

 

Even when he verbally endorses the reform idea of merit pay for teachers, he cleverly re-defines merit so that it will be measured by teachers themselves, rather than by "arbitrary tests." In other words, Obama placates critics of the educational status quo by being for merit pay in words, while making those words meaningless, so as not to offend the teachers' unions.

 

The failings of teachers are only part of the disaster of inner city public schools. Disruptive and violent students can make it impossible for even the best teachers to educate students.

 

Administrators are reluctant to impose any serious punishment on those students who make it impossible for other students to learn. Partly this is because liberal judges can make it literally a federal case if more minority students are punished than others.

 

In other words, if black males are punished more often than Asian American females, that can be enough to get the administrators drawn into a legal labyrinth, costing money and time, even if the punishment is eventually upheld.

 

When a bill was introduced into the Illinois state legislature that would put more teeth into suspensions of misbehaving students, Barack Obama voted against that bill.

 

A real reformer would want to crack down on both unruly students and unaccountable teachers. A clever politician would speak eloquently, demand "change"-- and then vote for the status quo. Obama talks a great game.

 

 

 

 

[Controlled Chaos]

Do Facts Matter?

Thomas Sowell

Friday, October 03, 2008

 

Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."

 

Unfortunately, the future of this country, as well as the fate of the Western world, depends on how many people can be fooled on election day, just a few weeks from now.

 

Right now, the polls indicate that a whole lot of the people are being fooled a whole lot of the time.

 

The current financial bailout crisis has propelled Barack Obama back into a substantial lead over John McCain-- which is astonishing in view of which man and which party has had the most to do with bringing on this crisis.

 

It raises the question: Do facts matter? Or is Obama's rhetoric and the media's spin enough to make facts irrelevant?

 

Fact Number One: It was liberal Democrats, led by Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, who for years-- including the present year-- denied that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taking big risks that could lead to a financial crisis.

 

It was Senator Dodd, Congressman Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

 

It was liberal Democrats, again led by Dodd and Frank, who for years pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans, which are at the heart of today's financial crisis.

 

Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President. So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury, five years ago.

 

Yet, today, what are we hearing? That it was the Bush administration "right-wing ideology" of "de-regulation" that set the stage for the financial crisis. Do facts matter?

 

We also hear that it is the free market that is to blame. But the facts show that it was the government that pressured financial institutions in general to lend to subprime borrowers, with such things as the Community Reinvestment Act and, later, threats of legal action by then Attorney General Janet Reno if the feds did not like the statistics on who was getting loans and who wasn't.

 

Is that the free market? Or do facts not matter?

 

Then there is the question of being against the "greed" of CEOs and for "the people." Franklin Raines made $90 million while he was head of Fannie Mae and mismanaging that institution into crisis.

 

Who in Congress defended Franklin Raines? Liberal Democrats, including Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus, at least one of whom referred to the "lynching" of Raines, as if it was racist to hold him to the same standard as white CEOs.

 

Even after he was deposed as head of Fannie Mae, Franklin Raines was consulted this year by the Obama campaign for his advice on housing!

 

The Washington Post criticized the McCain campaign for calling Raines an adviser to Obama, even though that fact was reported in the Washington Post itself on July 16th. The technicality and the spin here is that Raines is not officially listed as an adviser. But someone who advises is an adviser, whether or not his name appears on a letterhead.

 

The tie between Barack Obama and Franklin Raines is not all one-way. Obama has been the second-largest recipient of Fannie Mae's financial contributions, right after Senator Christopher Dodd.

 

But ties between Obama and Raines? Not if you read the mainstream media.

 

Facts don't matter much politically if they are not reported.

 

The media alone are not alone in keeping the facts from the public. Republicans, for reasons unknown, don't seem to know what it is to counter-attack. They deserve to lose.

 

But the country does not deserve to be put in the hands of a glib and cocky know-it-all, who has accomplished absolutely nothing beyond the advancement of his own career with rhetoric, and who has for years allied himself with a succession of people who have openly expressed their hatred of America.

 

 

 

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

[Controlled Chaos]

"The Real Issues": Part IV

Thomas Sowell

Friday, October 10, 2008

 

Barack Obama's supporters often try to sidestep questions about his character and judgment by saying that we should stick to what they arbitrarily define as "the real issues." But Senator Obama's record on specific issues is as bad as his record of repeatedly allying himself over the years with people who make no attempt to hide their hatred of America.

 

Among the so-called "real issues" are earmarks for Senators' pet projects, like the "bridge to nowhere." These are among the most indefensible parts of the inbred Washington political culture, which Obama has so often claimed to be against, as part of his promise of "change" to "clean up the mess in Washington."

 

Yet Senator Obama not only voted in favor of the bridge to nowhere, he voted against anti-earmark amendments proposed by Senator John McCain.

 

Obama has had more than two dozen of his own earmarks in the past fiscal year, and he knows the Senate well enough to know that, if he voted against the bridge to nowhere, his own earmarks might get nowhere.

 

Those earmarks, incidentally, included a million dollars of the taxpayers' money for a facility where his wife works at the University of Chicago. Her salary rose by nearly $200,000 when her husband became a United States Senator-- no doubt a shrewd investment by the university that paid off.

 

When a highly publicized bridge collapse in Minnesota in 2007 led Senator Tom Coburn to propose taking money from federal spending on bicycle paths and use it for maintaining and repairing bridges instead, Senator Obama voted against it. The kind of people who vote for him want bike paths.

 

Moreover, the very idea of taking money from one thing to use for something with a higher priority-- something that we all have to do in our own personal lives-- is foreign to the liberal big spenders in Washington.

 

When they want more money for some purpose, they simply raise the tax rates. They don't cut spending somewhere else.

 

The idea that Barack Obama is somehow different from other liberal-left politicians can only be based on his rhetoric, because his actual track record shows him to differ only in being further left than most liberals and at least as opportunistic.

 

His talk, however, is another story. The speech that Obama gave at the 2004 Democratic convention-- the speech that put him on the national map politically-- was one which has been aptly described as a speech that would have been almost equally at home if it had been delivered at the Republican national convention.

 

In the world of rhetoric-- the world in which Obama is supreme-- he is a moderate, reasonable man, reaching out to unite people and parties, dedicated to reform, opposed to special interests and a healer of the racial divide.

 

It is only in the real world of action that Barack Obama is the direct opposite. He has pushed for federal subsidies for ethanol, for example, as other midwestern Senators have, since a lot of corn is grown in the midwest to be turned into ethanol.

 

He is 100 percent behind the teachers' unions in their fight to preserve their grip on the public schools and exempt their members from being judged by performance instead of seniority-- which is to say, he is throwing the students, and especially minority students-- to the wolves.

 

Senator Obama would never call voting for ethanol subsidies a vote for "special interests," any more than he called his total support of the teachers unions a matter of special interests, even though teachers unions are the biggest obstacle to changing the status quo in public schools that have failed American children in general and minority children in particular.

 

Barack Obama's track record on so-called "real issues" is no better than his track record on issues of character and judgment. The media's track record of conveying the facts to the public is a travesty of their claims about "the public's right to know."

 

If John McCain had made half as many gaffes as Barack Obama-- "all 57 states," for example-- they would be picturing him as senile. Meanwhile, the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran supplying its terrorist surrogates with nukes does not interest the media nearly as much as scoring "gotchas" against Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

[BigSqwert]

Luckily a majority of America cares about real issues.

[lostfan]

You guys are killing me here... please be considerate of the thread you're posting in... ask yourself, if the roles were reversed, would you take objection to what you're saying?

[Controlled Chaos]

I bet most people have never used the word "folksy" in their entire lives. All of a sudden it's a household term. She has an accent/dialect/regionalism, whatever you want to call it, so that makes her uneducated??? So she says "you betcha" and "gosh darn"... Sorry those phrases dont' fit the elite, but they are simply just that...phrases. It says nothing about a persons intelligence. Yes she is different from many of us...she hunts, ice fishes, is a member of the NRA. For that she has been called white trash? Are you kidding me? Talk about bigots. People were swinging from Obamas jock strap without knowing a god dam thing about him, other than he could read a teleprompter, but Palin is a white trash uneducated moron because she talks different. Hypocrites!! I guess it's ok to be a bigot if you're talking of someone from a different party. I'm guessing the same people that are saying this are the same ones who feel people with a southern accent are just dumb country bumpkins.

 

Some would be ashamed to have their kids see this person as a role model. An athlete in high school, a beauty queen, a mom of a wonderful family. Wanted to change her local politics, ran for mayor and won. Wanted to change state politics, ran for governor and won. Took on the good old boys, regardless of their party affiliation and was the most popular governor in the country. Gosh darn, those are some terrrible attributes to have your kids look up to.... Now I certainly don't expect dems to like Sarah Palin, her views are the exact opposite of theirs, but to call her dumb, white trash...etc...is...ridiculous.

[BigSqwert]

I'm not trying to start a fight but don't you think it's a little odd that Palin, who called herself a pitbull with lipstick, will not talk to anyone in the media? Why is she hiding? It just seems odd that she keeps bringing up "who is Barack Obama?" when she is going out of her way to hide what her ideas and positions are.

[StrangeSox]

I bet most people have never used the word "folksy" in their entire lives. All of a sudden it's a household term. She has an accent/dialect/regionalism, whatever you want to call it, so that makes her uneducated??? So she says "you betcha" and "gosh darn"... Sorry those phrases dont' fit the elite, but they are simply just that...phrases. It says nothing about a persons intelligence. Yes she is different from many of us...she hunts, ice fishes, is a member of the NRA. For that she has been called white trash? Are you kidding me? Talk about bigots. People were swinging from Obamas jock strap without knowing a god dam thing about him, other than he could read a teleprompter, but Palin is a white trash uneducated moron because she talks different. Hypocrites!! I guess it's ok to be a bigot if you're talking of someone from a different party. I'm guessing the same people that are saying this are the same ones who feel people with a southern accent are just dumb country bumpkins.

 

I don't have a problem with regional dialects or accents. That doesn't make someone uneducated.

 

I have a problem with it being such a blatant gimmick. She is just over the top with it. *wink*

 

I also have a problem with her ignorance. That is not to say she is stupid, dumb, a moron, or anything else -- just uninformed or not knowledgeable about national/ international issues. Her interview with Couric was an absolute disaster. Her debate was nothing more than reading a stump speech from note cards. Out on the campaign trail, the only thing she talks about is Obama.

 

Some would be ashamed to have their kids see this person as a role model. An athlete in high school, a beauty queen, a mom of a wonderful family. Wanted to change her local politics, ran for mayor and won. Wanted to change state politics, ran for governor and won. Took on the good old boys, regardless of their party affiliation and was the most popular governor in the country. Gosh darn, those are some terrrible attributes to have your kids look up to.... Now I certainly don't expect dems to like Sarah Palin, her views are the exact opposite of theirs, but to call her dumb, white trash...etc...is...ridiculous.

 

No doubt their are people out there saying some pretty dumb things about her. It's unfortunate, but some people will root for their "team" no matter what and will try to disparage the other "team" as much as possible, well beyond the point of rational/ reasonable disagreement.

 

On the other hand, how many have trashed Obama and his accomplishments? Who wouldt't be proud to have their son graduate Magna Cum Lade from Harvard Law, win a seat in the state Senate and then the federal Senate, and Teach at the University of Chicago? How many still think Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a secret Muslim that hates America? How many ridiculous accusations have been laid against him?

 

I think her speeches and the reactions she is drawing from her crowds lately are shameful.

Edited October 9, 2008 by StrangeSox

[NorthSideSox72]

I bet most people have never used the word "folksy" in their entire lives. All of a sudden it's a household term. She has an accent/dialect/regionalism, whatever you want to call it, so that makes her uneducated??? So she says "you betcha" and "gosh darn"... Sorry those phrases dont' fit the elite, but they are simply just that...phrases. It says nothing about a persons intelligence. Yes she is different from many of us...she hunts, ice fishes, is a member of the NRA. For that she has been called white trash? Are you kidding me? Talk about bigots. People were swinging from Obamas jock strap without knowing a god dam thing about him, other than he could read a teleprompter, but Palin is a white trash uneducated moron because she talks different. Hypocrites!! I guess it's ok to be a bigot if you're talking of someone from a different party. I'm guessing the same people that are saying this are the same ones who feel people with a southern accent are just dumb country bumpkins.

 

Some would be ashamed to have their kids see this person as a role model. An athlete in high school, a beauty queen, a mom of a wonderful family. Wanted to change her local politics, ran for mayor and won. Wanted to change state politics, ran for governor and won. Took on the good old boys, regardless of their party affiliation and was the most popular governor in the country. Gosh darn, those are some terrrible attributes to have your kids look up to.... Now I certainly don't expect dems to like Sarah Palin, her views are the exact opposite of theirs, but to call her dumb, white trash...etc...is...ridiculous.

 

See, the scary thing is, she isn't dumb. This is an act, or probably more accurately, an exaggeration of certain aspects of her persona. Her being "folksy" isn't about being white trash, or dumb, neither of which I've said. Its about her reveling in acting uneducated and ignorant. Its incredibly insulting to us all.

 

Her being from a small town is irrelevant - Biden grew up in small towns too. It makes no difference to me that he did. Her membership in the NRA, her ice fishing, her hockey fandom... don't care. Not a bad thing at all, and in fact, maybe a good thing. And I could care less about her accent. Those aren't what our objections are about.

 

But if you want to think that the Palin hate is based on bigotry of some kind, feel free. Its probably true for some smallish number of people. But I don't see that on here, at all. Does this sound familiar, by the way? The victim of bigotry claim that you are making, but which is dismissed by GOP'ers when it comes to Obama?

 

In both cases, there is some truth to the bigotry. There are people who will vote for, or against, Palin because of her gender or her townie schtick act. There are even more people who will not vote for Obama because of his race, and some who will, because of his race. But in all honesty, with a very few exceptions, I have not see ANY of that in HERE.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

One difference I do want to point out though, in the arguments about perceived or real bigotry against Obama or Palin... The bigotry against Obama that is talked about is because of his race. He is what he is, in that regard.

 

The negatives reactions to Palin, on the other hand, are about her behavior. That is something she not only controls, but in fact exaggerates for effect. The equivalent, IMO, would be if Obama put on some sort of gangsta-like act in order to attract more minority voters. It would be, just like Palin, taking some of the worst stereotypes that they might be associated with, and pedaling them out there under the guise of being more "real".

 

[BigSqwert]

I think what's telling about Palin is her poor polling from independents. That says it all.

[Controlled Chaos]

So she winks. I have an Uncle that winks. It drives me nuts when he does it too. But everyone is so sure that she is doing it as some grand plan to be "folksy". Maybe she has always winked...what the hell do you or I know about her mannerisms. And why does the one blink of an eye piss of so many people. Blatant gimick? Exaggerating certain aspects of her persona? Reveling in acting uneducated and ignorant? Jesus Christ, if you want to paint the Paris Hilton portrait on someone it should be Biden who's been acting like an airhead for the last 30 years.

[NorthSideSox72]

So she winks. I have an Uncle that winks. It drives me nuts when he does it too. But everyone is so sure that she is doing it as some grand plan to be "folksy". Maybe she has always winked...what the hell do you or I know about her mannerisms. And why does the one blink of an eye piss of so many people. Blatant gimick? Exaggerating certain aspects of her persona? Reveling in acting uneducated and ignorant? Jesus Christ, if you want to paint the Paris Hilton portrait on someone it should be Biden who's been acting like an airhead for the last 30 years.

Paris Hilton IS an airhead. Joe Biden has, as you say, always seemed like one, because of his verbal gaffs over the years - but that is definitely not intentional. Sarah Palin WANTS to come off that way, even though she's probably (IMO) not.

 

[Cknolls]

Apparently 105% of the population of Indianapolis is registered to vote. i wonder if ACORN has an office or three there?

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/more_vote...its_population/

 

Oh, and they have problems in Missouri also

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081009/ap_on_el_ge/voter_fraud

 

 

Reminiscient of Franklin County, Ohio in 2004 where 817,000 people were registered and they only had 815,000 residents over age 18.

[Cknolls]

Waiting with baited breath for the MSM newscasts tonight to do a story on Messiah being a member of the NEW Party. They were all over Palin being a supposed member of a seccessionist party(false), so I am sure they will follow this story with as much vigor.

Edited October 9, 2008 by Cknolls

[bmags]

Waiting with baited breath for the MSM newscasts tonight to do a story on Messiah being a member of the NEW Party. They were all over Palin being a supposed member of a seccessionist party(false), so I am sure they will follow this story with as much vigor.

 

First, he sought their endorsement and that doesn't make him a member, though it would've given him their votes, which now is considered unconstitutional I believe. Second, do you really think seeking the endorsement of a left leaning group is on the same plane as a group wanting to secede from the United States and whose leader had Hugo Chavez type language about the United States? I assure you it isn't. Obama's move was just a political play to get votes early in his career.

[mr_genius]

Waiting with baited breath for the MSM newscasts tonight to do a story on Messiah being a member of the NEW Party. They were all over Palin being a supposed member of a seccessionist party(false), so I am sure they will follow this story with as much vigor.

 

it will be ignored, or mentioned followed by staunch defense of Obama.

[EvilMonkey]

Ok, check this out. On MSNBC, they try and tak with one of the questioners at the debate. He was kinda mad that McCain assumed he didn't know about Freddie and Fannie before the crisis. He posits that it may be because he is a young black man that McCain thought he was ignorant. He also mentions other things in the story like how he was selected to be an 'undecided' for the debate. That part, they just went right on by and bolded the part about the supposed racism. Maybe they should have highlighted the bit about his selection process too.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...09/1523335.aspx

1. How did I get to participate in the debate?

Well, as many of you know I went to undergrad at Tennessee State University. (Go Tigers) I have a Nashville area code for my cell phone. So the Sunday before last, I received a call from the Gallop Poll. They asked a few questions regarding my choice in the Presidential election. They asked who I would vote for. I said most likely I would be voting for Barack Obama. They followed with, “is there any chance that you would change your mind“? I said “Of course anything is possible.” They then asked me as an uncommitted voter would I like to participate in the Town hall debate. I said “Of course!”

Really now, this guy is an 'uncommitted'? There is a chance that anybody would switch their vote, but that is a pretty piss poor way to choose supposedly undecided people for the debate.

 

 

[EvilMonkey]

First, he sought their endorsement and that doesn't make him a member, though it would've given him their votes, which now is considered unconstitutional I believe. Second, do you really think seeking the endorsement of a left leaning group is on the same plane as a group wanting to secede from the United States and whose leader had Hugo Chavez type language about the United States? I assure you it isn't. Obama's move was just a political play to get votes early in his career.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932

Candidates must be approved via a NP political committee. Once approved, candidates must sign a contract with the NP. The contract mandates that they must have a visible and active relationship with the NP.

 

The political entourage included Alderman Michael Chandler, William Delgado, chief of staff for State Rep Miguel del Valle, and spokespersons for State Sen. Alice Palmer, Sonya Sanchez, chief of staff for State Sen. Jesse Garcia, who is running for State Rep in Garcia's District; and Barack Obama, chief of staff for State Sen. Alice Palmer. Obama is running for Palmer's vacant seat.

Sounds a little bit more than just seeking an endorsement. He also attended meetings as well.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng45.html

 

Sarah was never in the AIG, something which took the MSM a month to figure out, and still haven't retracted.

 

 

[kapkomet]

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng42.html#anchor792932

 

Sounds a little bit more than just seeking an endorsement. He also attended meetings as well.

http://www.chicagodsa.org/ngarchive/ng45.html

 

Sarah was never in the AIG, something which took the MSM a month to figure out, and still haven't retracted.

They don't have to (retract it). She's just a "folksy b****" who doesn't deserve the retraction (no offense to the ladies... I've just heard the phrase at work... so that means a lot of people probably are starting to believe it.).

 

 

[bmags]

Her husband is, and considering Michelle Obama was dragged through the mud in February I'd say Todd Palin has gotten a pretty free pass. But oh yes, the media is OUT TO GET MCCAIN, they built up his image for 10 years just to tear it down in some cruel trick!

 

edit: oh, and here's your correction, it also ran on the second page of the paper:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09...s-not-a-member/

 

 

Edited October 9, 2008 by bmags

[mr_genius]

Her husband is, and considering Michelle Obama was dragged through the mud in February I'd say Todd Palin has gotten a pretty free pass. But oh yes, the media is OUT TO GET MCCAIN, they built up his image for 10 years just to tear it down in some cruel trick!

 

edit: oh, and here's your correction, it also ran on the second page of the paper:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09...s-not-a-member/

 

Not a cruel trick, of course they will attack McCain and Palin. They are basically part of the Obama campaign. If McCain thought the media would continue to give him good press, running against Obama, he was totally wrong.

 

The media went after Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter, so I don't think they would consider going after anyone opposite a Democrat to be out of bounds.

[EvilMonkey]

Her husband is, and considering Michelle Obama was dragged through the mud in February I'd say Todd Palin has gotten a pretty free pass. But oh yes, the media is OUT TO GET MCCAIN, they built up his image for 10 years just to tear it down in some cruel trick!

 

edit: oh, and here's your correction, it also ran on the second page of the paper:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09...s-not-a-member/

Todd isn't out giving campaign speeches, Michelle is. That makes her fair game. But yeah, they are giving such a free pass to the Palin kids. Just totally ignoring them.

[bmags]

Todd isn't out giving campaign speeches, Michelle is. That makes her fair game. But yeah, they are giving such a free pass to the Palin kids. Just totally ignoring them.

 

He's out giving interviews. And just how did the media go after her 17 year old daughter, they reported on the press release the McCain campaign put out?

[mr_genius]

He's out giving interviews. And just how did the media go after her 17 year old daughter, they reported on the press release the McCain campaign put out?

 

For weeks they had 24-7 coverage, showing her on TV, trying to shame her into oblivion. The media WAS going to run with the daily Kos rumors, so the McCain camp came out and made clear what happened. The media thought this could be a knock out punch for their campaign, show that the Palin's have bad kids. It failed though, everyone knew trashing someones kid who got pregnant was a bogus tactic.