Monday, September 01, 2008

Sarah Palin sends the left over the edge

This has been amazing to watch - the left is going absolutely unhinged over the choice of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate.

Ironically, Republicans almost universally hailed the choice. But the left seems hell bent on destroying her quickly, and are pulling out all the stops to do it.

Over at Jack Bog's Blog, there are multiple threads presenting the most outrageous and scurrilous rumors, each with dozens of comments. Jack Bogdanski, usually a very rational, even tempered guy, latched on to the conspiracy theory of Sarah Palin actually being Trig's grandmother, and simply would not let it go. Even after it was pretty soundly debunked.

I saw James Carville argue that she was unqualified because she was mayor of a "tiny" Alaska town. He actually held up a picture of the Wassila City Hall, and said "this is the city hall where she was mayor. It looks more like a tackle shop."

Oh, my. Could there be a better example of middle America detesting left coast elitism? Please please I hope they keep this up. An awful lot of people would see Carville hold up that picture and think: "yep, that is pretty much what my city hall looks like."

What Carville apparently thought was ipso-facto proof that Palin wasn't ready for prime time was actually just more evidence (as if we need it) that the Carville Gucci-loafer crowd holds middle American values in contempt.

I'm telling you - this is going to shape up to be the narrative of this race. The reaction of the left to Palin has made it inevitable. The more the left attacks Palin, the more voters will perceive they are attacking the very values she embodies and they share.

The left can't help it. A woman with Palin's views and record can't be allowed to exist any more than a black with Clarence Thomas's views. They will try to destroy her, just as they did him. Remember Biden's performance in the Thomas hearings?

The left just doesn't understand middle America, because in their heart of hearts they hate it. I heard commentators this weekend say things such as: "Well, a woman who is pro-life will certainly be unpopular among women." And "Bristol's pregnancy will hurt Palin with the family values crowd."

How little they understand. How fortunate we are that they don't. There is a reason that the Democrats keep losing presidential elections, and that the only times they won was with a candidate who was not of their ilk.

I have never been more positive about the McCain campaign than I am at this moment. The hue and cry we are seeing from the left is music to my ears. The more Jack Bogdanski screams that Palin choice is a horror show, the more positive I get.

Sarah Palin is an incredibly accomplished woman. She is tough and she has guts.

To paraphrase something I read this weekend (I can't find it to link to it):

Obama shinnied up the greasy pole by ingratiating himself to a corrupt political machine in Chicago, carefully avoiding controversy by refusing to challenge any of the corruption. Then he used the favors he gained from the machine to support his rise to national prominence.

Palin, on the other hand, rose by taking on the corrupt old boy's network in Alaska, and got elected without any of their support, taking on the most powerful politician in the state and beating him in a primary. Then, when she got power she used it to root corruption out.

That is a HUGE difference.

Barack Obama isn't even remotely as qualified as Palin.


Jack Bog said...

As people will see if they actually read my blog, I have never reached any conclusion on the circumstances surrounding Trig Palin's birth, but I still have many questions and concerns about it.

It is also interesting to note that those horrible, scurrilous rumors about Bristol Palin actually had more than a kernel of truth to them.

I'd be ecstatic if they leave Governor Palin on the ticket. She will not help McCain where he needs it most. Plus, who knows what other Jerry Springer stories she has in store for us?

I have predicted, however, that McCain's smart enough to see that he'd be better off with a safer choice.

On a brighter note, the supermarket tabloids at the checkout at Fred Meyer are going to be a joy to behold over the coming months.

See you Sunday, if not before.

Anonymous said...

I will never forget the 1992 Presidential election. I saw a supermarket tabloid (this was before Jack's blog so I'm not sure which one). It announced "Clinton caught in 3-in-a-bed orgy with street hookers!" I thought "well, this election is over." In hindsight, the story was probably true, and at the least represented foreshadowing of Shakespearean portent.

Palin's daughter's pregnancy has been very revealing of the different ways in which liberals view issues.

Note that liberals - like Jack - want to punish the mother of a teenage girl who gets pregnant underage and out-of-wedlock. Note they take a "boys will be boys" approach to the baby's father and the girl's dad. Note how judgmental they are over a situation they normally applaud (after all, it is liberal policies that have purposefully created an epidemic of teenage single mothers in America's black community - a group now almost completely dependent on the government) solely for potential political gain. Publicly and personally embarrassing a young girl nationally just to win an election.

Set against these liberal values are the conservative values of compassion, sorrow, hope and, I suspect not a little "get a rope" mentality for the statutory rapist. For conservatives every life is sacred - even a little one that Jack only sees as a political opportunity. Even Obama's offended by Jack's take on this one.

RINO WATCH said...

As one of the harshest critics of John, "Juan", McCain, describing him as a "Conservative in Name Only", Jack I too will be "ecstatic" with Sarah Palin remaining on the ticket

Your choice of Johnny Edwards to head your ticket proves that none of us on the blogging sidelines are safe from an error in our selections.

PanchoPdx said...

I read Jack's blog on this - with over two hundred comments on a series of Palin-pregnancy-conspiracy posts. The thing that floored me the most was palpable desire among commenters that it ought to be true.

It is more than a little creepy.

Seeing Jack cheerlead the whole mess was disconcerting as well but he's always been a bit of a provocateur and (from my viewpoint) he's batting over .500 (esp. on local issues).

I'll forgive him for this Pierre Salinger moment, but I'll keep checking in to see when he wraps it all up with a blissfully unaffected "...nevermind...."

Oregon Reality said...

Hate monger and rabid left wing blogger Jack Bogdanski has gone off the deep end with his unsubstantiated accusations that Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin either lied about her pregnancy or made a poor decision while flying, WITH HER Dr's ok, while pregnant. Why would Bogdanski go off the deep end like this unless he was doing what left wing hate mongers always do- accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of?
Bogdanski put the lives of his wife and children in danger by deciding to become middle aged father. It is well known that Children fathered by middle-aged men (45 or over) are nearly twice as likely to die before adulthood. This comes from a 2008 study of about 100,000 Danish children born between 1980 and 1996.

Even after adjusting for the mother's age and other factors, researchers found an increased risk of death for children of older fathers. The mortality rate for children of men 45 and older was almost double that of children fathered by men in their late 20s. Children of teenage fathers also had higher mortality rates, but that was blamed on other factors such as poverty and the risks of teen motherhood.

Birth defects and injuries were leading causes of the greater mortality in the older men's children. The researchers speculated that the injuries may be related to conditions such as autism, schizophrenia or epilepsy. The study was published in the European Journal of Epidemiology. (Male Biological Clock Puts Children At Risk)
Recent studies also indicate that children born to older fathers face a higher chance of developing bipolar disorder.

You have to be pretty selfish to expose your wife and future children to birth defects, high mortality rates, bipolar disorder and early death. Bogdanski accuses Palin of the very thing he has actually done- put the health of his children at risk! He's a typical left wing hypocrite and liar. What else would you expect from a lawyer like Bogdansi, who couldn't cut it as a lawyer in the real world, and now hides out as a law professor at the left wing sandbox otherwise known as Lewis& Clark College?

Bogdanski, instead of judging pie contests, should do us all a favor by shutting his pie hole.

Anonymous said...

Poor Jack. He bans people from his "blog" for stating the truth about Obama: that Obama is a communist and a racist. These facts will become more clear as the election approaches. Why else would Obama belong to a church that preaches hate against white people? Why else would Obama count as a close friend a man who is an avowed communist who chose to use explosives against the police, innocent bystanders be damned.

Sure makes Todd Palin's ticket for fishing without a permit look *just awful*, doesn't it?

Obama's going to lose, and Jack knows it. That's why his panties are in such a wad. Take a deep breath, Jack.

Anonymous said...

Ol' Jack Bogdanski has his tinfoil hat on to tight again....

OregonGuy said...

It's disturbing, not surprising, that the Left is reduced to ad hominem attacks. Against all and everyone they disagree with.

Should Governor Palin attacked the corruption in her own state, in her own party? That would be the source of an interesting debate.

Should Governor Palin be criticised for pushing for increased petroleum production in Alaska? Again, source for an interesting debate.

What have been the positions pushed during meetings of the Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission? Have they been responsible positions? Again, the Left is undeterred by issues, prefering to harbour their abouts against the shoals of personal attack.

Perhaps Leftists naively assume that we all are more affected by name-calling than productive debate. That may be true on the Left. In fact, I would assert it is true.

That what passes for debate on the Left is a series of logical fallacies which can't stand scrutiny, but that the strength of such an attack is that it places us on the defensive...explaining the idiocy of the Left.

Undeterred, the Left presses on. And this is another fine example.

Anonymous said...


You are a hypocrite. And I hope Rob has the courage to call you out on the air next Sunday over it and have you stammer to give a plausible explanation. You silence dissent in your blog's comments on a regular basis, and you continue to persecute Sarah Palin whose only crime is that she threatens to defeat your man-crush, Barak Obama (who is only your man-crush now because your previous one, JE, turned out to be a lech).

Your behavior on this has been nothing short of despicable.

Now, here's a challenge to you Jack. Lets see if you have the courage to speak your accusations over the air on Sunday, rather than confining them to your blog-tatorship where you can silence dissent. Heck, throw in your baseless, tin-hat WTC7 conspiracy theories as well. Let Portland hear the real Jack Bodanski. Air your views and take callers. My guess is your are too much of a coward to voice this crap when your audience has the freedom to respond to the 'king' without getting their heads lopped off.

Anonymous said...

Jack will not respond... he is a typical cut and run liberal who is out of touch with reality. Loosen that tinfoil Jack, you will be a happier person...... Do you hear that whooshing sound Jack ??? It is your " man " Obama circling the drain.....

Come on Jack, grow a set, respond...

PanchoPdx said...

I suspect the anonymous comments above are actually from some of the ultra-liberal trolls that Jack bans from his site.

I've been reading him for a while and most of the folks he bans seem to have it coming (they don't follow his house rules).

I can't defend his take on Palin however, it is disturbing.

Anonymous said...


I am the 'anonymous' commentator you are referring to above. I only signed in as anonymous because I don't have an account on this site.

As far as most of the folks he bans having it coming, well - that's his choice. His blog, his forum. He is dictator of that realm. Yeah, I probably crossed the line when I told him his blog "jumped the shark" in its Palin meme. I criticized the blog, that's 'against the rules', and Jack's choice to ban me from his blog - fine. But he can't continue to put himself as a fair arbiter of anything when he bans ONLY the consenting voice. He's a hypocrite in that regard.

I'm sure he's banned me for life for posting this here, but I really don't care anymore. I like DEBATE. Jack doesn't allow that anymore. Its 'jump aboard my whacky conspiracy theory or you're banned' on his site now. The internet is great for debating intellectually. But when someone like jack stifles it into a yes-man blog, its no fun anymore.

I now see why Bill McDonald chose to terminate (actively) his blog. People like Jack Bogdanski have taken the honesty out of it in that he pretends to have forum in which ideas are welcomed, but if your 'ideas' stray to far from the farm, you're banned.

I wonder if his guy, Barak Obama, will practice that form of Democracy?

- butch (Hey Jack, did my 'jump the shark' comment earn me a lifetime ban?)

PanchoPdx said...

You may be right that Jack has jumped the shark with this one. Perhaps that's worthy discussion on another blog, but he's always had some fairly strict rules about discourse on his site.

It's his house and the commenters are his guests. When the debate gets personal he reserves the right to show you the door.

So let's talk about him here. I think really blew this one. He became wedded to a kooky theory based on a lot of weak circumstantial evidence. Then he became overly defensive when people started calling him on it.

He sacrificed several years of blogging credibility in exchange for bumping up his traffic on a holiday weekend.

He distilled the argument down to a binary choice:

A. Palin faked a pregnancy to cover for her daughter, or,

B. She needlessly endangered her unborn child bucking conventional medical wisdom.

The problem is that the possibility of A being true was about 1 in 1000, and the possibility of B being anyone else's business is zero.

Even if B were true, what does that get you?

Would anyone in their right mind run ads about this subject?

Only if you were waaay behind.

So it is a silly distraction with enormous blowback potential for Obama (who threatened to fire anyone on his staff for talking about the theory).

Jack hasn't admitted it yet, but I'm sure he regrets the way he handled it. I would venture to say that this display of poor judgment (combined with his thin skin) will certainly disqualify him for consideration as anyone's VP in the future.

Anittah Patrick said...

"the left" ... no reductive assumption-making there ...


Bill Holmer said...

BoJack took offense when I stated that he had officially joined the looney left, and then deleted my comment when I thanked him for owning up to his delusion. He's just disappointed that the governor of Alaska didn't turn out to be another lying, scheming, duplicitous, two-faced governor from a sparsely populated rural state that begins with "A."

Anonymous said...

It is undeniable that Palin is the least qualified candidate ever for a USA vice president.

It is also undeniable that she is charming and holds similar positions as many conservatives. But is that the best we can do? Certainly there must be some folks who a re charming, conservative AND experienced?

I'm pretty embarrassed that people actually think she's a reasonable VP candidate. She is a world class light-weight with few accomplishments. Republicans should be ashamed.

rickyragg said...

It is also undeniable that she is charming and holds similar positions as many conservatives. But is that the best we can do?

It is undeniable that the "we" you refer to doesn't include you.

Your qualifications to judge anything are "undeniably" absent... is your name.

YOU should be ashamed.

Anonymous said...

29047126483369175 I play dofus Replica Watches for one year, I Replica Rolex Watches want to get some Replica Watch kamas to buy Replica Chanel Watches item for my character. So, I search "Replica Swiss Watches" on google and found many website. As Exact Replica Graham Watch the tips from the forum, I just review the Swiss Replica Watches websites and choose some Replica Montblanc Watches quality sites to Replica Cartier Watches compare the price, and go to their Replica Breguet Watches online support to make Replica Breitling Watches the test. And Last Chaos Gold I decide to use Replica BRM Watch at the end. And Tag Heuer Replica Watch that is the Replica IWC Watch beginning..

evision said...