One of the more interesting takes on the whole teen pregnancy upset was given to me by Brian Weber, a 25-year-old delegate from Dodge City, Ks:
“I don’t think it’ll have an effect on elections. I think Palin’s daughter’s choice to have her baby will ring true with Americans.”
Weber says he has spoken to many delegates from many states, all of whom say this hasn’t shaken their faith in the McCain/Palin ticket; instead, Weber said, they feel this is proof that the pro-life conviction can be put into action by anyone in any sphere of life. That view is shared by James Dobson, founder of the conservative Focus on the Family. According to an NPR story, he:
“commending the Palins ‘for not just talking about their pro-life and pro-family values, but living them out even in the midst of trying circumstances.’ He added: ‘Being a Christian does not mean you’re perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord.'”
It’s an interesting premise, a twist on the Obama-eschewed-a-high-paying-corporate-law-job-to-help-the-people or McCain-suffered-in-a-POW-camp-he-knows-the-horrors-of-war. Here it’s Palin who has chosen belief over facility (though it undoubtedly would have been much worse had the story of her teenage daughter’s abortion broke). Will she lose McCain supporters for standing by her daughter through a teen pregnancy? Probably not. Will she gain fence-sitters for sticking to her principles? It’s not clear. But in my opinion, this can’t alienate Palin from voters any more than her strange resume already might.
That’s just my opinion though.
I’ll be headed to a Ron Paul rally later today, which I hope to post about. My laptop has a virus on it, so I can’t post a picture I have of some Paulites doing their thing in front of MSNBC cameras, but I plan on posting all the pics I’ve taken so far tonight, using the hotel computer.
198 · Manju said
Flawed UCLA led study on media’s liberal bias.
The work is problematic in many many many ways, and would not be taken seriously by anybody who put an iota of thought into it.
Authors are fellows at conservative think tanks.
None of the outlets that reported on the study mentioned that the authors have previously received funding from the three premier conservative think tanks in the United States: the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI), The Heritage Foundation, and the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Groseclose was a Hoover Institution 2000-2001 national fellow; Milyo, according to his CV (pdf), received a $40,500 grant from AEI; and, according to The Philanthropy Roundtable, Groseclose and Milyo were named by Heritage as Salvatori fellows in 1997. In 1996, Groseclose and Milyo co-authored a piece for the right-wing magazine The American Spectator, titled “Lost Shepherd,” criticizing the then- recently defeated member of Congress Karen Shepherd (D-UT) and defending her successor, Enid Greene (R-UT); when the piece was published, Greene was in the midst of a campaign contribution scandal and later agreed to pay a civil penalty after the Federal Election Commission found (pdf) that she violated campaign finance laws.
Methodological error in definition of bias.
Many many examples, but hilarious consequences of their stupid definition of bias are in the article:
National Rifle Association of America (NRA) scored a 45.9, making it “conservative” — but just barely. RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization (motto: “OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS. EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS.”) with strong ties to the Defense Department, scored a 60.4, making it a “liberal” group. Council on Foreign Relations, whose tagline is “A Nonpartisan Resource for Information and Analysis” (its current president is a former Bush administration official; its board includes prominent Democrats and Republicans from the foreign policy establishment) scored a 60.2, making it a “liberal” group. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), bête noire of the right, scored a 49.8, putting it just on the “conservative” side of the ledger. Center for Responsive Politics, a group whose primary purpose is the maintenance of databases on political contributions, scored a 66.9, making it highly “liberal.” Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a defense policy think tank whose board of directors is currently chaired by former Representative Dave McCurdy (D-OK), scored a 33.9, making it more “conservative” than AEI and than the National Taxpayers Union.
We leave to the reader the judgment on whether anyone could take seriously a coding scheme in which RAND is considered substantially more “liberal” than the ACLU. But this is not the only problem with Groseclose and Milyo’s study; they lump together advocacy groups and think tanks that perform dramatically different functions. For instance, according to their data, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is the third most-quoted group on the list. But stories about race relations that include a quote from an NAACP representative are unlikely to be “balanced” with quotes from another group on their list. Their quotes will often be balanced by quotes from an individual, depending on the nature of the story; however, because there are no pro-racism groups of any legitimacy (or on Groseclose and Milyo’s list), such stories will be coded as having a “liberal bias.” On the other hand, a quote from an NRA spokesperson can and often will be balanced with one from another organization on Groseclose and Milyo’s list, Handgun Control, Inc. (Nonetheless, this reference is somewhat confusing, since Handgun Control was renamed the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence on June 14, 2001, and there is no reference to the Brady Campaign in the study or clarification of the name change; therefore, it is impossible to determine from reading the study if Groseclose and Milyo’s score reflects post-2001 citations by legislators and the media of the group under its new name.)
It is not hard to imagine perfectly balanced news stories that Groseclose and Milyo would score as biased in one direction or the other, given the study’s methodology. For instance, an article that quoted a member of Congress taking one side of an issue, and then quoted a think tank scholar taking the other side, would be coded as “biased” in the direction of whichever side was represented by the think tank scholar. Since Groseclose and Milyo’s measure of “bias” is restricted to citations of think tank and advocacy groups, this kind of miscategorization is inevitable.
199 · moralize this said
I not quite sure what critical distinction you’re making. be that as it may, my point was kerry accused bush of letting attack ads do his dirty work. bush, of course, condemned these ads, as i’m sure obama will do if asked.
what are these ads saying that is so objectionable?
?
exploiting stereotypes of POWs mental stability, if i recall the press excoritated bush when similar rumors were spread by phone during his primary against mccain. i’m sure obama will distance himself if it becomes a bigger issue.
“The prisoner of war experience is not a good prerequisite for president of the United States,” says Butler. “He was known as a very volatile guy and he would blow up and go like a Roman candle. John McCain is not someone I would like to see with his finger near the red button.”
204 · Manju said
bs. it only emphasizes mccain’s propensity to go off the handle and lose his temper, something he himself has carefully kept alive to feed the myth that he is a maverick whose only interest is in getting things done. the pow part only contradicts mccain’s predilection to constantly mention his pow experience in all contexts, related or unrelated, as if that makes him above reproach on everyhting else.
sure, you can make it seem otherwise, but it will be a lipstick-on-a-pig moment all over again.
great colbert report episode on mccain’s manipulation of the press.
moralize this: the ad specifically refernces his pow experice in relation to being volatile. you don’t need to be a dog to hear that whistle. i see you like your politics strawmanish, clean and easy, black and white. thats why this stuff is done with reasonable doubt, plausible denial, for little darling puppy innocents like you, so afraid to look into the dark soul of comrades.
but if it makes you feal any better, obama didn’t authorize this, AS FAR AS I KNOW.
207 · Manju said
yes, the ad was being narrated by a pow, who was condemning himself as a nutcase. maybe, your world view requires easy stereotypes such as pows automatically being nutcases, which is why i can see you are a republican admirer of karl rove, the primo exploiter of the reptilian brain.
btw, here is the ad itself so everyone can decide for themselves.
mccain’s legendary bad temper.
But McCain went on: ‘I wouldn’t call you an a–hole unless you really were an a–hole.’ The Republican senator witnessing the scene had considered supporting McCain for president, but changed his mind. ‘I decided,’ the senator told Newsweek, ‘I didn’t want this guy anywhere near a trigger.’â€
Apparently, republican senators consider him too volatile for the red button.
By his own account, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the front-runner for the 2008 presidential race, had trouble controlling his anger long before he was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
so he radomly called himself a nutcase and this in now way is meant to impune mccain? jesus, you really have a deep need to belive in a black and white world. change you can believe in, for sure.
Yeah, i always liked this argument. conservatives use it all the time. “its only liberals who look at wille horton and see a stereotype of a black man. the admakers didnt’ intend it.” heh, sometimes the argument is true, like when lebron james was on a cover and progressives saw king kong. but, in their defense, that was subtler than this.
defintiely right out of the rove playbook, replete with a nuke weapon ref (but, of course, it must be just a coincidence…wouldn’t want to upset your worldview):
Bush Campaign Used Code Words to Question McCain’s Temper. “A smear campaign of the ugliest sort is now coursing through the contest for the presidency in 2000. Using the code word “temper,” a group of Senate Republicans, and at least some outriders of the George W. Bush campaign, are spreading the word that John McCain is unstable. The subtext, also suggested in this whispering campaign, is that he returned from 5 1/2 years as a POW in North Vietnam with a loose screw. And it is bruited about that he shouldn’t be entrusted with nuclear weapons.â€
yes, mccain’s notorious propensity to go absolutely bonkers is a smear.
next time, i will carefully annotate all instances of sarcasm for your benefit.
well, 203, 205, 208, really did sound like you were being serious.
now, interestingly, obama could come out and condemn this, which will simultaneously make him look good while slyly bringing more attention to the ads, getting people thinking mccain really is mentally unstable. of course, mccain could come out and say he doesn’t believe obama got prefrence when being admitted to harvard (as some are alleging)…but that might seem too obvious at this point.
213 · Manju said
the “who was condemning himself as a nutcase. ” was sarcastic. but let’s be real: the ad works because mccain has a long record of being impetuous and ornery. even his palin pick was described by some in his inner circle as being a response in pique to not being allowed to choose “joe or ridge”.
and instead this is what we discuss: whether pows have a high propensity to ptsd, and whether an ad might slyly allude to that. instead of whether mccain supports torture, something that will likely have a direct impact on the safety of american pows. or whether veterans need educational support.
i’d pay to have mccain do this. maybe he can then do another
failed racial reconciliationcall for action tour in penance. “no, no, really. if i had known then what i know now, i would have voted for mlk day. really.”Moralize this frantically posts every link they/it can find , in the hopes they can single handedly(so many reasons why)defeat McCain from a basement somewhere. Warrior of the Blogs. Time to get some pop corn and watch this.
215 · Rahul_By_Any_Other_Name said
have you asked your mommy to make some for you?
wow. so clever you are.
rbaon, next time be sure to put in a sitting in underwear reference too. if you are going to ignore facts, i say, go all the way.
rahul, here is a final link for you before i go home for the evening. david foster wallace (rip)’s essay of a possibly real mccain in 2000. and his depression with him now.
Panties in a bunch is more like it.
I’m sure you’ll be able to find a link to some Nostradamus prophecy about McCain too. What next… an article on how Foster’s death was caused by McCain ?
219 · Rahul_By_Any_Other_Name said
what, mccain kills people who write about him? i only thought he threw hissy fits and hid from the press.
i have no idea what nostradamus has to do with david foster wallace, but i will be glad to hear about it.
219 · Rahul_By_Any_Other_Name said
rahul, you know me so well. are you that pedo neighbor who i caught peeping into my basement the other day?
219 · Rahul_By_Any_Other_Name said
between your random ad hominem attacks though, do take the time to read that 2000 dfw article – yes, google and the internets are actually helpful in getting you information, even if you deride them as “links”.
wallace does a really great job of capturing the combination of idealism, craziness and hope that infected mccain’s 2000 campaign. and a reminder of what could have been.
Why did fannie, freddie, AIG, Lehman, Wachovia, and Merril go kaput just at the very moment McCain & Palin were surging ahead? I question the timing.
I mean, we know hedge fund managers have been favoring Obama, and shorting has played no small role in the collapse of the financial sector. Put 2 and 2 together. This could be bigger than Nixon’s alleged sabotaging of Johnson’s peace agreement, although Obama’s working that end too. Hmmmm?
Hitler.
thats not me by the way…if it was intelligent I wouldnt be above claiming it…but alas…
Rahul_By_Any_Other_Name? Would this be Thee Rahuligan smelling not so sweet? I’ve been awaiting The Return with palm branches in hand, but not sure as it appears that the defender of HRC is in the McCain camp….Perhaps I’ll put away the fronds and the oil for now.
225 · Dr Amonymous said
What did I do now?
Whoa! Polls have moved fast. Obama back in the lead. Palin bounce gone. He still needs some more cushion in case of a Bradley effect, but his path to victory appears clear now. McCain needs an OBL capture.
I am curious to know if the Obama camp still intends to redraw the electoral map, using their money advantage to register new voters and challenge McCain in states that were once firmly red. But Palin has obliterated the money advantage and can challenge Obama’s identity base with her own. It seems not taking public financing was a mistake, since he doesn’t have a cash advantage and now has to spend time raising money. He looks exhausted.
229 · Manju said
i am betting that mccain/palin will try to reignite culture war stuff in some way shape or form. they need their base to be baying for blood, and eager to show up on nov 4, and that’s the only way to do that.
there were multiple reasons to spend in red states. they were hoping that they would have such a huge money advantage as to force mccain to burn money on states that he would otherwise not have spent in, and to set up a firm base for the dem party itself to be more successful in state level and non presidential elections. i dont think the money advantage is substantial enough at this point – thanks to palin and rnc warchest – to do the former effectively, and, right now, trying to change the game in historically red states isn’t as important as obama getting to the white house. i still think they have an ability to put a large number (~5-6) states in play so they have multiple paths to electoral college victory, and that’s what they will focus on.
one thing though: the obama team’s tactical acumen, and focus on the long game is really really impressive. especially the latter, in a world of hour to hour news cycles, where it is so easy to get distracted by transient crap. in the primaries, they did a very good job with their focus on caucus states and a full 50 state strategy, and now too, they’ve done very well by strategically limiting fire even when all the dems were worried that obama wasn’t attacking enough and thought that he seemed weak, and making it clear that mccain is the one trying to drag things into the gutter (hlike in 2000, mccain unleashed nastiness when his situation became precarious, but this time he seems to have been hurt by it, at least a little). also, they have some interesting state-by-state stuff going on, which shows they really understand their demo stuff very well, another area where obama completely outclassed hillary when it came to understanding delegate apportioning by district. excellent stuff – obama and his advisors have an excellent head for details, and how to analyze them.
230 · moralize this said
I suspect the culture war well is spent at this point, the results already built into the polls. In tough economic times, he can stroke some xenophobia about jobs going overseas but Obama and the dems are way ahead on that issue, having expertly stroked those fears during the primary and convention. Anyway, the economy trumps everything, even culture, as clinton proved. If mcCain losses on the economy he loses period.
My advice to McCain is to go on the attack and hit Obama for his connections to Frankin Raines and Jim Johnson. Both are Obama campaign advisors and contributors and led their companies to the biggest taxpayer bailout in history. Ken Lays tenure at enron pails in comparison and there was no bailout. tie obamam to them the way the dems tied lay to bush. throw rangel in the mix as part of the culture of corruption. doubt it’ll work, but worth a shot. if he lets Obama own the economy the game is up.
Won’t that bring Phil don’t-whine Gramm and the repeal of Glass-Steagall into play? Slippery slope there. Might be easier to facilitate a five-week long 20% rally by infusing a trillion or two and banning short-selling, naked or otherwise. Relative to average attention span of a “swing/independent” voter, five weeks is eternity.
232 · dipanjan said
don’t knock the glass-steagall repeal. that’s what allowed b of a to buy merrill this weekend, which staunched the bleeding at least a little bit. glass-steagall was a real mess in any case, the problem is that no good replacement was put in place and both parties were asleep at the wheel. and now “the power of the market” needs to be restored by “big government”.