Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Conversation | 09/09/2008 6:15 pm

The wOw Women Weigh in on Sarah Palin, Republican Strategy and Slow Democratic Response

JONI: The election. There are so many angles here, I’m going to let you all decide which one you want to discuss. But here we are. I mean, at the end of the day the choice is really John McCain vs. Barack Obama. But, you wouldn’t think that today. You would think, well, all we’re doing is talking about Gov. Palin. And I guess every day talking about her is a bad thing for Obama, because we’re not talking about him. And another angle on all of this is about how the press has been so dismissive of her. And then yesterday you had Maureen Dowd completely turning around and saying she’ll probably be president in four years. So, the whole wrangle of vilification. Cynthia, since you’ve been to the Republican Convention, perhaps you’d like to start. Where are we on this election today?

CYNTHIA: There is no question Sarah Palin changed the conversation. And I think that’s exactly what John McCain hoped would happen. You know, we can debate her merits but, I mean, John McCain has achieved what he wanted politically, at least so far. Coming out of Denver and Obama’s Invesco speech, you know, the general feeling was "nothing can top that," and on Friday McCain did — by announcing Sarah Palin. And he and Palin have dominated the news cycle since. There’s still an awful lot we don’t know. And I’m not so sure that all of it, all of the vetting, has been terribly attractive. I think her daughter’s pregnancy – I’m not saying it’s off limits – but I don’t think it really matters very much and I don’t think the American people think it matters very much. And the sort of glee with which the mainstream media jumped on that seemed to me to be rather unattractive. Whether or not Sarah Palin is competent to be Commander in Chief has little to do with whether or not she is or she isn’t a good mother, which seemed to be what the debate was focusing on last week.

JOAN C: May I interject that I think it was focused as much on hypocrisy, Cynthia, as it was on anything else that she has – for purity balls and abstinence and all of that good stuff, and would not have sex education in schools and that’s why it was gleeful, I think, more than —

CYNTHIA: But you know, Joan, we like to gossip about it all. I just think that, you know, boy do we have more important things to worry about than whether or not her daughter’s pregnant.

JOAN C: But she uses her family politically a great deal in Alaska. There’s a very good piece – I think it’s in The Washington Post. They’ve done a lot of digging and her family is — her husband sits in on almost all the meetings in the governor’s office, and as her chief advisor; and sits in meetings with oil companies, even though he works for one, and advises her. And the children are everywhere. She takes them everywhere. And they’re very much part of the package. And so she’s in … that has invited some of this. But I’m telling you, it’s got to be news when someone brand new comes along to be one of the four major figures in the election and announces their teenage daughter is pregnant.

LESLEY: And not married.

JOAN C: And it was circulating on the Internet that her latest baby was really her daughter’s baby.

LESLEY: Can I step back for one second, step back about a mile, and just look at what’s happened from a distance because, Cynthia, I didn’t go to the convention so I was watching it, you know, at home. And what strikes me today is how brilliantly skillful the Republicans have been through all of this. They had no idea when they … when John McCain chose Sarah Palin at the very last second because he realized, or they forced on him that he couldn’t have his first pick, Joe Lieberman. When he picked Sarah Palin, and all these stories came up because she hadn’t been vetted very much, that they’ve handled all of this with just remarkable shrewdness and political genius because this really could have blown up in their faces.

259 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

phyllis Doyle Pepe
Hear! Hear! See my post above–––somewhere in this thread re: the tax credit bill for wind and solar lingering in Congress. I am so fed up with this Congress, I could spit nails.
By phyllis Doyle Pepe on 09/10/2008 10:15 am
James the Game
You’re right, Kit…now they’re even playing the sexism card against Obama, no matter how silly. Anything to keep the focus on Palin, and off McCain. A brilliant Republican strategy, no matter how filthy. You knew the Swift-boating was going to come, it just waited until the “lipstick” controversy to find a convenient opening.
By James the Game on 09/10/2008 11:42 am
James the Game
The way the McCain campaign treated CNN’s Campbell Brown for merely asking a McCain spokesman if Sarah Palin had any foreign-policy experience pertaining to the Alaska National Guard tells you all you need to know about how reporters would be treated by President McCain’s administration.
By James the Game on 09/09/2008 5:57 pm
Lucinda Herbert
Oh for goodness sake James and Cynthia! You know better than that! Questions should be asked … respectfully, professionally, and in a non-partisan manner. Campbell Brown interviewed Tucker Bounds in a snippy and sarcastic manner. She wrapped up the interview with “I’m just going to give it to ya, baby.” Had Campbell been a man and Tucker a woman, she would have been required to apologize or risk being suspended. . Campbell is certainly no Tim Russert … not even Anderson Cooper … and she diminished herself as a woman journalist.
By Lucinda Herbert on 09/09/2008 7:13 pm
Sandbee (FB) 54
Since when has respectful and non-partisan become part of the reporting manner? Haven’t seen it in a long time. Suddenly you want it for a person who managed to do quite a bit of snipping and being sarcastic in her own speech. Doesn’t work that way. She better learn to handle any sort of questions if she wants to be in a public office in an area where she can’t fire the people who hire the reporter.
By Sandbee (FB) 54 on 09/10/2008 7:20 am
James the Game
I watched the interview live, Lucinda, and she couldn’t get a straight answer out of Tucker. She kept asking him that same, simple question and he was the one who got defensive and snippy, saying things like (paraphrasing), “Campbell, if you’re going to denigrate our candidate.” Then Campbell would counter with (paraphrasing), “I’m not try to denigrate anyone, I’m really not. I’m just trying to educate myself, I really am. Isn’t that a fair question?” Tucker got all ruffled and defensive for nothing.
By James the Game on 09/10/2008 11:50 am
Lucinda Herbert
And, what did you think of her final comment … “I’m just going to give it to ya, baby.” I haven’t even decided which way I’m going to vote, but I was put off by Campbell … imagine if you’d wrapped up an interview with a woman that way, … you’d have had trouble coming up for a breath.,.
By Lucinda Herbert on 09/10/2008 3:10 pm
DeBúrca obj
Spot on James.
By DeBúrca obj on 09/09/2008 10:40 pm
James the Game
Thanks, DeB’. I was watching CNN at the time of the interview, and she kept saying, paraphrasing, “I’m just trying to educate myself. Can you please answer the question? Is that fair?” In no way, no shape, no McCain was that reason for McCain’s campaign to take their marbles and go home.
By James the Game on 09/10/2008 11:54 am
DeBúrca obj
This tactic of bullying the press and charging it with being “disrespectful” etc. started with Nixon and it’s a ploy to ONE… keep the press at bay and TWO… attempt to discredit in the minds of the public the press’s right and duty of asking tough questions and discredit everything the press manages to dig up.
By DeBúrca obj on 09/10/2008 12:23 pm
No Kill and Drill Palin
James, McBush/Rove/Palin has decided as a tactic to not respond to the press unless in a controlled environment. When you don’t have anything and you lie…don’t want to talk. Although he did say the children were off limits. Of course Chelsea Clinton was not when he said the reason she was “…so ugly is that her father is Janet Reno.” He’s a real jerk.
By No Kill and Drill Palin on 09/09/2008 11:05 pm
James the Game
Nobody’s saying anything about Chelsea’s looks now that’s grown into a beautiful young woman. Not that they should’ve ran their mouths in the first place.
By James the Game on 09/10/2008 12:01 pm
amy lamb-hall
i wish hillary would come out and openly kick palin’s butt right back to alaska.excuse me, but we have heard ever so much about the race card, do the intelligent women in this country not realise that mccain is playing the sex card. all through the primaries everyone was so careful about not commenting on race, they did not challenge Obama as bad as they did Hillary, it is okay for the media to play hardball with the woman, but they did not want to be racist. Who in their right mind would think that it is better to be sexist than racist, apparantly all the media, and the rest of the country.shame on all of you. it is the issues we should worry about. everyone has lost sight of that.and mugsy, , i hear you. hillary has too much class and is too smart than to even take a swat at palin.but i would still enjoy it. you are right, sisters, out there HOW IN THE HELL DID WE LET THIS HAPPEN?I AM AN ANGRY WOMAN.and the rest of you should be too.and ashamed. We let her down.and guess what ladies, now we are going to be in the same boat.I am sure Obama will be fine. i like him too.but that is neither here nor there.i hope we have enough conviction and intellegence so we can shove this stupidity right back down the throats of the politcal advisers that have served us this unappealing entree.
By amy lamb-hall on 09/09/2008 6:03 pm
No Kill and Drill Palin
Palin and McCain lied about the Bridge to Nowhere……CBS http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/09/eveningnews/main4433129.shtml From Talking Points Memo: “LYING SARAH WATCH Sometimes when you’ve got a liar as big as Sarah Palin on the line only a timeline will really do justice to her fibbing ways. So a lot of you have written in to ask: Okay, she says she said ‘Thanks. But no thanks’ to the Bridge to Nowhere. But how exactly did it all come out? What’s the order of events? Well, briefly, it went like this. Actually, Congress put the kibosh on the Bridge to Nowhere back in November 2005. Since Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was then head of the Senate Appropriations Committee he was able to force a compromise in which the earmark for the bridge was killed but Alaska got to hold on to the money — some $442 million of federal tax dollars. Fast forward to November 2006. That’s when Sarah Palin was running as a staunch supporter of the Bridge to Nowhere — that is, after the feds had themselves already said ‘No Thanks.’ In 2006, the Democrats took over both houses of Congress. So by the time Palin got into office it was clear that not only was the first Bridge earmark killed but that Congress was not going to be ponying up any more money. That meant that Alaska was going to have to pick up the tab all on its own. So since she couldn’t pay for it with the federal pork barrel, in September 2007, Palin officially halted the project which was then a state project since Congress had said ‘Thanks. But no thanks’ two years earlier. She couldn’t say ‘No Thanks’ because Congress had already said ‘Forget It’. Still with me? So the money Palin sent back to Washington? Well, she didn’t. She kept the money for other bridges and roads in Alaska. So, to boil it all down, Congress pulled the plug on the Bridge to Nowhere in 2005. Palin was still for it in 2006. And when she finally ended the project because Congress had cut off funding, instead of saying ‘No Thanks’ she actually said ‘Thanks!’ because instead of sending the money back to Washington she kept it all in Juneau. Next question? Late Update: From TPM Reader JF … Good summary of the Bridge to Nowhere fiasco but it’s even worse: From the Anchorage Daily News: Alaska “is continuing to build a road on Gravina Island to an empty beach where the bridge would have gone — because federal money for the access road, unlike the bridge money, would have otherwise been returned to the federal government.” The state is building a road to a bridge that doesn’t even exist for $24M. Who’s paying for it? You and me. We are beyond the ridiculous here. It’s utterly surreal.” —Josh Marshall
By No Kill and Drill Palin on 09/09/2008 10:55 pm
~ countrywoman ~
By ~ countrywoman ~ on 09/10/2008 2:13 am