Politics | 01/30/2009 9:00 am

Palin and Obama to Speak at DC Dinner

By The Staff at wowOwow.com

Sarah Palin has a date with the president Saturday night.

Well, not really, but the politicians will both be attending dinner at DC’s Alfalfa Club. And, as a treat for other guests, Palin and Obama will both offer some wise words. Hopefully those words will be witty, too, for the dinner’s less concerned with policy than roasting other attendees.

Founded in 1913, the club is one of the nation’s most exclusive, and it wasn’t until the 1970s that they allowed black people to attend the annual dinner, the club’s only event. Women weren’t included until 1993.

In addition to regular speeches, the attendees also pick a "mock candidate" for the presidency. That person’s then meant to give an acceptance speech. Perhaps Palin will get the chance to practice for 2012, when some think she’ll try to win the White House.

No doubt Palin’s looking forward to tomorrow. She said this week that she’s looking forward to dining with Obama: "How often will I get an opportunity to have dinner with the president? I will take up that offer to do so." Wise woman!

Read more about: Alfalfa Club, Barack Obama, News, Sarah Palin, Washington DC

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

Reagan and Goldwater are not models for the future??—But FDR is?

By eleanor roche on 02/01/2009 9:54 am

Are you kidding?! Brooks is the STANDARD of conservative journalism! eleanor, you have proven yourself once and for all to be completely unwilling to see past your limited scope of information. You refuse to hear anything that doesn’t agree with your tiny perception of things. David Brooks of all people is about as conservative as a journalist can be… of course by conservative I def. do not mean right-wing christian fundamentalist, I mean CONSERVATIVE. You say HE is misinterpreting date, I suppose YOU know better right? Yes, well as long as you think you know better than anyone you will never learn anything.

By DeBúrca obj on 02/01/2009 11:33 am

e-mail alert

By whose standard? You have no idea what you are talking about. You just got done referencing an article where he rejects Goldwater and Reagan philosophies and you call him the “standard of conservative journalism”!!! They are the scions of conservatism!!! WFB was the standard of conservative journalism. Only Dems like Brooks—he is one of their “token” republicans. He is most certainly not “as conservative as a journalist can be”—if he was he wouldn’t back candidates like McCain!!!! He would back CONSERVATIVES. He is a republican, not a conservative. He must be the the man you think represents our party—the operative word being “think”. Does Lieberman represent your party? Well Brooks does not represent the republican base or conservatives anymore than Liebermann represents Dems. Did you ever even read what I write? You have no first hand knowledge whatsoever of who speaks for the conservative movement in this country. It most certainly is not Brooks!! He must be the only “republican” you read, therefore you make you illinformed assessments. I can give you a list of conservative writers—L Brent Bozell, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Fred barnes to name a few. If you want to know what “conservatives” think, go to Heritage, or townhall, not Brooks. I stopped listening to Brooks years ago, most conservatives can’t stomach him. And yes, I think he is misinterpreting the data, that is my opinion. As to— “you have proven yourself once and for all to be completely unwilling to see past your limited scope of information”— you have got be kidding.

By eleanor roche on 02/01/2009 12:30 pm

It sounds like you’re trying to say today’s and the future’s “reality” is “large government and a dependent populous - sounds like socialism. I strongly believe that this is not the future for America that most responsible Americans want. Productivity of a nation increases because of productivity of the individual. When the opportunity to be productive and rewarded for hard work is taken away by a government, it leads to economic stagnation. The government doesn’t spend its own money - it spends “our money.” If we are not making any money then the government doesn’t get any either to help those who need help, except by borrowing against the nation’s future. The countries that hold U. S. debt were able to buy that debt because of their own high poductivity. There is not a case in history of a vibrant economy being created through a socialist system.

By deber B on 02/01/2009 9:47 am

e-mail alert

deber The state of America today is based on President Bush’s failed policies. Where were you when this decline over the last 8 years happened? Why don’t you think hard working Americans were so unproductive during the last 8 years. So you blame the American people for not being as productive as other workers in countries that “hold debt” and the reason for the current economic crisis?

By Andromeda Jakes on 02/01/2009 10:44 am

e-mail alert

AJ—The numbers show the economy grew every year while Bush was in office—except 2008 and the last quarter numbers are what caused this. Dems—who controlled Congress in 2008—who control spending-were at the helm when this happened.

By eleanor roche on 02/01/2009 11:13 am

I’ll bet you believed that statement “The American economy is fundamentally strong” didn’t you?

By DeBúrca obj on 02/01/2009 2:23 pm

e-mail alert

Well, the economy IS fundamentally strong. It is strong enough that it can be fixed with the right stimulus package. If it were weak nothing could be done. The “core” is strong. The infrastructure is bold and strong. Americans have always bounced back from recessions and even a great big depression. The reason the stimulus package has to be right for America is so that that infrastructure can withstand something like this in the future. And will it happen again? You bet….it is cyclical….we can’t avoid recessions.

By deber B on 02/01/2009 4:32 pm

e-mail alert

America is so that that infrastructure can withstand something like this in the future. And will it happen again? You bet….it is cyclical….we can’t avoid recessions The current situation has never happended before. That is what you can’t seem to understand.

By starry Nite on 02/01/2009 8:52 pm

e-mail alert

No, you are incorrect, Andromeda. The state of the economy is directly related to foolish, greedy Americans (subprime mortgages) and the greed on Wall Street. It happened fast and furiously and when the first signs of distress presented it was too late. America has been through many recessions due to real estate values escalating and high and low interest rates. Please reread my post regarding your last question. It was directly attributable to what happens when you live in a socialist country.

By deber B on 02/01/2009 11:21 am

e-mail alert

The state of this country is due to the deregulation of the banking industry, the failure of Republican trickle-down (voodoo) economics, the Bush War and the billions going down that toilet, the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% (something NEVER done at a time of war), and the Republican war on the middle class, because, without a strong middle class there is no strong economy.

By DeBúrca obj on 02/01/2009 11:55 am

e-mail alert

deber and eleanor………….I compliment you both for excellent posts. It’s always good to see someone using their own words rather than someone copying and pasting someone else’s script.

By Diamond In The Rough on 02/01/2009 10:01 am