Whoopi Goldberg | 08/29/2008 11:02 am

Whoopi Weighs in on Sarah Palin and Reader Comments on Her Obama Post!

Well, as I’m watching television this morning, it appears that John McCain may pick Gov. Sarah Palin, of Alaska, to appease all of those angry women — the ones who were going to vote for Hillary and then threatened to vote for John McCain — by just picking a woman. It’s expedient, and should make everybody feel better. After all, what do women actually know? They’ll pick any female, as long it’s not a guy. That kind of thinking is so insulting I don’t know what to say.

I’m sure Sarah Palin (we’ll find out more information on her) is a wonderful woman, but if you’re a Democrat why would you go for a Republican female that you don’t know much about just because she’s female? Has John McCain missed the point? Or is that the point? That these angry women are angry because a woman was not picked … not Hillary Clinton … but a woman.

I looked at some of the comments to my Barack Obama post this morning and I thought they were fantastic. There was one lady who was irritated with me, I guess because I called Barack Obama an African American.

Well, normally one would say, "Well, his dad is African," as some of the other folks who were on the site pointed out and, "He is American," so that would make him an African American, in the truest sense of the word. The irritated comment was from Helen King. Well, Helen, he brags about his family but I’m sure he just wanted to make folks who were concerned about whether or not he could deal with white people feel better about the fact that half of his family is white. You know, so he’d be able to talk to white folks without freaking people out.

Helen said, "You never hear him brag about that." Well, in fact, he showed mama’s picture and grandmama’s picture and granddaddy’s picture quite a bit. We see pictures of his black father, but it’s kind of obvious he’s black, so he wants to let everybody know that he also has white in him. I guess in a funny way it means that he’s a well-rounded American. And just for the record, "African American" is cool, and although I do enjoy seeing the word Negro, one doesn’t generally say African Negro. One would just say Negro.

Read more about: John McCain, News, Politics, Sarah Palin, Whoopi

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

I believe McCain voted against these things because of the amount of pork that had been loaded into the bills. By the time these items get to the floor, they aren’t even recognizable. If you haven’t read the bills in their entirety, I encourage you to do so. I believe you will find that they would have been hard to support. Not because of what was at the core, but because of what had been added to the fringes.

By Giving Heart on 10/31/2008 9:36 pm

e-mail alert

Yes, I am sure that is what you believe, but in fact you would again be incorrect in your assumptions.

By Deni G on 10/31/2008 10:32 pm

e-mail alert

Why is Obama so in our faces now with photos of his white family when in his books he is ready to denounce them? How can we trust this wishy-washy flip-flopper!!! By Giving Heart on 09/03/2008 9:10 am :: Giving Heart, I have read both of Senator Obama’s books and he did not denounce his “white family” in the least. He dedicates The Audacity of Hope To the women who raised me - My Maternal Grandmother, Tutu, who’s been a rock of stability throughout my life. and My Mother, whose loving spirit sustains me still. I would not call this “denouncing” in the least.

By M L Staats on 09/03/2008 1:59 pm

e-mail alert

Again, just stupid. This is just stupid. You can’t stay anything at all about his issues, his policies, and his condemnation of the Bush Administration, so you are pulling straw out of your ass.

By Mugsy Peabody on 09/03/2008 2:55 pm

e-mail alert

Thank you Kitty, I’d really love to continue this conversation because I think it’s an important one and hopefully we’re providing a little economic food for thought to some of the other readers(that is, if we’re not boring them to sleep, LOL) I don’t think for a minute that it would be OK for the foreign holders of Treasury Bonds to just dump them. That’s why I said it’s a very delicate balancing act. What I think is that it was complete mismanagement of the finances of the government and the resulting disastrous economic circumstances we’re in now that put us in such a precarious situation. As has been pointed out by at least one tax consultant on here, the big corporations that are getting tax cuts to move their manufacturing operations out of this country do not pay income tax. The CEOs of those corporations hide much of their personal income under the umbrellas of their corporate tax exemptons so they pay income taxes on relatively small portions of their incomes. Right now the people who are paying the biggest percentage of their actual incomes in tax are among the upper 8% to 20% of income earners. You notice I say earners. That’s because when income comes from capital gains and dividends rather than “earned income”(like the super wealthy) they don’t pay as much tax. The middle class used the be the biggest group of tax paying citizens. They may not have paid the biggest percent of the tax revenue the government received, but they were the biggest single group of tax payers and they contributed a very large percent of that revenue. That tax was paid on incomes ranging from around $60 - $120 thousand back in the nineties. Adjusted for inflation that would probably be somewhere between $85 - $200 thousand now. That is, if those people still had the jobs they had then. Most of those people are now earning from around $20 - $50 thousand because the economic rug was pulled out from under them when the companies they worked for were given tax breaks and corporate welfare to move the jobs overseas. The income tax revenue wasn’t the only thing hit by this. So was SS and Medicare. It seem to me that the government should have thought a little more about what it’s tax breaks and corporate welfare to wealthy corporations moving jobs out of the country was going to do to the financial well-being and therefore the tax base of the people of this country. Perhaps if in their manipulations of the economy they had taken the working people into a little more consideration rather than paying the corporations to take their jobs, they might have avoided this precarious situation. While they were giving tax breaks and paying corporate welfare our middle class tax base was shrinking. If the people were still working living wage jobs and paying taxes accordingly; If tax dollars weren’t being given away hand over fist to republican corporate special interests. http://www.eriposte.com/economy/tax/corporate_welfare.htm ; If banking hadn’t been deregulated to allow for even further economic destruction of the working people through sleazy loan and credit card practices and false inflation of the already erroneous numbers used as economic indicators; then perhaps we could have financed our own government and we wouldn’t be owned by China and Dubai. Our National Debt and budget deficit has been growing exponentially ever since Bush took office because of the corruption of his administration and his failed economic policies. And the War that’s costing us $10 million per month isn’t even counted in the budget numbers. What is it that you think McSame is going to do to change this? Oh he says he’s going to stop ear-marking and pork barreling. Well more power to him if he can, but I’ll bet you $10 million dollars a month that he won’t stop any of the things I listed above. In fact he already says he’s going to get them made permanent if not increase some of them. I’ll bet you the National Debt that we’re paying a lot more to Halliburton than we are to check the DNA of bears. So, how is voting for him going to improve our economic situation?

By Sherrie Crews on 09/03/2008 12:12 pm

e-mail alert

Hi Sherrie, I’m so glad you decided to continue our conversation. I have, and continue to enjoy discussing this with you. I’ll take your points one at a time. Your first point addresses the middle class, and you contend that they have lost earning power since the nineties. For all families, median family income actually inched up under Bush by $272. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_obama.html Regardless of that fact, I concede that the globalization of the economy has resulted in job losses, particularly in the manufacturing sector. Let’s use the automobile industry for an example here. More than 1/2 of the “big 3” sales are outside the US. Clearly, we must be competitive on a global scale. That will require us to produce superior products at a competitive price, or lose business to others who do. GM is about to be overtaken by Toyota for these very reasons. To simply pay workers more will make GM less competitive, lose more money, and eventually go out of business. So, Senator Obama proposes to take away tax breaks (increase taxes) for overseas production. The result? The company will pay more taxes, be less profitable, and be put at a global disadvantage. Not a good solution, in my opinion. Your second point was corporate tax loop holes. I agree with you, as I said before. Close them. Both candidates have promised to do so. Your third point was banking regulation. You contend that working people have been economically destroyed by sleazy loan and credit card practices. Allow me to address real estate lending practices. I’m assuming you are referring to sales people being incented on a higher commission basis to sell adjustable rate mortgages with no down payments - those that are most commonly in default. I agree. That sales practice was vile, and should be punished. But a line must be carefully drawn here. You don’t want such a regulated banking industry that banks tell you what kind of debt you “should” and “should not” incur, do you? Credit card debt is not forced on anyone. Rate regulation is fair. Predatory lending practice regulation is fair. But, many borrowers were speculating in this market, too. Let’s be fair. It was not all the fault of the banking industry. Last, you address the National Debt. I couldn’t agree more. Every American man, woman and child would have to pay $31,500+ to pay this off. When Bush took office, the National debt was $20,000 per American. Disgraceful. You contend that McCane will stop earmarks and pork barreling, but doubt he has other plans. In fact, he’s laid out a plan - and said how he’s going to pay for it. I’ve provided the details in an earlier post, and they can be reviewed in the 8/25/08 issue of Barron’s magazine. Senator Obama has not said how he is going to pay for his economic plan. His plan is less economic growth friendly, and I don’t know how he’s going to pay for it. Sure, I love the sound of early childhood education, funding “No Child Left Behind,” tax cuts for the middle class and creation of more jobs. I just will not vote for him until he says how he’s going to pay for this, because until he does, they’re empty promises. Nothing more. I don’t think this is an unreasonable thing to ask. Do you?

By K O on 09/03/2008 1:05 pm

e-mail alert

Kitty Great Expose’. There is one more thing I would like to add about the mortgage crisis. There were many sleazy lenders that preyed on the unsuspecting. But this not the whole story. I live in an area where development was going on at such as fast pace it was alarming. Young couples would buy large houses that they couldn’t afford. There isn’t always a hard sell because these are new houses by developers and a real estate agent is not involved. The developer usually had 5-6 models of varying sizes and prices. There was a lot of choice. Sometimes I would run through some of the models, they are beautifully decorated, and make every young couples heart pound. Many times they would buy more than they could afford and take sub prime loans in order to “keep up” with their friends buying habits. They adjustable rate mortgages, (I know you know), and by the time the house was ready (6-9 mos after purchase) the value of it in that volatile market, had gone up usually $60,000 or $70,000 dollars. They would move into these enormous houses, and then get an equity loan (which they couldn’t afford) to buy furniture, pools, boats, RV equipment, and much more. They appeared to be successful, while it was all borrowed. And since they bought items with equity, when they foreclosed, many of them hid the boats, seabees, etc, and ended up with goods they will never pay for. I was asked several times by people about subprimes and always said don’t do it, and don’t borrow from you home. That is part of the problem. Many created it for themselves. Whenever I go to the bank for anything, regarding our business, equity line etc, I am always given a full disclosure, and have to sign it. If people are not sure of the jargon, they need to take someone with them. It is not a lease for an apartment or condo. Those people’s decisions and the banks have impacted America for a long time to come.

By Frannie Em on 09/03/2008 5:02 pm

e-mail alert

Hi Frannie, Good point. Those people you described who constantly pulled equity out of their houses operated on the assumption that their home price would always rise. As those of us who have been around for a while know, no prices always rise. You’d think so soon after the Internet speculation, people would know this. Lucky people who asked you for advice. “Don’t borrow from your home” was wise advice indeed, Frannie. I hope the people to whom you said this are grateful to you. What business is it that you are in, if I may ask?

By K O on 09/03/2008 6:49 pm

e-mail alert

hi, unfortunately i’m either late or lost, but i do know when someone is being used. How can Sarah Palin lend herself to be used? i can see that if they win(pray they do not!) she will be VP, and how that can be appealing to someone very ambitious. I know many incredibly strong women, most of us are,but our strength and power( yeah, REAL power,,just imagine if every woman on earth decided to cross their legs, the world would cease to exist! i call that power, don;’t you?)does not mean we are ready to be President!! To be a gun touting,hockey mom means one has different preferences,and abilities, but it does not mean EXTRAORDINARY. i think i’m angry and consider Sarah P. and affront to women, and John McCain a self serving,thoughtless,careless politician.

By Jacq. C. on 09/03/2008 1:29 pm

e-mail alert

If Sarah Palin is being used by the Republican party because she is a women, is Obama being used by the Democrats because he is an African American? Is that all you see Mrs. Palin as, a gun toting, hockey mom? And you think the only power women have is their reproductive system? How shallow are you? Why is it that some women are so destructive to themselves and others, I will never know. Try to get away from the television and do some research like a mature person would, who is responsible and can shape an opinion with some sort of intelligence based on facts.

By Kay Mine on 09/03/2008 6:16 pm

e-mail alert

I have to admit to being a little star struck to responding to an article by one of my heros. Though our opinions are a bit different. I am “one of those women”. One of the members of Puma that has been one of the targets of the Republicans reaching out to Hillary supporters. We are not all stupid enough to support McCain just because he pulled a woman up onto his stage, though many of the members of Puma will be voting for McCain as a protest. I am a democrat, I am voting Democrat. Though I am leaving the top blank and not casting a vote for Barack Obama. I know you are an Obama supporter and god bless. However, as a woman, can you look at the media treatment of Senator Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin and not see the good ole boy network alive and well? It is screamingly obvious, but we are only women…what do we know. I will not support Sarah Palin, even though she is a woman, she is against everything I stand for, but I am ashamed at the treatment of women in this election by the media and political supporters.

By Carrie Grubbs on 09/03/2008 2:23 pm

e-mail alert

Carrie Women on this site have torn her apart. It is not just men.

By Frannie Em on 09/03/2008 5:05 pm

e-mail alert

At this point, I wish he had chosen MICHAEL Palin; at least we’d have something to laugh at :)

By E W on 09/03/2008 4:41 pm

e-mail alert

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=_KjsEs46C70 An amazing video from a classmate & fellow POW of Senator McCain’s.

By MaryPage Drake on 09/03/2008 5:16 pm

e-mail alert

Issues people—ISSUES—not personalities…lets wait until tonight after she speaks and see what she has to say about ISSUES//// Neither Obama or Palin have enough experience-face it-it is a fact- Remember Palin is running for VP…..

By Lynn Marie on 09/03/2008 5:22 pm