You remember Peggy Noonan, right? She of the open mike idiocy about that Palin pick being “bullshit” gaffe. Then she tried to spin it around, but, she has been less then a supporter. That is her right, but, now, she is a bandwagon jumper

She killed. She had him at “Nice to meet you. Hey, can I call you Joe?” She was the star. He was the second male lead, the good-natured best friend of the leading man. She was not petrified but peppy.

The whole debate was about Sarah Palin. She is not a person of thought but of action. Interviews are about thinking, about reflecting, marshaling data and integrating it into an answer. Debates are more active, more propelled—they are thrust and parry. They are for campaigners. She is a campaigner. Her syntax did not hold, but her magnetism did. At one point she literally winked at the nation.

As far as Mrs. Palin was concerned, Gwen Ifill was not there, and Joe Biden was not there. Sarah and the camera were there. This was classic “talk over the heads of the media straight to the people,” and it is a long time since I’ve seen it done so well, though so transparently. There were moments when she seemed to be doing an infomercial pitch for charm in politics. But it was an effective infomercial.

There is more gushing from Peggy. How does that crow taste, Peggy?

And David Brooks? You remember the Keith Olbermann network gleefully writing “Palin: When you’ve lost David Brooks…” Now we get

Still, this debate was about Sarah Palin. She held up her end of an energetic debate that gave voters a direct look at two competing philosophies. She established debating parity with Joe Biden. And in a country that is furious with Washington, she presented herself as a radical alternative.

By the end of the debate, most Republicans were not crouching behind the couch, but standing on it. The race has not been transformed, but few could have expected as vibrant and tactically clever a performance as the one Sarah Palin turned in Thursday night.

Ummmm, crow. Tastes good! Feels good! Real good! (to the tune sung during marching in Full Metal Jacket by R. Lee Ermey)

Next on the crow list will probably be Kathleen Parker. We’ll give her a few days to clean her Thanksgiving Day silverware.

Surrendie didn’t know if he should be sad because Saracuda did so well last night, or happy because so many in the Liberal media were so flumoxed by her performance that they were forced to surrender and say “She done good!” But, Surrendie loves how they have done it. Consider an Internet front page story at the Washington Post

Sarah Palin looked as though she had prepared for her appearance at the vice presidential debate last night by studying Tina Fey’s impressions of her on “Saturday Night Live.” She twinkled and winked and piled on the perkiness, a “darn right” here and an “I’ll betcha” there.

At the same time, Palin seemed determined to banish thoughts of her as airheaded and inexperienced; she was really debating her own public image rather than Sen. Joe Biden. She subverted the whole purpose of the exercise by merely repeating the key points of her running mate, Sen. John McCain, and ignoring questions that called for more specific answers.

No mention from Tom Shales about the lies of Joe Biden. Who is Tom Shales? He is a Style writer for the Washington Post. Nice to know the Post apparently has no political writers sober enough after Palin’s performance (and, to be honest, let’s not forget that Biden did do very well himself, certainly better then either McCain or Obama) to write a decent article. Shales’ article is considered “top news,” if you look at that link.

Despite the even toned article at the LA Times, one which tends to avoid the zingers by Palin, their headline says it all for those searching for some medical mary jane in the newsroom

Palin and Biden spar in VP debate but neither deals a knockout

And, how can we ignore the Grey Lady?

Gov. Sarah Palin made it through the vice-presidential debate on Thursday without doing any obvious damage to the Republican presidential ticket. By surviving her encounter with Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. and quelling some of the talk about her basic qualifications for high office, she may even have done Senator John McCain a bit of good, freeing him to focus on the other troubles shadowing his campaign.

It was not a tipping point for the embattled Republican presidential ticket, the bad night that many Republicans had feared. But neither did it constitute the turning point the McCain campaign was looking for after a stretch of several weeks in which Senator Barack Obama seemed to be gaining the upper hand in the race. Even if he no longer has to be on the defensive about Ms. Palin, Mr. McCain still faces a tough environment with barely a month until the election, as he acknowledged hours before the debate by effectively pulling his campaign out of Michigan, a Democratic state where Mr. McCain’s advisers had once been optimistic of victory.

So, she did fantastic, but, it don’t mean nuttin’.

Exit question: other then perhaps at Fox News, the Washington Times, and a few other media outlets, are there any in the Credentialed Media who do not have hangovers like Cuba just won the World Cup?

The New York Times took on Joe Biden in my previous post, painting him as a great guy who just wants to give his family a good life in a pleasant, beautiful domicile. How do they treat Sarah Palin? Let’s check the headline: As Governor, Palin Has Focused on Developing State’s Resources. The underlying premise is “sure, she did well in Alaska, that state with the tiny population out in the middle of nowhere, but, does that mean she knows anything else? Can she really run a country? Does she have the right stuff? Does anyone really know anything about her?”

When Gov. Sarah Palin meets Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. on Thursday in the vice-presidential debate, even her fellow Alaskans might hear for the first time some of her views on health care reform, education policy and other issues of state government.

Yeah, because that 80% + approval rating was based on the wind. Let’s go to the next two paragraphs.

In her 22 months in office, Ms. Palin has not addressed many of those matters in a significant way, pursuing a narrower agenda rooted in Alaska’s resource-based economy.

Ms. Palin has approved increased spending for education and the elderly, sued the federal government for listing the polar bear as a threatened species, and pushed for a bill that would have reduced state regulation of new medical facilities.

Hmm, that seems like education and healthcare policy. Here we go, though, the red meat for the liberals who read the paper

But by and large, oil and gas issues have dominated her tenure.

“You can’t think of another area where there’s been another drive or initiative coming out of the administration with the same level of intensity,” said Scott Goldsmith, a professor of economics at the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska Anchorage.

Big Oil! Or, should that be written, Evil Big Oil! Obviously, she must be intimately linked with Big Oil, the destroyer of Gaia, the Bane of Liberal Existence, those evil people who jack gas prices up and harm the economy at the expense of the Middle Class! Yawn.

Interestingly, they actually do something they have yet to do for Barack Obama or Joe Biden, and delve in to several of the issues Sarah has been involved in, healthcare, education (remember, Alaskans do not know her positions, according to the Times), trade, environment, elderly, budget, and social issues. In each and every one, the Times attempts to put in a little rejoinder that spins what Palin did as not so good. Consider environment, which is not so subtle

Ms. Palin has taken positions that reflect her support for developing Alaska’s natural resources. Her views are largely in line with those of voters in her state, but not with environmentalists.

And, in Liberal World, to hell with the 80%+ people who support her, the environmentalists come first.

A good chunk of the story involves the oil industry, no surprise considering how important it is to Alaska, but, the constant mentions are, of course, meant to tie her to that EVIL industry, even when she is taking them on.

I’m waiting for the story on her house.

Ask yourself if you have ever seen an article this nice about Sarah Palin by the Grey Lady. Ask yourself why this artice just happens to come out the day of the VP debates. A bit of Biden Luv from the New York Times: An Everyman on the Trail, With Perks at Home

For the millions of voters getting to know him, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, portrays himself at times as an average guy who takes the train to work, frets about money and basically has led a middle-class life.

“Ladies and gentlemen, your kitchen table is like mine,” Mr. Biden said when Senator Barack Obama introduced him as his running mate. “You sit there at night after you put the kids to bed and you talk, you talk about what you need. You talk about how much you are worried about being able to pay the bills.”

He’s a swell guy, eh?

Although he is among the least wealthy members of the millionaires club that is the United States Senate — he and his wife, Jill, a college professor, earn about $250,000 a year — Mr. Biden maintains a lifestyle that is more comfortable than the impression he may have given on the campaign trail. A review of his finances found that when it comes to some of his largest expenses, like the purchase and upkeep of his home and his use of Amtrak trains to get around, he has benefited from resources and relationships not available to average Americans.

As a secure incumbent who has rarely faced serious competition during 35 years in the Senate, Mr. Biden has been able to dip into his campaign treasury to spend thousands of dollars on home landscaping and some of his Amtrak travel between Wilmington, Del., where he lives, and Washington. And the acquisition of his waterfront property a decade ago involved wealthy businessmen and campaign supporters, some of them bankers with an interest in legislation before the Senate, who bought his old house for top dollar, sold him four acres at cost and lent him $500,000 to build his new home.

Hmm, that would seem to be problematic. Is yardwork the reason people donate to his campaigns? As for the waterfront property, that seems to be exactly the kind of issue that Obama rails about (though we know he doesn’t mean it.) I bet the Times has something to say on this obvious lapse in ethics

There is nothing to suggest Mr. Biden bent any rules in the sale, purchase and financing of his homes. Rather, he appears to have benefited at times from the simple fact of who he is: a United States senator, not just “Amtrak Joe,” the train-riding everyman that the Obama-Biden campaign has deployed to rally middle-class voters.

Ah. It’s OK, then. Sarah Palin fires a guy who refused to fire a trooper - who happened to be her ex-brother in law - who tazed a 10 year old, drank before and during shifts, illegally shot animals, etc, but, according to all the Liberal media, there is a problem with that.

Interestingly, throught the who article, which is about telling us what an average Joe Joe is, we get a look at Joe’s finances, and realize that this guy just isn’t very good with money. Good thing he is just running for the job of VP, eh?

So, where is the article on Palin? That post is up next.

The headlines of both articles gives a good idea of where the Times wants to push the reader. We’ll start with Sarah Palin, then get to the Gaffe Master after the jump

Past Debates Show a Confident Palin, at Times Fluent but Often Vague

Not since Dan Quayle took the stage in 1988 have debate expectations for a major party candidate been as low as they will be on Thursday for Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Setting the stage for calling Palin a lightweight

A newcomer to the national scene, Ms. Palin has given little indication that she has been engaged in a serious way in the pressing national and international issues of the day.

Sorry she couldn’t have been in the Senate since 1972 like Biden, and having failed 3 attempts for the Democrat nomination, or having been chosen as a VP with more experience then the top of the ticket. I doubt Clinton was real concerned with national or international issues while governor of Arkansas, either.

But a review of a handful of her debate performances in the race for governor in 2006 shows a somewhat different persona from the one that has emerged since Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, named Ms. Palin as the vice-presidential nominee a month ago.

Ms. Palin, a former mayor who had become a whistle-blower about ethical misconduct in state government, held her own in those debates. (There were almost two dozen in the general election alone; she skipped some, and not all were recorded.)

Some pleasantries thrown in to give an appearance of journalism, rather then opinionation

Her debating style was rarely confrontational, and she appeared confident. In contrast to today, when she seems unversed on several important issues, she demonstrated fluency on certain subjects, particularly oil and gas development.

But just as she does now, Ms. Palin often spoke in generalities and showed scant aptitude for developing arguments beyond a talking point or two. Her sentences were distinguished by their repetition of words, by the use of the phrase “here in Alaska” and for gaps. On paper, her sentences would have been difficult to diagram.

John Bitney, the policy director for her campaign for governor and the main person who helped prepare her for debates, said her repetition of words was “her way of running down the clock as her mind searches for where she wants to go.”

These tendencies could fuzz her meaning and lead her into linguistic cul-de-sacs. She often used less than her allotted time and ended her answers abruptly.

Um, uh, um, well, you see, Jim, ah, what I mean is.  No mention of The Messiah’s constant and consistent speaking manner when his friend Mr. Teleprompter is off having a drink after a hard days work from the Times, or any other Credentialed Media outlet.

But, you can tell what the Grey Lady wants to do: paint Palin as a bubble headed lightweight. Period.

And on to Biden

I’m glad that someone in the Liberal media is finally taking on Barack Obama’s 20 years of attendence at a church founded on Black Liberation doctrine, mentored by Black Liberation docrine pastors such as Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger, surrounded by people in the pews who believe in Black Liberation doctrine, and reading about Black Liberation doctrine in all those copies of Trinity Church’s newsletter that featured articles about Barack Obama.

Huh? No? I missread it? How about that? Palin treads carefully between fundamentalist beliefs and public policy

Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago — about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct — the teacher said.

After conducting a college band and watching Palin deliver a commencement address to a small group of home-schooled students in June 1997, Wasilla resident Philip Munger said, he asked the young mayor about her religious beliefs.

Palin told him that “dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time,” Munger said. When he asked her about prehistoric fossils and tracks dating back millions of years, Palin said “she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks,” recalled Munger, who teaches music at the University of Alaska in Anchorage and has regularly criticized Palin in recent years on his liberal political blog, called Progressive Alaska.

I do not hold those same beliefs, but, apparently, the Los Angeles Times is requiring a religious test for Palin. Her beliefs in what the Bible actually says are a cause for concern for the Times, though, apparently, it is OK for Barack H. Obama to sit in the pews of Trinity and listen to preachers talk about how Jesus was Black, and Whites are NOT practicing real Christianity.

Remember one thing, though: most of this is all hearsay. He said she said. Almost no direct quotes from Palin herself.

Palin has attended a number of prayer sessions with pastors and has quietly sought their guidance, but she is often mum on matters of faith in high-profile public forums.

Her aides say Palin’s caution at the intersection of religion and governance is a studied effort to share her beliefs without forcing them on Alaska.

In other words, the LA Times is digging for relevance, attempting to create an issue without direct, concrete evidence. Of course, Palin’s anti-abortion stance is good enough for the Times to label her a fundamentalist, and outside the mainstream.

Furthermore, they disengenuously misquote her, as so much of the media has, on Iraq

In one of her more controversial appearances in the Wasilla church, Palin told a group of ministry students in June to pray that sending troops to Iraq was part of “God’s plan.”

No no no.

But, you know, she wanted to allow Intelligent Design to be taught in schools, if they wanted to! How horrible to allow different viewpoints to be taught!

But, then, it has gotten so bad on the left that they are seeking counseling for their Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Can anyone point out a Credentialed Media article which discussed the negative implications of the pastors, both visiting and resident, at Trinity Church discussing how great Obama is, how evil his opponents were, and their other political talk? Jeremiah Wright? Who dat?

Defying a federal law that prohibits U.S. clergy from endorsing political candidates from the pulpit, an evangelical Christian minister told his congregation Sunday that voting for Sen. Barack Obama would be evidence of “severe moral schizophrenia.”

BTW, unless the pastor happens to be preaching Black Liberation doctrine, they must be evangelical. In MSM world, they are all “fundies” unless they ean Left.

The Rev. Ron Johnson Jr. told worshipers that the Democratic presidential nominee’s positions on abortion and gay partnerships exist “in direct opposition to God’s truth as He has revealed it in the Scriptures.” Johnson showed slides contrasting the candidates’ views but stopped short of endorsing Obama’s Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain.

Johnson and 32 other pastors across the country set out Sunday to break the rules, hoping to generate a legal battle that will prompt federal courts to throw out a 54-year-old ban on political endorsements by tax-exempt houses of worship.

The ministers contend they have a constitutional right to advise their worshipers how to vote. As Johnson put it during a break between sermons, “The point that the IRS says you can’t do it, I’m saying you’re wrong.”

The IRS was alerted to this by “opponents,” ie, far Left groups who despise religion, except when Obama is practicing it and Pflegar (I refuse to use his religious label, as anyone who acts like he does doesn’t deserve to be in that job) is using his time to flount IRS regulations.

This time, the church action is concerted. Yet while the ministers say the rules stifle religious expression, their opponents contend that the tax laws are essential to protect the separation of church and state. They say political speech should not be supported by a tax break for the churches or the worshipers who are contributing to a political cause.

Yes, that notion that does not appear in the Constitution. The real one, I mean, not that “Living Constitution” based on European laws one.

Anyhow, let me point out that when I go to church, I do not want to listen to political speeches. I have no problem with Church time being used at other times, but not during the worship time. But, if I was going to one where that was happening, I would switch in a minute, even if the preacher was showing support for my candidate.

I’m sure we’ll be seeing the story about the IRS investigating left side churches like Trinity United tomorrow, right? More then likely, we will see the ACLU demanding, well, something. They always demand something. It’s like they hate freedom or something.

A triple shot of weird from the New York Times. Let’s start with “Obama has many ties to Fannie Mae, AIG, Lobbyists, and Domestic Terrorists.” Huh? Oh, sorry: McCain and Team Have Many Ties to Gambling Industry

Senator John McCain was on a roll. In a room reserved for high-stakes gamblers at the Foxwoods Resort Casino in Connecticut, he tossed $100 chips around a hot craps table. When the marathon session ended around 2:30 a.m., the Arizona senator and his entourage emerged with thousands of dollars in winnings.

As a two-time chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, Mr. McCain has done more than any other member of Congress to shape the laws governing America’s casinos, helping to transform the once-sleepy Indian gambling business into a $26-billion-a-year behemoth with 423 casinos across the country. He has won praise as a champion of economic development and self-governance on reservations.

As factions of the ferociously competitive gambling industry have vied for an edge, they have found it advantageous to cultivate a relationship with Mr. McCain or hire someone who has one, according to an examination based on more than 70 interviews and thousands of pages of documents.

Mr. McCain portrays himself as a Washington maverick unswayed by special interests, referring recently to lobbyists as “birds of prey.” Yet in his current campaign, more than 40 fund-raisers and top advisers have lobbied or worked for an array of gambling interests — including tribal and Las Vegas casinos, lottery companies and online poker purveyors.

A “nicely” written article by the Times, with a mix of “look at the good McCain has done for these Indians!” and “hmm, he sure seems like he does quite a bit with lobbyists and to increase gambling in this country, which is bad!” A long, long, long page A1 article.

Why? What is the point, other then to subtely paint McCain as a gambling addict hell bent on taking lobbyist money to make American’s into gamblers.

Massachusetts Proposal Would Repeal Income Tax

….Amid the whirlwind presidential election, Massachusetts has a ballot contest of its own this November that could drastically alter — some would say cripple — state government.

At issue is Question 1, which would eliminate the state income tax. It would save the average taxpayer about $3,600 a year. Annual revenue from the tax is about $12.5 billion, roughly 45 percent of the state’s budget of about $28 billion.

Let’s see: the state with two of the most Liberal Senators, one a failed presidential candidate who liked to talk about tax cuts for the rich, and the other the Lion of the Senate, who never met a tax increase he didn’t like, wants to eliminate the State income tax. This is a state with 10 House seats, and all ten are Democrats. Massively liberal/progressive. If they think this is a good idea, maybe the rest of the country should consider it.

And last, but not least, but certainly most insane, the Grey Lady editorial board, the sense of the entire paper, goes nutroots

Electronic voting machines are notoriously unreliable, but their defenders insist that they can be trusted because they are rigorously tested before they are certified for use. Now Congressional investigators have issued a report confirming that the federal certification program needs work.

The Election Assistance Commission says it wants to do better. Congress should monitor its progress and make sure that the certification system is strengthened. Still, the best way to ensure the integrity of the vote is for Congress to require voter-verified paper records for every electronic ballot cast.

In other words, watch out for those wascally Republicans, who are going to attempt to steal the vote for a 3rd straight presidential election. Maybe they should be looking at their own side first.

He has already joined the ranks of the Media Who Have Lost It, so, now he goes a little farther with his “OMG, Barry could actually lose!” whining

Can Barack Obama actually blow this thing? Can he actually lose in November?

Yes. Check the polls, Roger.

We have a deeply troubled economy,

It has some issues, and Democrats running around, including Barack Obama, saying we are closing in on the next Great Depression sure doesn’t build confidence by the American people

an unpopular war,

Which barely gets a mention in the media anymore, is barely on people’s radar, and, is actually almost over, thanks to The Surge that Barry opposed, and continued to say was not working

a very unpopular president

Congress is even more unpopular, Roger, and, BDS aside, Bush is not running

and a historic reluctance on the part of the American people to elect the same party to the White House three terms in a row.

Check the polls, Roger.

“Dear (insert name of news source here”

At what point should you be forced to give up your press credentials because of massive bias which leads to journalistic malpractice and a complete lapse of journalistic ethics? How are you different from the Blogosphere, which tends to add opinion to news stories?”

Bob Hebert has written a standard liberal missive about how McCain is bad, in this case, McCain’s health care plan, which attempts to put the choice of choosing an insurance plan in the hands of the workers, not the government or employer. Choice. Responsibility. Humorously, he actually writes in the column

There is nothing secret about Senator McCain’s far-reaching proposals, but they haven’t gotten much attention because the chatter in this campaign has mostly been about nonsense — lipstick, celebrities and “Drill, baby, drill!”

It’s apparently nonsense in the Manhattan cocktail party circuit to talk about going and getting our own energy. Then they get in their limo’s.

But, anyhow, Bob, Barry Obama’s main focal point in attacking McCain is multiple commercials saying that McCain=Bush. He has one which whines about McCain’s ties to lobbyists. No mention of the ties B.O.’s running mate has to lobbyists, including his own son (who supposedly got out of the business recently.) Barry attempted to smear McCain for not being an email and Internet user, Bob. Is that an important issue?

The Barry campaign, along with elected Democrats and democrat operatives, have tried to make hay about McCain’s age and having had cancer. Are those important, or nonsense, Bob? One of those groups has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Obama, Bob.

The Barry camp, along with a compliant and complicit media has looked for massive personal dirt on Sarah Palin, Bob. That would be exactly the type of nonsense you are referring to.

It’s kinda hard to have a substantive debate on the issues, Bob, when Barry refueses to engage in anything other then acting like a modern day Messiah. McCain offered multiple times to debate Barry many, many times. Barry ran away like a little girl who got mud on her fancy party dress.

Go talk to your man-crush, Bob, and ask him if he would like to really debate and deal with the big issues. Maybe he would like to discuss how things are going very well in Iraq, and how he was completely against the surge, instead, preferring to walk away like a bad dating experiment.

Or, perhaps, we could discuss how Barry wants to nationalize a sizable chunk of healthcare, making our system as piss poor as it is in Canada, England, France, and Germany, Bob. How’s that sound?