McCain aide: Palin 'going rogue'

Need we be reminded that Palin has an 80 percent approval rating in Alaska? She knows the Constitution because she actually refers to it when making decisions and does not merely assume she knows it like most others.

The Republicans will blame her for any defeat. Yet the truth is they were not even on the maps until she showed up. Now it appears they are jealous of her.

The only robo-calls I get (every day) are Obama calls badmouthing McCain..... it is plain and simple harrassment.

harassment :
1) A feeling of intense annoyance caused by being tormented
2) Tormenting by continued persistent attacks and criticism

[edit on 10/26/2008 by dreams n chains]

I remember quite clearly during the third debate, and during the recent interview with Letterman, that McCain enthusiastically, emphatically, proclaimed his utmost trust in Sarah Palin. So if she is going rogue to the McCain campaign then so is McCain.

reply to post by dreams n chains


80% because she gives them money. I'd like my Gov. too if they gave me free money. So saying she has a high approval rating in Alaska doesn't mean much.

Originally posted by RRconservative
Nice! Not voting for McCain because of his brother? What if people decided to not vote for Obama because his brother is a Muslim living in a hut in Kenya?

Since when are native Kenyans, especially those that live in a hut, Muslims? You got to be kidding me, right?

reply to post by jmdewey60


So the constitution is wrong? I can tell you are a republican...trying to change the constitution....take away rights...destroy our country...make us slaves to the government...NICE!

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by RRconservative
Nice! Not voting for McCain because of his brother? What if people decided to not vote for Obama because his brother is a Muslim living in a hut in Kenya?

Since when are native Kenyans, especially those that live in a hut, Muslims? You got to be kidding me, right?

I don't kid about people being Muslims...........


bobmccarty.com...

According to Investor’s Business Daily reports (see here and here), the older half-brother of the upstart Democrat presidential candidate is a militant Muslim activist in Kenya who has urged his younger brother to embrace his African heritage and supports implementation of Sharia law in a country that, until recently, has been regarded as among the most pro-Western and modern African nations.

reply to post by RRconservative


I think not voting for either candidate for either of those reasons would be ridiculous.

Originally posted by RRconservative

bobmccarty.com...

According to Investor’s Business Daily reports (see here and here), the older half-brother of the upstart Democrat presidential candidate is a militant Muslim activist in Kenya who has urged his younger brother to embrace his African heritage and supports implementation of Sharia law in a country that, until recently, has been regarded as among the most pro-Western and modern African nations.

You do know that as a source you provided an anti-obama blog right?

It's like the Obama bashers don't even pretend to have legit sources anymore.

"older half-brother of the upstart Democrat presidential candidate is a militant Muslim activist "

The only part they got right was Muslim. He is not a Militant. He is an ACCOUNTANT.

This whole lumping together of Muslims..equals Militant...equals terrorist has run its course in this campaign. It's gross intolerance and it is one of the many reasons the American people aren't interested in this rhetoric anymore.

Obama's Brother
www.suntimes.com...




[edit on 27-10-2008 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by maybereal11

You do know that as a source you provided an anti-obama blog right?

It's like the Obama bashers don't even pretend to have legit sources anymore.

So only MSM reports are legit? Kind of hard to get a MSM source if they refuse to report on the story. What makes MSM coverage credible anyway? Who decides what is a credible source....the MSM?

Is Investment Business Daily a credible source, since the blog used their information in the story?

[edit on 27-10-2008 by RRconservative]

reply to post by RRconservative


That's true. Everything is biased.

However, the more people involved in the analysis (for instance a large user base such as ATS) the less biased it becomes (you see the different sides).

The problem with a lot of the mainstream sources is that they intentionally leave out the counter-argument. Hence biased to one side.

Cant' really trust anyone except the people you trust I guess.

Originally posted by Witness2008
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

The campaign is preparing to lay their failures all over her. I predict in the end she'll come out and with volcanic force tell the truth of what has been happening for the last couple of months.

Palin being the maverick isn't going to sit back and take it. Look at what she did to her brother-in-law. Palin may not have a lot of brain but she has plenty of bravado.

Whether or not McCain wins, it's painfully clear that his campaign has been anything but a "well-oiled machine". He has missed so many opportunities to address Americans on the real issues, especially the economy.

Where he really had a chance to make headway was to vote NO on the bailout bill. At least then he could have shut down Obama's accusations that he votes inline with Bush's policies all of the time and was a champion for the working class. But no, he voted FOR that stinking bailout package. And he wasted time attacking Obama on William Ayers when there was no concrete evidence.

Like I said - time well wasted. Time well lost.

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


Although we disagree on alot of things, I do look forward to reading your posts.



The way I see it the NY Times is no better than WorldNetDaily when it comes to bias. Bloggers seem to have a leg up on alot of breaking stories and the MSM decides on which story fits their agenda then they run with it.

reply to post by deathhasnosound

You shouldn't believe everything the news outlets tell you.
She was correct when she said the VP is in charge of the senate.
Even Geraldine Ferraro agreed with her and she doesn't like Palin.

But didn't you just say that:

She has been advised by Hanitty and Limbaugh to do this and it seems as if she is listening to them.

Looks like you have been ridin' on the Straight Talk Express!! WHOO-WOOT!

I bet they wish they had picked someone a little less "mavricky", don't you?!?

I think there is more of this to come. A divide that will make the Clinton-Obama split look tame by comparison.

The prospect of defeat has unleashed what insiders describe as an "every man for himself" culture within the McCain campaign, with aides in a "circular firing squad" as blame is assigned.

Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy".

He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?"

Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters.

He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."

Mr Nuzzo, who believes this election is not a re-run of the 1980 Reagan revolution but of 1976, when an ageing Gerald Ford lost a close contest and then ceded the leadership of the Republican Party to Mr Reagan.

He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests the future of the Republican Party.

Source

I think we are looking at an overhaul of the Party. The Palin-McCain split is just the beginning of a larger ideological battle within the GOP.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by clay2 baraka]

reply to post by sos37


I am dissapointed that neither candidate stood up to the Administration on the bail-out. If either of these men had a grasp of history and the well being of americans in mind they would not have handed over my childrens and grandchildrens hard earned dollars (maybe Ameros soon).

I'm not one to be too hard on Palin, I think she got swept up in more than she was prepared for. McCain needs to take the bumps he has coming...vetting Palin would have been a mountain of prevention.

McCains biggest mistake was not Palin, it was the choice of people that he surrounded himself with. That in itself for me anyway is a reason not to vote for him.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Witness2008]

reply to post by clay2 baraka


A few more tid bits on what Palin maybe up to. rawstory.com...

Republican pundants can see how they need to head her off at the pass with all the discrediting of her. I honestly believe she is going to really #### off McCain after the fourth and let the world know how she was used. I would. You know what they say about women and wrath?

Yeah, she is obviously allot smarter than she made herself out to be in the debate and in a few interviews...

This Lady is insulted

and she is up there acting like the dumb chick the McCain Camp wanted her to be...

To hear her speak, it is obvious to me we have been watching 2 Sarah palins, one of them is real and it's allot harder to fake smart than it is to fake dumb

She is not after VP

She figures Obama is screwed by the nature of this situation no matter what

and she wants President in 2012

Watch her smarten up fast after McCain Looses


I get the felling they don't call this lady the Barracuda for no reason

I really dislike Palin, but if these are the things she believes, then I say good for her. I'd rather have someone being honest about their beliefs than just mindlessly towing the party line.

This is sour grapes from the people who have lost this campaign for McCain. Palin is not the problem. The problem is that McCain turned over control to (or never took control from) the GOP hacks like Rove who believe that the only way to win is to run against the Democrat instead of running a positive campaign. If McCain had run against Bush and the idiocy of the GOP and its record for the past eight years while laying out a positive vision for the country, he would be leading now.