Next Time, Make Sure the Microphone is Off

 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008 at 5:34 pm and is filed under Politics, Weirdness. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

40 Responses to “Next Time, Make Sure the Microphone is Off”

  1. Matt Talbot says:
    September 3, 2008 at 5:40 pm

    LOL – oopsie.

  2. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 5:42 pm

    Just as an intellectual exercise, Henry, why don’t you look for about 5 or 10 negative things to post about Biden? It would be very easy to do, and would boost your claim that you’re not rooting for either side here.

  3. TeutonicTim says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:16 pm

    Somehow it’s not surprising that the incident happened on MSNBC…

  4. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:19 pm

    Is Biden associated with a secessionist party?

    Is Biden currently mired in an abuse of power scandal toward which he now claims executive privilege?

    Is he a politician who accepted $27 milliion of pork for a town whose population is less than 10,000 and was left it in massive debt when he left office as mayor, while he now calls himself a reformer maverick?

    Did he run for governor FOR the bridge to nowhere, before her recurrent lies that she was always against it?

    Was he a lobbyist for Tom Stevens only 3 years, before he emerged as a new , anti-establishment crusader?

    Is he one who was for book banning only 10 years ago?

    Is he a member of a Church whose dispensationalist theology has willfully gone hand in hand with neocon imperialism, interpreting US military might with the wrath of God?

    Is he a member of a Church whose pastor warmheartedly embraces and hosts the anti-Jewish, Jews for Jesus organization?

    Is he a candidate who cut $11 million in assistance to young mothers, while pushing abstinence only sex education?

    Is he pick who is a gimmick at best, at worst, a sign of his running mate’s bullheaded, erratic and uneven temperament?

  5. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:21 pm

    Oh…now I see…she is one of us…for she hunts and wrestles moose and calls herself pro-life!

  6. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:28 pm

    Mark — you’re presenting a lot of misinformation there, and you don’t even refer to the correct Stevens.

  7. Naum says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Oddly, Noonan has a published WSJ piece today that states something entirely different — that it’s a coin flip plus/minus choice… …how can anybody take her seriously? If her editors had any respect for their readers, they’d can her.

  8. Gerald A. Naus says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:35 pm

    By the way, your church was started by, uh, “Jews for Jesus”.

    Even if your DailyPOS talking points were all true, I’m afraid Barry Obama still takes the cake with his babies as ‘punishment’ and “I’ll do it with my bare hands” approach to abortion.

  9. Winston D says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:43 pm

    I had to laugh at this when I first saw it on another blog; not sure why it’s relevant to VN. I have been down on the Palin pick, and my wife had found Noonan’s column today somehwat supportive of the pick. Well, it appears Noonan is less than enthusiastic abou the pick.

    Henry is at least Pro-Obama in the sense that a two-person race is a zero sum game. He would certainly prefer an Obama presidency based on his far more numerous criticisms of McCain, but he has that right. Henry at least acknowledges the obvious difficulties with supporting a candidate who will seek to describe anyone who is anti-abortion as an extremist unfit for office. This post is certainly better than MM’s ceaseless petty cheerleading or his near-hysterical ravings about ‘dangerous theology’ based on an obtuse or uncharitable reading of a couple statements.

  10. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:47 pm

    S.B.

    Debunk one claim.

  11. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm

    Like saying that she cut $11 million in assistance to young mothers. From what I’ve seen, that just isn’t true at all. http://www.anchorrising.com/barnacles/006281.html

  12. blackadderiv says:
    September 3, 2008 at 6:56 pm

    Here is Noonan on the open-mic thing:

    When the segment was over and MSNBC was in commercial, Todd, Murphy and I continued our conversation, talking about the Palin choice overall. We were speaking informally, with some passion — and into live mics. An audio tape of that conversation was sent, how or by whom I don’t know, onto the internet. And within three hours I was receiving it from friends far and wide, asking me why I thought the McCain campaign is “over”, as it says in the transcript of the conversation. Here I must plead some confusion. In our off-air conversation, I got on the subject of the leaders of the Republican party assuming, now, that whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks. I made the case that this is no longer true, that party leaders seem to me stuck in the assumptions of 1988 and 1994, the assumptions that reigned when they were young and coming up. “The first lesson they learned is the one they remember,” I said to Todd — and I’m pretty certain that is a direct quote. But, I argued, that’s over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, “It’s over!” — and I said it more than once — that is what I was referring to. I am pretty certain that is exactly what Todd and Murphy understood I was referring to. In the truncated version of the conversation, on the Web, it appears I am saying the McCain campaign is over. I did not say it, and do not think it. In fact, at an on-the-record press symposium on the campaign on Monday, when all of those on the panel were pressed to predict who would win, I said that I didn’t know, but that we just might find “This IS a country for old men.” That is, McCain may well win. I do not think the campaign is over, I do not think this is settled, and did not suggest, back to the Todd-Murphy conversation, that “It’s over.”

  13. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:05 pm

    Sorry.. I missed a decimel: $1.1million

    Anyway, McCain/Palin cannot win on issues, so they going to run on anti-elitism…small town experience…from what I have seemn about what has been aleady leaked about Palin’s speech tonight.

    I would not be surprised, BTW, if Rove himself was behind the false story about Palin’s daughter being the mother of Sarah’s 5th child.

    This is all pure theatre.

  14. Brett says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:08 pm

    Nothing to see here. Move on. This is about as unnoteworthy and inconsequential as the RNC keeping a Biden Gaffe clock. Yes, GWB’s party is keeping a gaffe clock…on someone else.

    Keeping track of these gaffes are the blogosphere equivalent of pointing out some poster’s spelling mistakes. Glaring errors, but rarely content rich. Next.

  15. Winston D says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:09 pm

    Mark – you are beyond caricature. Tom Stevens (Ted maybe)? 1.1 billion? The rumor had been floating around Alaska for months…I suppose Rove did it in anticipation of the pick months later?

  16. Tim F. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:10 pm

    Rove being behind the Democrat rumor campaign about Trig Palin. Wow! Just wow! Mark I believe you have Rove Derangement Syndrome. This blog is a joke.

  17. Tim F. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:10 pm

    I might add a bad joke.

  18. Matt says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:23 pm

    Mark,

    The secessionist party smear has been totally debunked.

    Has Palin been associated with big law firms driving legislation, lobbyists investing in family members’ business ventures, hedge funds and multi-million dollar law suits, sweetheart deals with credit card dealing MBNA, big jobs for family members with banking interests who get favorable treatment? Why do I ask? Because Joe Biden has but it hasn’t been covered at all by MSNBC and the other mainstream media. Biden. the big family man, claims he didn’t know anything about it, even though some of it went on for years & what didn’t directly involve him involved the son who wasn’t at the convention & his brother.
    Read the linked Wilmington. Delaware article – about the only one that has ever appeared on some of this.
    http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080829/NEWS/808290366

  19. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:30 pm

    Matt.

    Wishful thinking.

    She attended the convention in 2000 and addressed it via videotape this year. Her husband was a member from 1994/5-2002.

    S.B.

    (WP) ST. PAUL — Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.

    After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation — “SP” — Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.

    According to Passage House’s web site, its purpose is to provide “young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives” and help teen moms “become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families.”

  20. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:32 pm

    It’s still misleading, Mark. You say that Palin “cut $1.1 million in assistance to young mothers,” whereas a more accurate phrasing would be that a certain program got $1.2 million in funding, sought an extra $5 million to build a new building, and got $3.9 million. So they got triple their normal allotment of money from Palin. It’s just not accurate to describe that as a “cut.”

  21. Henry Karlson says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    SB

    I will do a post with criticisms on Biden for Friday (I double posted today; we try to do one post/contributor, or if two, to skip a day). I think it will be better suited for a specific post and not comments, don’t you?

    Here are two of the several issues I will raise when I write it

    1) Iraq War
    2) Russia-Georgia

  22. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    SB.

    Nice try. The legislature was set to give $5.1 million more. She was solely responsible for a loss of $1.1 million in additional assistance, by HER executive actiion.

  23. Henry Karlson says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    Oh, a third. At least slight hints of racism (Indian-Americans).

    Fourth: culture of death.

    But I will write these out in more detail…

  24. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:50 pm

    Nice try. The legislature was set to give $5.1 million more. She was solely responsible for a loss of $1.1 million in additional assistance, by HER executive actiion.

    It’s still dishonest not to mention the full context, as if the group had $5 million in hand, and she then reduced an actual budget for the next year. The group still got triple the money it normally got. Honest human beings don’t say that a budget got “cut” when the money was merely tripled rather than quadrupled.

  25. S.B. says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:52 pm

    So if I go to your boss and say, “I propose that you quadruple Mark’s salary,” and your boss says, “No, but I’ll triple it,” you can then go around whining that your boss “cut” your salary. Most normal people wouldn’t feel very sympathetic when they found out what really happened.

  26. TeutonicTim says:
    September 3, 2008 at 7:53 pm

    Oh, a third. At least slight hints of racism (Indian-Americans).

    Biden?

    “In Delaware, the largest growth of population is Indian Americans, moving from India. You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.”

  27. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    September 3, 2008 at 8:17 pm

    Watching Romney…

    Pitting U.S.East against U.S.West; wanting to rescind habeas corpus again from Gitmo detainees; rallying against teacher protection and higher pay; trumpeting pro-business oil-drilling anywhere and everywhere; of course,playing the fear/terrorist card, reinvoking the AXIS OF EVIL terminology; declaring his pride to be an American….

    PATHETIC!!!!!

  28. Matt says:
    September 3, 2008 at 8:35 pm

    Mark,
    She’s been a registered Republican since 1982. So what if she attended an event 15 years ago or, as a Republican governor, welcomed conventioneers by videotape? Do you think her son is going off to Iraq to fight for Alaska’s independence? Considering how the media has reacted as though Alaska doesn’t count for anything, they probably listen to folks who don’t like that. Her husband is part Eskimo, by the way.

    More importantly, you totally ignored the genuine issues relating to Biden, naturally, because you aren’t really interested in fact.

  29. Matt Talbot says:
    September 3, 2008 at 9:26 pm

    Here are two of the several issues I will raise when I write it

    1) Iraq War
    2) Russia-Georgia

    You might also mention Biden’s vote for the odious bankruptcy bill, Henry.

  30. Tony says:
    September 3, 2008 at 10:32 pm

    It’s still misleading, Mark. You say that Palin “cut $1.1 million in assistance to young mothers,” whereas a more accurate phrasing would be that a certain program got $1.2 million in funding, sought an extra $5 million to build a new building, and got $3.9 million. So they got triple their normal allotment of money from Palin. It’s just not accurate to describe that as a “cut.”

    S.B., you have to understand, that’s “Democrat math” like in “how do we pay for Bush’s tax cut. You don’t pay for a tax cut, you simply let people keep more of what they earn. :)

  31. Matt says:
    September 3, 2008 at 10:37 pm

    Mark,
    “Secession” has never been in the platform of the Independence Party.

  32. Gerald A. Naus says:
    September 3, 2008 at 10:58 pm

    People like Palin because she’s a real person. Not some bleached-anus limousine liberal phony. I disagree with her on several things, but gawd she’s preferable to the liberal do-gooder socialist engineers anytime. Obama wants our money, the worst threat Palin poses is school prayer. She grew up in real America, Obama slept his way, so to speak, through the radical leftist looney bin of Chicago.

    * Sarah Palin used to wrestle kodiak bears in Alaskan bare knuckles fight clubs.
    * Sarah Palin once bagged a caribou by staring it down until it died.
    * Sarah Palin turned down a job as skipper of a Deadliest Catch boat because it wasn’t
    challenging enough
    * Sarah Palin fishes salmon by convincing them it’s in their interest to jump into the boat.
    * Sarah Palin once guided Santa’s sleigh through an Alaskan blizzard with the light from her
    smile.
    * Little known fact: without her glasses, looking deep into Sarah Palin’s eyes will blind you with
    the beauty of the tundra sun.
    * Chuck Norris wishes he was Sarah Palin trapped in a man’s body.
    * Sarah Palin paid her way through school by hunting for yeti pelts with a slingshot.
    * Sarah Palin knows the location of DB Cooper’s body because she threw him from the plane.
    * Global Warming doesn’t kill polar bears. Sarah Palin does – usually with her bare hands.
    * Three of Sarah Palin’s five kids came out sideways – she never flinched.
    * If placed into Schroedinger’s experiment, both Sarah Palins remain alive.

  33. Michael J. Iafrate says:
    September 4, 2008 at 12:12 am

    The secessionist party smear has been totally debunked.

    Damn. That was one of the few cool things she had going for her.

  34. Katerina Ivanovna says:
    September 4, 2008 at 12:35 am

    Damn. That was one of the few cool things she had going for her.

    Hahaha… the other thing was her pro-life record that she did not mention tonight in her introduction to the country. Sad.

  35. Michael J. Iafrate says:
    September 4, 2008 at 1:08 am

    Hahaha… the other thing was her pro-life record that she did not mention tonight in her introduction to the country. Sad.

    I agree.

  36. Henry Karlson says:
    September 4, 2008 at 2:44 am

    Matt Talbot

    I was just giving examples; but you know, I think (for once) SB had a point, which is why I will do a post. I’ve had posts which criticized Obama and McCain already. I’ve talked about Palin quite a bit this week (obviously, people know why). But I’ve not given any attention to Biden. As is clear, every candidate has some good and bad sides, and so it’s worth showing some of the problems many of us have with Biden.

  37. Henry Karlson says:
    September 4, 2008 at 5:25 am

    Some of my reactions/criticisms of Palin’s speech (again, tomorrow I will be doing a post on Biden, so consider that before you respond here; this is all about Palin).

    While she is capable of standing out in a public which is ready to cheer her on, with props put in place to help put some comic relief into her presentation, there is much more at stake them someone who can “look good.” Image is what she brings to the campaign more than anything else; her lack of speech on pro-life causes here demonstrates she wants to rely upon the image even for that, without actually saying anything specific. So her family is a representation of that image. I get it. It’s why I keep saying she brings them out and into the spotlight, and any criticism of her, by how she uses them for political gain, will include criticism of that image and how correct it is to reality. Nonetheless, on a surface level, it is effective, and it might work to the end. I don’t know. And her making for herself the image of “I am not a career politician but one of you” (which contrasts her to Biden) certainly will attract many in America, even though one could question if that makes one qualified or not. And I question how accurate it might be now.

    I did find a few things she said disturbing as a Catholic/Christian, and those are what I want to highlight.

    1) America first. This is a big center of her speech. A couple problems with this. One, it’s quite capable of being idolatry. Second goes with #2.

    2) Win victories in war. Are the wars merely for American dominance and is this why we must win victory, because it means America first (in the world)? But what if the war is unjust? Do we put America over justice? No humility, but really, pride, boastful pride, over America’s place in the world.

    These two really go together in another way. “America first” can be a mantra used ot justify any injustice — from wars to torture. “Well, maybe it’s a problem, but we need to be concerned about America first.” It reminds me of the way the Soviets put the USSR first over the needs of the people.

    3) Thus, we see her giving constant attention to threats in the world, but in doing so, she also showed her inability to accept the fact that even our enemies have human rights is indicative of someone who is not pro-life. Anti-abortion, maybe; pro-life? No.

    4)Talking about “destroy them” McCain’s views on evil. He has, “Seen evil, and seen how evil is overcome.” Ok, Sarah, how is evil overcome? Fighting and killing your enemies? I thought you were Christian. Evil is overcome by the cross. Can you tell me, what exactly is evil?

    As has been said on Voxa Nova many times, the first of those concerns is found throughout American politics. Obama is just as guilty as Palin here. However, Christians shouldn’t use that as an excuse. Whether or not you believe a certain candidate is best, that doesn’t mean you should be silent on those issues which contradict Catholic (or Christian) sensibilities. And this is one of the big ones which Catholics need to get their act together on. Too much of this “America first” without any sense of what it implies is dangerous. For some, I do think it is idolatry. We might render what is Caesar’s to Caesar, but Caesar should never be first.

  38. S.B. says:
    September 4, 2008 at 8:38 am

    Re: Palin’s failure to be explicit about being pro-life: Isn’t it powerfully moving when a politician can lead by example, not by empty rhetoric? I’ve never seen such a politician on the American stage before.

  39. Henry Karlson says:
    September 4, 2008 at 10:46 am

    If she is leading by example, then it means her example is worthy of being questioned. If her example is her family, then that is where the questions will come from. I have nothing against leading by example; and as people probably remember, I suggested Palin would be McCain’s best choice for VP because of what I heard about her example.

    The problem is, the more I hear, the less that example seems real to me.

    Nonetheless — tomorrow, Biden. While some might wonder what importance there is to discussing VP picks, the issue is, it is important: they indicate the kinds of decisions the candidate will make by showing the kind they have. And Biden does contradict many aspects of Obama’s message — from the Iraq War to being about change. So there is much to criticize here.

  40. S.B. says:
    September 4, 2008 at 11:04 am

    The problem is, the more I hear, the less that example seems real to me.

    What a baseless smear. Are you trying to suggest that she didn’t give birth to the Down’s baby?