So I guess the real question on everyone’s lips has to be just how much a holy through-and-through America is important to people when it comes to voting. I mean, is this effort wasted because Palin is ultimately only going to shore up votes in the (arbitrary figure alert) 20% of Americans that put christ before any other policy…and they already vote Republican…or is the figure closer to 50% putting swing voters in the firing line?

I have a feeling that it’s more the former than the latter, but anyone want to shed some light on just how important the Jesus stuff really is in the grand scheme of things?

Further to Laurie’s article, it seems that Sarah Palin has tried to prohibit literature. In fact, she also attempted to sack the unwilling librarian.

Ben

Isn’t that Iain Dale? Next up, he’ll be accusing feminists or running a sexist campaign against Palin. Peter Hitchens to the rescue!!

“Next up, he’ll be accusing feminists or running a sexist campaign against Palin”

Rudy Guliani already has, conveniently ignoring the fact that the most sexist criticism – essentially, ‘couldn’t they have picked somebody that doesn’t have to stay at home with their kids’ – has come from right-wing media icon, Laura Schlessinger.

Ben

we know that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant by a moron

Do we know that? Levi Johnston seems a rather normal 18 year old to me.

* Giuliani (obviously)

The New Testament was written from a context of actual physical occupation of the Holy Land by the invading Romans. To take that kind of domination and twist it to apply to the relationship between Dominionists and the USA establishment is indeed crazy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/sarah-palin-rnc-conventio_n_123703.html

Notice how whenever she makes personal attacks, the crowd (esp McCain’s wife) love it.

For the time being, Palin and McCain’s line of attack is basically stealing the “standing up to the special interests/lobbyists/big oil companies” and “ending politics as usual at Washington” from Obama, the base-rousing “Obama wants bigger government and more of your money”, and energy (oil drilling as a way of gaining independence from foreign sources).

Whilst Obama and Biden have to stake out their ground on these issues, they also need to take the fight to social issues, as suggested by Sunny in PP: Palin’s dreadful record on tolerance, rights, etc.

But they also have to dispel the myths around “bigger government” without giving any more airtime to them, because as we all know, those swing voters will believe anything if it is repeated enough times. This should be his line of attack, as it points out the reason why people don’t vote Republican:

“For over two decades, he’s subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy – give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is – you’re on your own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps – even if you don’t have boots. You’re on your own.”

This points out why they do vote Democrat:

“Ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves – protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology.”

Well, she describes herself as a “pit bull in lipstick” so maybe we could call the election if we could find out what proportion of Americans have a favourable image of pit bulls (even feminists like lipstick these days…)

These connections are very troubling and rather throw the libertarian case for Palin into doubt: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/the_libertarian_case_for_palin.html

I do wonder, though, why a fully-fledged Dominionist would appear to follow constitutional limits as carefully as she does (or rather, at all!). Unless she was planning on a national ticket, presumably a theocrat would do whatever she could to introduce these extreme values into her own state. She doesn’t appear to have done that. Maybe she is just clever and is waiting for the right time to strike, or perhaps she believes in the US constitution rather more than these lastdayists with whom she is associated do.

Nick:

Exactly – I’ve never yet seen anyone make a libertarian case for banning books and trying sack librarians who refuse to play ball.

Well on that point, she is simply lacking consistency. A libertarian could sack ALL librarians and sell off all public libraries – not because freely available books are bad, but just reasoning they are too important and too sensitive to be left in the hands of the state.

You totally weaken your article with the bizarre video at the end. It’s rather embarrassing. Is the rest faked too?

Maybe I’d think it was cleverer if I know what the original was.

C Ford:

Relax, it’s an in-joke for us Brits…

Try this – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2sySORDLjo – it might make things a little clearer…

Unity:

I’m also british. I guess I just watch less crap tv than you.

Maybe she is just clever and is waiting for the right time to strike

That would be a split second after McCain is sworn in. She could even be on the grassy knoll herself, if it wasn’t for ‘plausible deniability’.

Incidentally, I’ve some sympathy for the suggestion that it would suit the Republicans fine to have the campaign turn into a Kulturkampf: it’s obvious that Palin would reach for her gun [oops, Godwin's law - sorry Sunny, ], and it saves them the bother of talking about the economy. As for playing the victim of sexism; I’m not remotely surprised – insulating Palin from any kind of scrutiny or criticism may be the only thing that will stop her screwing up in public.

Lee, I don’t think the Republicans can take the hard-core Christian vote for granted this time round. Many evangelicals still don’t trust McCain after the 2000 primary and have been making goo-goo eyes at Obama (member of a church just as bonkers as Palin’s). He’s even competitive in Virginia and North Carolina, where he’s got no right to be. You can expect to see Palin reassuring the faithful in those states while McCain tries to sound like the voice of moderate reason in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
As ever, the West Wing saw it all coming. Alan Alda’s maverick GOP candidate (McCain without the war record) is forced to select a fundamentalist running mate to placate the religious right’s doubts. Palin serves exactly the same function.

Redpesto:

http://www.forerunner.com/blog/2008/08/sarah-palin-sigh-factor.html

So here is my three point plan:

1. Vote Constitution Party. (I vote my conscience and cannot support McCain even with Palin.)

2. Pray for Sarah Palin to win. (I am an idealist, but also a realist!)

3. Pray for John McCain’s salvation and speedy death.

http://tinyurl.com/5jqagz

McCain’s VP choice, Sarah Palin, suddenly made me want to vote for him, as long as the LORD smites him while he’s in office.

Now what was that about a grassy knoll?

Stephen Rouse: As ever, the West Wing saw it all coming. Alan Alda’s maverick GOP candidate (McCain without the war record) is forced to select a fundamentalist running mate to placate the religious right’s doubts. Palin serves exactly the same function.

I think my version (and Unity’s supporting evidence) have got it better – and it got (kinda) made into a TV series with Geena Davies.

If I were McCain, I’d get my head examined…and watch my back too.

This is all way too sensible. It is perfectly clear that Sarah Palin wants to turn the Southern States, i.e. all of them, into a huge remix of God and Guns and Gays poliitics. She is a nut job.

Which isn’t to say she and her grandfather won’t win. You only have to stare the US electorate in the eye long enough for most (moist) of them to feel their genitals stirring. Idiots, the lot of them.