Palin is campaigning for what?

[Lux Interior]

Black Landlord wrote:
Wow . . . do you need someone to talk to?

No. Why?

[mikeylikesit]

Gutenberg wrote:
I think it is amazing and kind of wonderful what men will do and say to avoid saying "whoops, I was wrong."

Was that a general or political observation?

I myself think the inability to admit a mistake is a function of station or power, not sex per se. I could be wrong but my life experiences dictate against that. On the other hand I never ask for directions when it might appear I'm lost.

So there.

[Black Landlord]

Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=Black Landlord]
Wow . . . do you need someone to talk to?

No. Why?
You sound . . . depressed.

[Lux Interior]

My intent was to say that I hope neocon-ism does not repeat for a long, long time.

Long after I have died from natural causes at the ripe old age of 152 years.

[Seacrest]

Lux Interior wrote:
My intent was to say that I hope neocon-ism does not repeat for a long, long time.

Long after I have died from natural causes at the ripe old age of 152 years.

Your original post DID kinda make it seem like you were speaking of the upcoming Jan 20.

[Pam]

This thread is missing the point. The podium decor and signs in abundance all said Country First. That there were some McCain/Palin signs from who knows where is really irrelevant. It's obvious the RNC knowingly and with forethought set this up. They will have ample footage of Palin giving stump speeches without the McCain name in prominent display. Editing can eliminate the times she invokes his name. The RNC has all but abandoned McCain and are stockpiling video, picts, sound bites, etc for a future Palin campaign. Forgetting about how I personally feel about either McCain or Palin, I think this is a very crappy way to treat your candidate. I know the RNC was never fond of McCain, but back stabbing like this is pretty sad. The RNC and McCain should have stepped in weeks ago to reign Palin in. It's obvious McCain couldn't and the RNC didn't want to.

[davester]

Ah, Pam's straight talk is like a knife through the butter of prior hyperbole.

[Black Landlord]

Pam wrote:
This thread is missing the point. The podium decor and signs in abundance all said Country First. That there were some McCain/Palin signs from who knows where is really irrelevant. It's obvious the RNC knowingly and with forethought set this up. They will have ample footage of Palin giving stump speeches without the McCain name in prominent display. Editing can eliminate the times she invokes his name. The RNC has all but abandoned McCain and are stockpiling video, picts, sound bites, etc for a future Palin campaign. Forgetting about how I personally feel about either McCain or Palin, I think this is a very crappy way to treat your candidate. I know the RNC was never fond of McCain, but back stabbing like this is pretty sad. The RNC and McCain should have stepped in weeks ago to reign Palin in. It's obvious McCain couldn't and the RNC didn't want to.

Wow, you could have saved a lot of pixels and a few relationships had you just included this in your original post.

[Pam]

Black Landlord wrote:
[quote=Pam]
This thread is missing the point. The podium decor and signs in abundance all said Country First. That there were some McCain/Palin signs from who knows where is really irrelevant. It's obvious the RNC knowingly and with forethought set this up. They will have ample footage of Palin giving stump speeches without the McCain name in prominent display. Editing can eliminate the times she invokes his name. The RNC has all but abandoned McCain and are stockpiling video, picts, sound bites, etc for a future Palin campaign. Forgetting about how I personally feel about either McCain or Palin, I think this is a very crappy way to treat your candidate. I know the RNC was never fond of McCain, but back stabbing like this is pretty sad. The RNC and McCain should have stepped in weeks ago to reign Palin in. It's obvious McCain couldn't and the RNC didn't want to.

Wow, you could have saved a lot of pixels and a few relationships had you just included this in your original post.
I didn't want to lead the jury too much. I wondered if anyone else would reach the same conclusion or give a plausible explanation. It wasn't to stir the pot.

[karsen]

Gutenberg wrote: The McCain signs were hand-lettered. That's how he knew that the visitors to the rally brought them themselves. Whenever I see hand-lettered campaign signs, though, I check the colors and handwriting.

They must have done a really great job of coloring between the lines. The signs I saw looked EXACTLY like the official McCain/Palin signs. Where does it say the signs were hand-lettered? Or do reporters in general just like making stuff up to support their story?

Watch the linked video. 40 seconds in someone holds up a McCain sign. Sure doesn't look like hand-lettering to me!

Black Landlord wrote:
The t-shorts were there too. Along with a large McCain sign.
If you saw the t-shirts, you must have seen the sign(?)

I saw the McCain sign too, but there was still an overwhelming number of Plain signs in that photo like mentioned in the story. And as I mentioned before the clip I saw on my local news showed a shot of the crowd (in the hanger) and there looked to be hundreds of signs that said McCain/Palin. Those must be some dedicated voters to color all those signs in their spare time!





This just in... I watched the second video on the link which featured Obama. The majority of people at his rally were holding up signs that said "Change We Need!" OMFG, what a shocker! I bet the people that held up "Obama/Biden" signs must have made those at home with construction paper and crayons. I should be a reporter. This is big news.