Palin Talks about Clothes and Such

UPDATE: 

Here’s a link to lots of great photos of Sarah, Todd, Elizabeth & Sean Hannity at Kissimmee:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2116061/posts

It looks like Todd is back to wearing his own jackets.  The RNC must have bought him a suit; the one in the photos linked above looks worn and not tailored.  He looks great anyway.

Here’s Sarah in her own jeans in North Carolina on Sunday after leaving  Florida:

 

Sarah talks about her clothes, wedding ring, Eskimo-made earrings and other accessories in Tampa earlier that day:

Evidently the campaign folks bought the clothes and dropped them off in her hotel room before her appearance at the RNC.  She did not go shopping for them.  The Naughty Monkey red shoes she wore when she was introduced were her own.  I wonder if some of the campaign-bought shoes were Jimmy Choos?  That would eat up a lot of money right there.   And how stupid to buy her underwear and pantyhose at Neiman Marcus.  Doh.

You go, girl.

Julia

Blues fans show some class

The Blues fans showed some class when Palin dropped the puck before the Blues/Kings game, not like the Flyers fans.   Like her or not, she is a candidate for the VP of the United States of America.  If Obama or Biden dropped the puck I wold not cheer, but I would not boo, not at a hockey game.  That just shows no class.

H/T to Gateway Pundit

At least the Blues could have won the game and not loose 4-0.

Wise Words from Abe Lincoln about Close Elections

From the National Review On-Line today:

“McCain Versus the Juggernaut”   [Rich Lowry]

Bill Kristol editorial in TWS. A particularly nice ending:

If Obama wins, we wish him well. But for now, we can only echo the words of the 30-year-old Abraham Lincoln. On December 26, 1839, responding to the confident prediction of one of his political opponents "that every State in the Union will vote for Mr. Van Buren at the next Presidential election" and that Lincoln’s opposition to the Van Buren forces was therefore bound to be in vain, Lincoln responded:

Address that argument to cowards and to knaves; with the free and the brave it will effect nothing. It may be true; if it must, let it…The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just…Let none falter, who thinks he is right, and we may succeed. But if after all, we shall fail, be it so.

As it happens, the Whig ticket Lincoln supported won that 1840 election. So might the party of Lincoln again.

Source:  10/24 05:57 PM

Hang in there folks.    Julia    Vote early (but not often like they do in Chi)

Some Words from Fred before the Election

UPDATE:  You can see Fred give this talk at http://www.fredpac.com/Index.aspx

UpdateII: Video at the bottom

Courtesy of NRO, here is some wisdom from Fred Thompson about the importance of this election.

Re: Unleashing Fred   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Fred’s rally:

It’s time for those of us who are concerned about our nation’s future to focus on what is at stake in this year’s elections. This is a time of great challenge for our country. We know that somewhere in the world our worst enemies either have, or are trying to get their hands on, the most dangerous weapons known to man.  Small rogue nations are developing nuclear weapons and threaten our allies.  Large nations are engaged in massive military buildups.

At home we are girding for the possible onset of a recession. Very soon we will go to the polls and set a path that will determine how we respond to these challenges. It will be a decision that we will make not only for ourselves but very possibly for generations to come. . . .

Senator Obama and his campaign see an historic opportunity—a political opportunity.  They know that in times of fear and uncertainty the promise of a safe haven is well received.  But there is no sanctuary in what they offer.

Their “haven” is the same old tired refuge of liberalism: the federal government.  And the candidate – the least experienced, most liberal in two generations – represents a last gasp at imposing the failed 1960s radical, leftist agenda that could never succeed in normal times. 

Let me make it as plain as I know how.  If Senator Obama is elected President with a Democrat majority in the House and Senate, this country will make a dramatic shift to the left, such as we have never seen before.  Senator Obama and the Democratic Congress will be unrestrained and unrepentant in making our country as never before more divided and more dependent upon a dramatically larger and intrusive federal government.

[snip]

. . . [H]ow we respond to our economic challenge is more important than the crisis itself. For the last 25 years the United States, and indeed the world, has enjoyed unprecedented prosperity.  You wouldn’t know it from listening to Obama, but worldwide over 1 billion people have been able to lift themselves out of poverty.  This is due to America’s influence, from our defense of freedom in World War II to the Cold War, to the ascendency of our free-market capitalism, the adoption of open trade policies, and globalization.  Yet some say our current financial difficulties are evidence that we should turn our back on our founding, free market principles … that it’s time for big changes. 

But in a world that is increasingly inter-connected by jobs, trade and global finance, how our economy is viewed by the rest of the world is extremely important to America’s economic well being. The worst thing in the world we could do is appear to be unfriendly to investment and trade with an economy constrained and made uncompetitive by layers upon layers of new regulations, and bogged down in the divisiveness of class warfare.  Yet if you are to take them at their word this is precisely the direction that an Obama administration and a Democratic Congress would take us, turning a short term recession into a long term economic decline for the United States.

And while our regulatory regime needs to be examined and improved, we should be clear: capitalism is not the cause of our nation’s economic challenges. The subprime mortgage crisis was not rooted in lack of regulation, but in bad policies made by Democrats in Congress that forced banks to give mortgages to people who could not afford the houses they were buying. These are the same politicians who protected the excesses and fraudulent conduct of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They are the same ones who now want to control the spending of hundreds of billions of dollars to solve the problem they helped create, and who tried to slip $200 billion into the first bailout bill for their political cronies in ACORN, the organization that is now systemically perpetrating voter registration fraud around the country.  This record, Obama and the Democrats say, entitles them to total control of all of the levers of power in Washington.

[snip]

The liberal agenda is based upon the belief that there are elites among us who know more and know better than the rest of us.  And that with the application of their intellect and power … and our money … they can impose regulations and establish programs, bureaus and agencies that will solve all the problems of the masses’.

Senator Obama and his supporters essentially see society not as dynamic and changing or full of opportunity.  They see one that is divided by economic classes into which every one of us is permanently assigned.  In their worldview, those in a lesser economic class are presumably resentful and envious.  So it’s the government’s job to level things out … or as Senator Obama would say “spread the wealth around.” . . . . 

This is the reason why they do not understand Joe the Plumber.  Because he doesn’t have a higher income today they assume that he never will and that he believes he never will. They expect him to resent anyone whose doing better than he is, instead of planning to do better himself. They don’t understand the Joes of the world.  Never have.  Never will. 

This political philosophy has a long tradition. At best it can be labeled a benign welfare state.  But history tells us that it can lead to tyranny or economic turmoil or both.  And … most important … it has never found favor in the United States – not during the Great Depression, in times of war, or any other time. 

It’s because in this country we have a different view.  We know that people do better when given opportunity and responsibility.  It has to do with our view of the nature of man.  . . . .  We believe that man was meant to be free—entitled to be free.  It’s an inalienable right, endowed by our Creator.  When free and inspired man can achieve great things – for his family, community and his nation.  In fact this belief is what we built our nation on.

[snip]

Let there be no doubt that an Obama administration and a heavily Democratically controlled Congress would change the face of this nation.  Only you can decide whether or not the ways in which they would change it would be a good thing.

I don’t believe it.  And John McCain doesn’t.  . . . Responsible change is the essence of conservatism.  We must change in order to preserve what is best about our country.  We have always been able to accommodate constructive change without turning our back on our first principles.  We must do it again. 

However, that does not include staking everything upon the eloquence and inexperience of one who has toed the extreme liberal and partisan line his entire political life, much as he tries to blur that fact now. 

This is the choice that we have in this election.  Let’s hope for our nation’s sake that we choose well.

Read the whole thing here:  10/24 11:01 AM

Let’s not lose heart.  Get everyone you know to vote.  There are long lines of people voting early in Dade County in Florida.  Somebody on FOX is interviewing them right now and you can tell they were all bussed in.    Chicago tactics are spreading country-wide.  It’s essential we get out the vote. 

And let’s also hope that a victorious McCain finds a place in his administration for the marvelous and wise Fred.

Julia

Red-Necked Woman in a Sacks' Dress

Some real common sense about Sarah and her shockingly expensive wardrobe :

The Palin Wardrobe   [Lisa Schiffren]

So now we learn that the RNC shelled out $150,000 for clothing, hair, and make-up for Sarah Palin since her surprise nomination. Scandal! Gotcha! Such hypocrisy! If she wants the Joe Six-pack vote, the "logic" goes, why isn’t she wearing clothes from Target? Huh? While everyone seems to get that Palin had to have an emergency make-over for prime time, this particular number offends — as does the fact that she didn’t pay for it herself.

Was a new wardrobe neccessary? Clearly. Last winter, when she posed for Vogue, Governor Palin wore a big, army green parka, (partly to hide her pregnancy), which looked great — but perhaps not entirely vice presidential. No one wears that sort of thing to, say, National Security Council meetings in D.C. In pre-September pictures, she wears inexpensive, perfectly appropriate but not ready for prime-time black suits, or the kind of outdoor clothing that Alaskans, and others who spend a lot of time in harsh elements, require. Her biggest sartorial luxury seems to have been fancy running shoes, as she told the Wall Street Journal weekend section, just before being nominated.

But then, a few days before Labor Day, lightening hit. The governor of Alaska turned into a vice-presidential candidate, who had to show up in front of the nation for the next 60 days, several times a day, always looking camera-ready, and impeccably turned out. She also had to project that new, somewhat amorphous thing: female power. We, as a nation, have not yet been led by a woman, and we aren’t sure what it looks like. It will, of course, vary from woman to woman, depending on her personal needs and style, but not so much. Can’t be too sexy, too severe, or too casual. For sure it requires perfectly fitted, constructed jackets, with a serious shoulder line, in good quality fabrics. Nowhere are those cheap. Palin had to look at least as good as the women we see on TV all the time. You may not realize it, but you don’t see Katie Couric or Diane Sawyer or any of the on-camera female talent at the networks, CNN or Fox in off-the-rack stuff from Macy’s. It is all upscale designer stuff, and at the low end it costs a couple of thousand per outfit. Always. Hair and make-up is done, professionally, any time you see them, at the cost of much time and money. That is the visual standard women at the upper end of politics must meet. Condoleezza Rice, who needed to project power, figured it out. Others have not. If Palin hadn’t bothered with any of it, we would have heard about that too.

Had she been a creature of Washington, Palin would have had closet full of suits, unexciting, perhaps, but appropriate. Had she been a former First Lady running for president, whose husband has raked in $109 million in the last 8 years, she could have called Oscar de la Renta, and and had him come for a fitting. He did well with Hillary’s jewel-toned pantsuits, (at a few grand a pop?). She might already have collected some of those great Gurhan necklaces, which accentuated Hillary’s suits all election season. (Look up for yourself what they cost.) Were she Speaker of the House, and the wealthiest Democratic lawmaker, she could have called Georgio Armani himself — and worn the Pelosi pearls that cost more than the Palin’s house.

Instead, she had zero time and no personal fortune. And she faced the terrible hurdle of  being young and attractive — the very sort of woman who most desperately needs wardrobe cues to make her look authoritative. If she had had to pay for it herself, she could not have run. The bill would have been ruinous to a genuinely middle class person. So the GOP did what it had to do in order to put a non-rich woman on a national ticket. Whatever one thinks of the choice — and I am a supporter — it’s nice to see that someone was thinking about the details. The difference between Palin at the announcement in Dayton, and Palin at the convention was a subtle but impressive transformation. Subtle always costs more. As a sometime GOP donor, I begrudge her none of it.

Because I like Sarah Palin, and want her to succeed, I would be really happy to know that, should she find herself back in Alaska for the next four years, (or, for that matter, in D.C.) she chose to spend a little of the money that would otherwise go to her clothing budget on a personal library of conservative classics. Going upmarket intellectually will complete the transformation, and make her truly prime-time ready.

Source:  The Corner at NRO 10/22 11:10 PM

I particularly like the photo of Sarah at the grocery store talking with a constituent.  But, of course, she now has to look the part to make her mark in the lower 48.  I disagree a bit with the writer.  I thought her look when she was announced in Dayton in her own clothes was not changed all that much in the time between then and the convention.   She now just has more expensive versions of the same kind of thing she had already been wearing when dressed up for business.  After all, Sarah had been to a number of governors’ conventions – in Texas, DC, and even New Yawk City!  She knows what  is appropriate and expected.   But she didn’t have the bucks to be outfitted for 2 – 3 events a day for several months.   

Gretchen Wilson appeared at Sarah’s event in Western Pennsylvania yesterday singing her trade  mark:  "Red Necked Woman" and it seems she is not turned off by Sarah’s polished look.  Because enabling has been disabled, here’s a link to Gretchen singing her song again in case you haven’t seen her before.  BTW Gretchen originally supported Fred Thompson!   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30V5vnYHzk                                              

Ha ha  There’s a Democrat dame on FOX right now saying the McCain campaign showed bad judgment spending this money on such fancy duds – should bought them at Target!!!  Neil Cavuto says what about JFK’s $2,000 suits and FDR’s homes including one on an island?  Well, she says it’s different with women – she should be wearing something less expensive if she wants to connect with Joe the Plumber.  Unreal.  Then she gives it away – too bad, she says, that the campaign is being side-tracked with this kind of stuff when they could be talking about real issues.  Doh!  I’ll say.  She says: after all you asked me to come on the show to discuss it.  She’s got a point.  FOX is pushing the controversy, too.  Knock it off!! 

Wish there had been more of a to-do in the MSM about Michelle and her NYC room service, paid by the Obama campaign I assume, of lobsters, champaign and Iranian caviar.  Have they made a decision not to reach out to plumbers? 

Julia   

Red-Necked Woman in a Sacks’ Dress

Some real common sense about Sarah and her shockingly expensive wardrobe :

The Palin Wardrobe   [Lisa Schiffren]

So now we learn that the RNC shelled out $150,000 for clothing, hair, and make-up for Sarah Palin since her surprise nomination. Scandal! Gotcha! Such hypocrisy! If she wants the Joe Six-pack vote, the "logic" goes, why isn’t she wearing clothes from Target? Huh? While everyone seems to get that Palin had to have an emergency make-over for prime time, this particular number offends — as does the fact that she didn’t pay for it herself.

Was a new wardrobe neccessary? Clearly. Last winter, when she posed for Vogue, Governor Palin wore a big, army green parka, (partly to hide her pregnancy), which looked great — but perhaps not entirely vice presidential. No one wears that sort of thing to, say, National Security Council meetings in D.C. In pre-September pictures, she wears inexpensive, perfectly appropriate but not ready for prime-time black suits, or the kind of outdoor clothing that Alaskans, and others who spend a lot of time in harsh elements, require. Her biggest sartorial luxury seems to have been fancy running shoes, as she told the Wall Street Journal weekend section, just before being nominated.

But then, a few days before Labor Day, lightening hit. The governor of Alaska turned into a vice-presidential candidate, who had to show up in front of the nation for the next 60 days, several times a day, always looking camera-ready, and impeccably turned out. She also had to project that new, somewhat amorphous thing: female power. We, as a nation, have not yet been led by a woman, and we aren’t sure what it looks like. It will, of course, vary from woman to woman, depending on her personal needs and style, but not so much. Can’t be too sexy, too severe, or too casual. For sure it requires perfectly fitted, constructed jackets, with a serious shoulder line, in good quality fabrics. Nowhere are those cheap. Palin had to look at least as good as the women we see on TV all the time. You may not realize it, but you don’t see Katie Couric or Diane Sawyer or any of the on-camera female talent at the networks, CNN or Fox in off-the-rack stuff from Macy’s. It is all upscale designer stuff, and at the low end it costs a couple of thousand per outfit. Always. Hair and make-up is done, professionally, any time you see them, at the cost of much time and money. That is the visual standard women at the upper end of politics must meet. Condoleezza Rice, who needed to project power, figured it out. Others have not. If Palin hadn’t bothered with any of it, we would have heard about that too.

Had she been a creature of Washington, Palin would have had closet full of suits, unexciting, perhaps, but appropriate. Had she been a former First Lady running for president, whose husband has raked in $109 million in the last 8 years, she could have called Oscar de la Renta, and and had him come for a fitting. He did well with Hillary’s jewel-toned pantsuits, (at a few grand a pop?). She might already have collected some of those great Gurhan necklaces, which accentuated Hillary’s suits all election season. (Look up for yourself what they cost.) Were she Speaker of the House, and the wealthiest Democratic lawmaker, she could have called Georgio Armani himself — and worn the Pelosi pearls that cost more than the Palin’s house.

Instead, she had zero time and no personal fortune. And she faced the terrible hurdle of  being young and attractive — the very sort of woman who most desperately needs wardrobe cues to make her look authoritative. If she had had to pay for it herself, she could not have run. The bill would have been ruinous to a genuinely middle class person. So the GOP did what it had to do in order to put a non-rich woman on a national ticket. Whatever one thinks of the choice — and I am a supporter — it’s nice to see that someone was thinking about the details. The difference between Palin at the announcement in Dayton, and Palin at the convention was a subtle but impressive transformation. Subtle always costs more. As a sometime GOP donor, I begrudge her none of it.

Because I like Sarah Palin, and want her to succeed, I would be really happy to know that, should she find herself back in Alaska for the next four years, (or, for that matter, in D.C.) she chose to spend a little of the money that would otherwise go to her clothing budget on a personal library of conservative classics. Going upmarket intellectually will complete the transformation, and make her truly prime-time ready.

Source:  The Corner at NRO 10/22 11:10 PM

I particularly like the photo of Sarah at the grocery store talking with a constituent.  But, of course, she now has to look the part to make her mark in the lower 48.  I disagree a bit with the writer.  I thought her look when she was announced in Dayton in her own clothes was not changed all that much in the time between then and the convention.   She now just has more expensive versions of the same kind of thing she had already been wearing when dressed up for business.  After all, Sarah had been to a number of governors’ conventions – in Texas, DC, and even New Yawk City!  She knows what  is appropriate and expected.   But she didn’t have the bucks to be outfitted for 2 – 3 events a day for several months.   

Gretchen Wilson appeared at Sarah’s event in Western Pennsylvania yesterday singing her trade  mark:  "Red Necked Woman" and it seems she is not turned off by Sarah’s polished look.  Because enabling has been disabled, here’s a link to Gretchen singing her song again in case you haven’t seen her before.  BTW Gretchen originally supported Fred Thompson!   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30V5vnYHzk                                              

Ha ha  There’s a Democrat dame on FOX right now saying the McCain campaign showed bad judgment spending this money on such fancy duds – should bought them at Target!!!  Neil Cavuto says what about JFK’s $2,000 suits and FDR’s homes including one on an island?  Well, she says it’s different with women – she should be wearing something less expensive if she wants to connect with Joe the Plumber.  Unreal.  Then she gives it away – too bad, she says, that the campaign is being side-tracked with this kind of stuff when they could be talking about real issues.  Doh!  I’ll say.  She says: after all you asked me to come on the show to discuss it.  She’s got a point.  FOX is pushing the controversy, too.  Knock it off!! 

Wish there had been more of a to-do in the MSM about Michelle and her NYC room service, paid by the Obama campaign I assume, of lobsters, champaign and Iranian caviar.  Have they made a decision not to reach out to plumbers? 

Julia   

Red-Necked Woman in a Sacks’ Dress

Some real common sense about Sarah and her shockingly expensive wardrobe :

The Palin Wardrobe   [Lisa Schiffren]

So now we learn that the RNC shelled out $150,000 for clothing, hair, and make-up for Sarah Palin since her surprise nomination. Scandal! Gotcha! Such hypocrisy! If she wants the Joe Six-pack vote, the "logic" goes, why isn’t she wearing clothes from Target? Huh? While everyone seems to get that Palin had to have an emergency make-over for prime time, this particular number offends — as does the fact that she didn’t pay for it herself.

Was a new wardrobe neccessary? Clearly. Last winter, when she posed for Vogue, Governor Palin wore a big, army green parka, (partly to hide her pregnancy), which looked great — but perhaps not entirely vice presidential. No one wears that sort of thing to, say, National Security Council meetings in D.C. In pre-September pictures, she wears inexpensive, perfectly appropriate but not ready for prime-time black suits, or the kind of outdoor clothing that Alaskans, and others who spend a lot of time in harsh elements, require. Her biggest sartorial luxury seems to have been fancy running shoes, as she told the Wall Street Journal weekend section, just before being nominated.

But then, a few days before Labor Day, lightening hit. The governor of Alaska turned into a vice-presidential candidate, who had to show up in front of the nation for the next 60 days, several times a day, always looking camera-ready, and impeccably turned out. She also had to project that new, somewhat amorphous thing: female power. We, as a nation, have not yet been led by a woman, and we aren’t sure what it looks like. It will, of course, vary from woman to woman, depending on her personal needs and style, but not so much. Can’t be too sexy, too severe, or too casual. For sure it requires perfectly fitted, constructed jackets, with a serious shoulder line, in good quality fabrics. Nowhere are those cheap. Palin had to look at least as good as the women we see on TV all the time. You may not realize it, but you don’t see Katie Couric or Diane Sawyer or any of the on-camera female talent at the networks, CNN or Fox in off-the-rack stuff from Macy’s. It is all upscale designer stuff, and at the low end it costs a couple of thousand per outfit. Always. Hair and make-up is done, professionally, any time you see them, at the cost of much time and money. That is the visual standard women at the upper end of politics must meet. Condoleezza Rice, who needed to project power, figured it out. Others have not. If Palin hadn’t bothered with any of it, we would have heard about that too.

Had she been a creature of Washington, Palin would have had closet full of suits, unexciting, perhaps, but appropriate. Had she been a former First Lady running for president, whose husband has raked in $109 million in the last 8 years, she could have called Oscar de la Renta, and and had him come for a fitting. He did well with Hillary’s jewel-toned pantsuits, (at a few grand a pop?). She might already have collected some of those great Gurhan necklaces, which accentuated Hillary’s suits all election season. (Look up for yourself what they cost.) Were she Speaker of the House, and the wealthiest Democratic lawmaker, she could have called Georgio Armani himself — and worn the Pelosi pearls that cost more than the Palin’s house.

Instead, she had zero time and no personal fortune. And she faced the terrible hurdle of  being young and attractive — the very sort of woman who most desperately needs wardrobe cues to make her look authoritative. If she had had to pay for it herself, she could not have run. The bill would have been ruinous to a genuinely middle class person. So the GOP did what it had to do in order to put a non-rich woman on a national ticket. Whatever one thinks of the choice — and I am a supporter — it’s nice to see that someone was thinking about the details. The difference between Palin at the announcement in Dayton, and Palin at the convention was a subtle but impressive transformation. Subtle always costs more. As a sometime GOP donor, I begrudge her none of it.

Because I like Sarah Palin, and want her to succeed, I would be really happy to know that, should she find herself back in Alaska for the next four years, (or, for that matter, in D.C.) she chose to spend a little of the money that would otherwise go to her clothing budget on a personal library of conservative classics. Going upmarket intellectually will complete the transformation, and make her truly prime-time ready.

Source:  The Corner at NRO 10/22 11:10 PM

I particularly like the photo of Sarah at the grocery store talking with a constituent.  But, of course, she now has to look the part to make her mark in the lower 48.  I disagree a bit with the writer.  I thought her look when she was announced in Dayton in her own clothes was not changed all that much in the time between then and the convention.   She now just has more expensive versions of the same kind of thing she had already been wearing when dressed up for business.  After all, Sarah had been to a number of governors’ conventions – in Texas, DC, and even New Yawk City!  She knows what  is appropriate and expected.   But she didn’t have the bucks to be outfitted for 2 – 3 events a day for several months.   

Gretchen Wilson appeared at Sarah’s event in Western Pennsylvania yesterday singing her trade  mark:  "Red Necked Woman" and it seems she is not turned off by Sarah’s polished look.  Because enabling has been disabled, here’s a link to Gretchen singing her song again in case you haven’t seen her before.  BTW Gretchen originally supported Fred Thompson!   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L30V5vnYHzk                                              

Ha ha  There’s a Democrat dame on FOX right now saying the McCain campaign showed bad judgment spending this money on such fancy duds – should bought them at Target!!!  Neil Cavuto says what about JFK’s $2,000 suits and FDR’s homes including one on an island?  Well, she says it’s different with women – she should be wearing something less expensive if she wants to connect with Joe the Plumber.  Unreal.  Then she gives it away – too bad, she says, that the campaign is being side-tracked with this kind of stuff when they could be talking about real issues.  Doh!  I’ll say.  She says: after all you asked me to come on the show to discuss it.  She’s got a point.  FOX is pushing the controversy, too.  Knock it off!! 

Wish there had been more of a to-do in the MSM about Michelle and her NYC room service, paid by the Obama campaign I assume, of lobsters, champaign and Iranian caviar.  Have they made a decision not to reach out to plumbers? 

Julia   

Old Ladies Thrash Hecklers at Palin Rally in NH

Surprising article in the Boston Globe that presents a positive picture of Sarah Palin at a rally in New Hampshire.  What is even more interesting to me is the video of 2 hooligans who were shouting "Obama" to disrupt the rally.  They are whining about old ladies roughing them up. ha ha ha ha

Here’s a bit of the article. 

Palin stumps in New Hampshire

Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor October 15, 2008 06:24 PM

Palin made an unabashed appeal to Granite Staters’ pride, praising the natural beauty of the state, the still-vibrant foliage, and residents’ love of the outdoors. She likened New Hampshire to the state where she is governor.[snip]

"You’re a lot like the people of Alaska," she said at one point, then suggested Alaska should borrow the New Hampshire motto of "Live Free or Die."

She also made reference to the fact that New Hampshire and Alaska are the only two states with neither a general income nor a general sales tax, repeating the old joke that New Hampshire is home to "two kinds of people: the fine people of New Hampshire, and the fine people of Massachusetts who got sick of paying all those taxes."

After the Laconia rally, however, two men said they were roughed up by McCain supporters after they began chanting Obama’s name. One had a black eye with a trace of blood, and they said they complained to police. A Laconia police spokesman said the two men had disrupted the event and had been ejected. (Watch the video [above] to hear the two men’s accounts.)

[snip]

At the event in Dover, not far from the seacoast, many in attendance were from Massachusetts or Maine. Many of those interviewed said they are independents, or undeclareds, as they are known in New Hampshire, a state with a deep libertarian streak and where conservatism has long been defined more in terms of economic rather than social issues. Most were impressed by Palin.

"I think she’s fresh, not like a politician in Washington," said Charles Sloane of Rochester, a retired civilian employee at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, who was among hundreds turned away when the Dover gym reached its fire safety capacity.

"She’s feisty and a breath of fresh air," said Cynthia Hill of Somersworth after the Dover rally. She said she supports Palin even though they differ sharply on a key issue; Hill favors abortion rights, which Palin opposes, even in cases of rape and incest.

Michael Shaw, an accounting manager from Enfield, Conn., said he drove more than 200 miles to see Palin in the flesh at Laconia, after being shut out of tickets for the Dover event. Shaw said he’s even more convinced that she has been treated unfairly after seeing Palin speak in person.

"She’s the bomb," said Shaw, an independent who said he plans to vote for McCain. "She’s getting beat up left and right. Look at what the media are doing to her, like the ‘Saturday Night Live’ skits. They treat her like she’s a baboon, like she doesn’t have a brain."

Source:  http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/10/palin_stumps_in.html

Julia – proud of old ladies 

Old Ladies Thrash Hecklers at Palin Rally in NH

Surprising article in the Boston Globe that presents a positive picture of Sarah Palin at a rally in New Hampshire.  What is even more interesting to me is the video of 2 hooligans who were shouting "Obama" to disrupt the rally.  They are whining about old ladies roughing them up. ha ha ha ha

Here’s a bit of the article. 

Palin stumps in New Hampshire

Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor October 15, 2008 06:24 PM

Palin made an unabashed appeal to Granite Staters’ pride, praising the natural beauty of the state, the still-vibrant foliage, and residents’ love of the outdoors. She likened New Hampshire to the state where she is governor.[snip]

"You’re a lot like the people of Alaska," she said at one point, then suggested Alaska should borrow the New Hampshire motto of "Live Free or Die."

She also made reference to the fact that New Hampshire and Alaska are the only two states with neither a general income nor a general sales tax, repeating the old joke that New Hampshire is home to "two kinds of people: the fine people of New Hampshire, and the fine people of Massachusetts who got sick of paying all those taxes."

After the Laconia rally, however, two men said they were roughed up by McCain supporters after they began chanting Obama’s name. One had a black eye with a trace of blood, and they said they complained to police. A Laconia police spokesman said the two men had disrupted the event and had been ejected. (Watch the video [above] to hear the two men’s accounts.)

[snip]

At the event in Dover, not far from the seacoast, many in attendance were from Massachusetts or Maine. Many of those interviewed said they are independents, or undeclareds, as they are known in New Hampshire, a state with a deep libertarian streak and where conservatism has long been defined more in terms of economic rather than social issues. Most were impressed by Palin.

"I think she’s fresh, not like a politician in Washington," said Charles Sloane of Rochester, a retired civilian employee at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, who was among hundreds turned away when the Dover gym reached its fire safety capacity.

"She’s feisty and a breath of fresh air," said Cynthia Hill of Somersworth after the Dover rally. She said she supports Palin even though they differ sharply on a key issue; Hill favors abortion rights, which Palin opposes, even in cases of rape and incest.

Michael Shaw, an accounting manager from Enfield, Conn., said he drove more than 200 miles to see Palin in the flesh at Laconia, after being shut out of tickets for the Dover event. Shaw said he’s even more convinced that she has been treated unfairly after seeing Palin speak in person.

"She’s the bomb," said Shaw, an independent who said he plans to vote for McCain. "She’s getting beat up left and right. Look at what the media are doing to her, like the ‘Saturday Night Live’ skits. They treat her like she’s a baboon, like she doesn’t have a brain."

Source:  http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/10/palin_stumps_in.html

Julia – proud of old ladies 

Joe the Plumber