« What just happened? | Main | Broken clocks »

October 05, 2008

Palin Rally in California, but is the campaign poised to stumble? UPDATED

****UPDATE*** Jeff Goldstein further highlights continued demagoguery used by the Left in framing any, ANY criticism of Obama as “racially tinged”.****

First things first, I was at the Palin Rally yesterday at the Home Depot Center in Carson. The weather, which had been in the triple digits earlier that week, cooperated with a cool temperatures and a thick cloud cover. It started lightly raining towards the end, but when Sarah said "Maybe I should wrap this up?" the crowd emphatically roared "NO!". The stadium was packed and at least 5 deep in standing-room-only at the top perimeter. Normally the stadium holds 8,000, but there were extra seats and the floor in front of the podium was packed. I confirm that the estimates of 15-20,000 are about right.

While California is not really in play -- the royal fiefdoms of Los Angeles and San Francisco holding blue sway over the peasants in the rest of the state -- the rally was enthusiastic and there was a lot of "well, at least we can make the Obamaniacs sweat a little". Volunteerism is up at Republican headquarters throughout the state and many are also volunteering to go to battleground states, like Nevada, in the ten days leading up to the election.

Follow me over the jump for a few pictures I took and why I'm also worried that the McCain campaign handlers, already shown to boobishness over their not letting Sarah-be-Sarah for three weeks after the convention, are making additional extraordinarily foolish decisions.

The California rally was more about keeping state Republicans enthused and pumping up local elections. The crowd was there to see Sarah but reacted nicely to the short speeches by local politicians and party officials. Fun time when Jon Voight took to the stage. He talked about his change from leftist to conservative and also had some funny stories about his mom. He said he looked at Sarah as someone just like his mom from Yonkers, a strong, intelligent, principled woman, raising children with love and a firm hand.

Jon Voight October 4 2008 Carson CA pic by Darleen Click

A stunner was when Shelly Mandell, president of the Los Angeles Chapter of the NOW, life-long Democrat, took the stage to introduce Sarah. The money quote from her introduction:

This is what feminism looks like.

Shelly Mandell, Sarah Palin Oct 4 2008 Carson CA pic by Darleen Click

Sarah Palin Oct 4 2008 Carson CA pic by Darleen Click

Sarah Palin Oct 4 2008 Carson CA pic by Darleen Click

As the stadium emptied and the rain fell a bit harder, a woman in the row behind us was helpful enough to take my camera and snap a picture of:

baldilocks, me and Miss Attila.

If you need any further proof that for the Left their political ideology has become their cult religion, then a few pictures of the moonbats and knowing the the local Democrat party was out there trying to be as disruptive as possible (and a few Code Pinkers inside the rally) should help. As laughable as these loons are, a sobering thought is that you never see the reverse at Democrat rallies. While the Dems/Leftists are secure that their political opponents acknowledge their First Amendment rights, it is apparent they don't have the same respect for people who disagree with them.

This last picture (the bottom line of the sign is "from my house") is illustrative in a few ways. One is the mocking and threatening tone of the poster. The Left isn't out to ignore Palin and hope she just goes back to icky, backwater Alaska, the Left is out to destroy her and her career. They fear that even if Obama is elected, Palin will return to the national scene in the future. They won't have it. Hence the continued "scorch the earth" policy they have towards her - slander, libel, threats against her family - is all in play. Also notice the woman holding the sign, late 50's and grim-faced. A kool-aid drinking, boomer, gender feminist. Palin is a threat to her. This woman is not having a good time. A look at these "protesters" is to see people who are angry and hatefilled. Not a smile or laugh or chuckle amongst them. Palin's happiness, indeed any non-leftist who is happy, frosts them like nothing else. It pushes their derangement right up to eleven.

Which brings me back full circle to something to worry about. The McCain campaign does not have the time to make any more stumbles like it already has, but it looks not only they haven't learned but arestubbornly determined lose the election.

Here is the big question of the moment that many GOPers are asking: Why is John McCain not tearing into Barack Obama and the Dems on the huge role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Community Reinvestment Act in the financial crisis on Wall Street? In fact, the biggest criticism by conservatives of Sarah Palin's debate performance last night was that she had the opportunity to talk about Fannie/Freddie and the CRA but instead criticized the role of "predatory lenders." [...]Why not? 1) It is a complicated argument, and McCain is not good at making complicated arguments, not even about earmarks. (Note, additionally, his lack of defense of the war in Iraq during his debate with Obama. Amazing.)

2) There is a racial component to criticism of the Community Reinvestment Act that can make it sound like you are scapegoating minorities for Wall Street's problems.

3) The campaign believes McCain's time is better spent talking about taxes and energy and healthcare. Really.

The campaign handlers don't seem to be getting that Obama/Biden are out there lying about how the whole subprime debacle is solely a Republican mess. McCain's 2005 legislation? Per the Dems: "NEVER HAPPENED".

McCain has to stop playing his campaign as if it were an extension of his Senate career, he can't be pulling his punches with Obama when The One and his acolytes are out to take a baseball bat to the back of his head and dance in his blood on the floor.

As Patterico says:

All you have to do is play the videos quoting Republicans worrying about Fannie and Freddie, as contrasted with the quotes from Democrats claiming there was no crisis.If they couldn’t see this crisis coming, how are they going to see an Al Qaeda attack coming?

If the McCain campaign handlers are the reason that Sarah Palin (and John McCain) didn’t hit back hard in the debates on Fannie and Freddie, then they have to be the most stunningly incompetent bunch of campaigners in history. This crisis is the biggest thing going. McCain and Palin have a great argument to make.


Or we’re going to lose.

It’s just that simple.

Yes, it is that simple.

Posted by Darleen at October 5, 2008 11:09 AM


Boy you are paranoid. If McCain loses Palin goes back to obscurity as a Quayle-like joke. That's what "end of political career" means. It's not threatening. Get a grip.

McFalin can't talk about Fannie Mae because of Rick Davis. Wingnut political analysis would be a lot more astute if you quit fixating on nothings like Ayers and paid more attention.

Posted by: Josh at October 5, 2008 02:30 PM

We really need to look at the financial situation, as complex as it is, as non-partisanly (?) as possible. Freddie and Fannie are abominations, and a terrible mix of capitalism and socialism, and certainly guilty of Democrat crony capitalism. *AND*, by law, they can only give "near prime" loans, not "subprime". They certainly have their toes over the line of what is responsible lending, and lead the way, but they aren't the ones who completely dropped the ball.

I just hope as the economy collapses, we see that "both sides" have had their hand to play in the collapse, and the Fed has its share of the blame, and we can solve this with smart decisions. I'm not convinced that Bush's newly found love of socialism is a good idea either.

Posted by: TJ at October 5, 2008 03:38 PM

I'm with you sister.

I made the same argument about the McCain campaign, here:


One theory was that McCain was holding back until after the bailout bill passed.

Well, it passed. McCain needs to go after Obama on this at the next debate.

Posted by: Nice Deb at October 5, 2008 05:32 PM

Josh is right. Reason McCain can't talk Fannie/Freddie is RICK DAVIS. As in his campaign manager who was taking a paycheck from Fannie/Freddie right up until the day they were taken over. I would have thought a big McCain supporter would at least know this fact, even if it's uncomfortable.

He has also taken more money from Freddie/Fannie than Obama has, except his was funneled through "bundlers". Obama's contributions are almost entirely from employees of Fannie/Freddie - one of those inconvenient facts that McCain supporters haver successfully suppressed.

Posted by: Leah at October 6, 2008 03:40 AM

I also would like to know where Darlene comes off telling others "what feminism looks like". It certainly doesn't include the kind of woman-on-woman hatred expressed in this blog for any woman who doesn't adhere to Darlene's personal brand of feminism.

Posted by: Leah at October 6, 2008 03:42 AM

I "hate women", Leah?

Can you substantiate your assertion or is that just another gender feminist way of saying I'm an "inauthentic woman" and Real Feminists are demanding to repo my vagina?

And I find it interesting that you're totally in support of a racist, child abuser - as long as the child abused is the child of a non-leftist.

Posted by: Darleen at October 6, 2008 06:38 AM

She probably just thinks feminism means something about ideas and principles, rather than just supporting a candidate with ovaries. Lord knows what you think your point is about racist child abuse. Although a Judge did say that the way the Palin family behaved in the custody dispute was tantamount to child abuse, I don't think that's what you meant.

Posted by: Josh at October 6, 2008 09:15 AM

Wow, the Kool-Aid drinkers crawled out of the sewer to show you, huh?

It used to be that Feminism stood for women getting Equal Rights/Treatment/Pay. Not just lip service to Roe vs. Wade. Whatever happened to that, I wonder...

Sarah Palin is a self made woman. She didn't marry into her power like Hillary. Or she didn't use her father's connections like Nancy Pelosi. Isn't it interesting how we SHOULD look up to Palin (even with her own faults) and say, that's what the suffragettes marched for.

Naaaaah...that's WAAAYYYY too ancient for people to remember today. That was like 80 years ago! Susan B Who? Whatever!

Posted by: baxtrice at October 6, 2008 05:44 PM

My comment was in response to this: Also notice the woman holding the sign, late 50's and grim-faced. A kool-aid drinking, boomer, gender feminist. ... to describe a woman who doesn't like Palin.

But the late 50s, grim-faced, boomer woman hunched over the microphone introducing Palin is "what feminism looks like".

I think the worst casualty of this cartoonish Palin candidacy is feminism unfortunately. She was put up as VP strictly because she was female - gender politics personified. And she's done nothing but demonstrate she's unqualified ever since.

Women overwhelmingly favor this Democratic ticket. So, unless Darlene (and apparently Baxtrice) want to claim that most women are koolaid drinkers who don't know what feminism looks like, you might need to reevaluate. You wouldn't hate your own gender so much that you'd contend the majority of women (who disagree with you) are all somehow unable to make rational judgments about what's in their own best interests, would you?

Posted by: Leah at October 7, 2008 02:50 AM

Re: racits child abuser.... Darlene, what part of WALT MONEGAN do you not understand? We're not talking about improprieties regarding Wooten, who still has his job, but the firing of Monegan, a distinguished public servant who did nothing wrong except to refuse to carry out a Palin family vendetta.

The way you keep trying to switch to an unrelated topic makes it seem you're afraid to discuss the true facts of the matter. Luckily the Alaskan legislature has not been as easily cowed by the interference of the McCain campaign in a local matter that predates the VP selection of Palin.

Posted by: leah at October 7, 2008 03:06 AM


My brand of feminism was taught to me from my studies of Susan B. Anthony, the champion of women's suffrage. She supported Republicans, fought furiously for all minorities to have the right to vote (until betrayed by the 15th amendment's language) and she thought abortion was child-murder.

I suggest you open your eyes to multiple views from women. Only then could you see that the "pro-life, Republican, 2nd Amendment sisters" form of feminism is in the minority and perhaps like Susan B. Anthony, we are simply just tired of being labeled and ignored. Or worse - being told we betray our own gender.

Far be it from us to still agree with the very individuals who fought feverishly to give us equal constitutional rights from the beginning. Besides, I never saw Gloria Steinem's mug (or anyone from NARAL either) on U.S. currency - ever.

Posted by: Conservative Belle at October 7, 2008 10:45 AM

I appreciate your making a reasoned case for your point of view, Conservative Belle. It's a shame Darlene feels compelled to insult and ridicule other women merely because they disagree with her, because it's those kind of feminists who diminish your perspective.

I think the main problem is that conservative women ally themselves to the ilk of Limbaugh, who coined the phrase "feminazi" , a term designed to malign women of a particular point of view. Women of your conservative view of feminism want to be respected, but they don't respect others. The abuse and hatred Darlene heaps on other women makes your argument untenable.

It's interesting you bring up Susan B. Anthony, who had a rather dicey relationship with racism. That dynamic, of conservative women battlling their racist inclinations, has been evident in both the Hilary and the Palin campaigns against Obama. I don't accuse any individual here of having that problem, but it's naive to deny its existence.

Posted by: leah at October 7, 2008 05:50 PM


The comment, "What Feminism looks like" was used by Sherry Mandell when she introduced Sarah Palin at the rally. I think that you took that line and attributed it to Darleen.

Darleen's not doing the "hate" here. I do find it interesting that you obviously missed that part and decided to launch you little attack on HER blog here. It's called reading comprehension, look in to it.

Also, I don't know about the "racism" that you attribute to Susan B. Anthony. My own study of her life has been focused on her work to get Women the right to vote in the 1920's. And for you to throw that charge at Hillary and now Sarah Palin, is ridiculous. I didn't see racism with Hillary and I don't see it with Palin. I think you're confusing criticism with racism.

Criticism of Obama's policies and judgement is NOT racism. But I never think about a person's ethnicity -- I look at their character.

You've opened yourself up to be judged an Axelrod/Obama astroturfer and I think it would be best if you stopped dropping your "smears" here without actual hard evidence.

Posted by: baxtrice at October 7, 2008 08:27 PM

I had to look up "astroturfing" since it seems so popular on the wingnutty side of the aisle, i.e. among the kind of people who think Obamunist is a clever way to describe that majority of their fellow Americans who now plan to vote for Obama. Unsurprisingly, it's a poor descriptive for someone like me, since I represent only my own point of view and harbor no delusions that I'll influence the likes of Darleen.

Although abolitionists like William Henry Garrison championed feminism, Susan B. Anthony chose to ally herself with and accept funding from a rabid racist of her time called George Train. Her political organization, the National Women's Suffrage Association, argued against giving the vote to black men. It's hard to judge her though by contemporary standards, as it is with abortion - where she was motivated by the gruesome mortality rate of women. (Though I found her writings on abortion interesting mainly because they exposed how making it illegal has never and will never put an end to it. )

I don't claim that Hillary or Palin are racist. In fact, I think they both are not racist. But they appeal to that dark underbelly in so many hate filled conservative voters. Like Susan B. Anthony they find the concept of a black man besting a white woman to be inherently offensive.

Posted by: leah at October 8, 2008 03:13 AM

Leah said: I don't claim that Hillary or Palin are racist. In fact, I think they both are not racist. But they appeal to that dark underbelly in so many hate filled conservative voters.

Umm, W.T.F.? No, dear, you're seeing "racists" in closets and back alleyways, aren't you? Please, just stop. Conservatives are not hate filled nor racist as a GROUP. Some INDIVDUALS harbor their own demons, whether they be conservative, liberal or polka dot. You're throwing out blanket generalizations.

Just stop.

Posted by: baxtrice at October 8, 2008 07:26 AM

Did anybody call for Obama to be killed at this rally? I hear that's all the rage at Palin events these days.

Posted by: Josh at October 8, 2008 03:18 PM

The right can't hide its rage any longer. Palin is a disgrace not speaking out against this behavior at her rallies. She shows every day one more way she is not qualified to serve as Vice President of these United States. Luckily for all of us, that day will never come.

Posted by: leah at October 8, 2008 04:50 PM