That blog article (see sig) by someone who knows Palin well and who has been an enemy of Attack Kitty since she opposed the firing of the librarian, should be widely disseminated. Why should it be taken with a grain of salt? The reasons Anne Kilkenny wrote it seem very valid to me.

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I’ve always operated in the belief that “Bad things happen when good people stay silent”. Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don’t have a job she can bump me out of. I don’t belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that’s life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah’s attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

TJ1111.... I don't have a name for that type of person readily at hand, but characteristics include employing juvenile sarcasm and mocking in making arguments, using tortured logic and giant leaps of faith, perceiving conspiracies as the basis of all problems, making sweeping generalizations with little or no evidence to support them, and above all, playing to the galley in trying to cast the members of the council or commission as bad or stupid.

Ann Coulter!

Now go wash that taste out of your mouth.

You know you want to. It's that bad.

Is it off-limits to criticize Palin for being vicious? The Republicans want to make to the election all about "character", as they define it, once again. She revealed herself in her speech to be a very nasty person, and to me, that reflects very poor character. Is that criticism too personal? No, she is selling the character that she very consciously portrayed, and that is a fair target for criticism.

I want to know that too, but I don't think that's where the focus of Glenn's writing is. He's not a strategist (thank god, the way that word has been bandied around for the past 10 years).

In my own opinion, Democrats just can't play this game. The only reason Republicans even have a base, as compared to the 5% of Americans they actually represent, is that they made the choice in the NIxon era to go after disaffected, poor and poorly educated people who have a lot of grievances against their position in society. They have been succesful in convincing those people that Democratic associated institutions and ideas are responsible for those problems and get them to focus on things that make them feel uncomfortable civil rights, women's rights, academia, taxes, etc. After a generation or two, those ideas have stuck beyond the point of being able to be countered by reality, i.e., that Romeny, McCain are fantastically wealthy elitists themselves.

The Democratic base are what's left of the seventies movements and ideals, and some of the vestiges of pro-labor people from the fifties and sixties (although the Republicans succesfully culled them aside with teh former strategy). They're idea of politics is not visceral or reactionary, but performanced based. They think it is society;s responsibility to create as stable environment.

This is all a lot of generalization, but you get the picture. This turned into a dissertation. I've been a bit gabby today, but now I have to go and you'll all be rid of me.

Taking the high road DOES NOT WORK!!!!! F&@K!! What the fuck are they thinking????? FIGHT BACK.

Do NOT, NOT, NOT compliment Palin or McCain ANY MORE!!!

Jesus!

Is it off-limits to criticize Palin for being vicious?

Unless she molests them or beats them and you have some evidence of same.

What was it John McCain said about Chelsea Clinton?

Clockwork Smurf wrote: We'll get our poll numbers reflecting the results of last night and tonight on wednesday. Then we'll know what worked and what didn't.

Yes, indeedy! And the latest CBS-NY Times poll has an even steven tie at 42-42.

So much for Obama's eight point lead, which is now history.

All this blather about the "new political paradigm" O & B are using is tommyrot. It will not work, and they WILL lose unless they eagerly grab the weapons needed and partake in the political WARfare.

Re: "Use the same sort of veiled attacks as Palin."

What are they waiting for? They have already let McCain recast the election as Obama vs Palin. Meanwhile McCain is some John Wayne type warrior.

Now they just post phrases next to asterisks.

-- omooex

And, some of those phrases were more sexist than anything the Obama campaign has even dared to say. Ironic, no?

RMP: I guess I take everything from an unknown quantity with a grain of salt. The blog is convincing, to be sure (to me, at least), and most of it comports with what we already know to be true. I just wouldn't want to run with it without fact checking it first.

That's one poll. Rasmussen and Gallop have him at much greater leads, and they were conducted over the same period of time--starting Friday with Palin's announcement..

Dear MoveOn member,

Did you watch Sarah Palin's speech last night? The speech told us a lot about her.

It told us that she can distort the facts and deliver mean-spirited zingers with the best of them. It told us that if Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter ever need a stand-in, she'd be a great pick.

It told us that she can be condescending and dismissive of the real work Barack Obama did helping real people on the South Side of Chicago. It told us that she can uphold the long Republican tradition of lying about Democratic tax cuts—even though Obama's plan would give Americans a bigger break than McCain's.

But the speech—written by one of President Bush's speechwriters—didn't tell us the truth about Sarah Palin's extremist positions. And the more that people know her far-right views, the less they support her. (There's a partial list below.)

One of the best ways to get the word out about Palin is to write a letter to the editor of your local paper. Today's a great day to write because this is very relevant—it just happened last night. Plus, our online tool makes it easy and has great tips. Please take a few minutes to write a quick letter to the editor now:

http://pol.moveon.org/lte?campaign_id=95&id=13709-8383510-gCUf5lx&t=3

Palin's speech and the reaction to it also made clear why McCain picked her. It wasn't a decision about who's most qualified to serve a heart-beat away from the presidency—it was a political decision about pleasing the far-right base of the Republican party.

Here are a bunch of points you might want to include in your letter:

· Palin recently said that the war in Iraq is "God's task." She's even admitted she hasn't thought about the war much—just last year she was quoted saying, "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."

· Palin has actively sought the support of the fringe Alaska Independence Party. Six months ago, Palin told members of the group—who advocate for a vote on secession from the union—to "keep up the good work" and "wished the party luck on what she called its 'inspiring convention.'"

· Palin wants to teach creationism in public schools. She hasn't made clear whether she thinks evolution is a fact.

· Palin doesn't believe that humans contribute to global warming. Speaking about climate change, she said, "I'm not one though who would attribute it to being manmade."

· Palin has close ties to Big Oil. Her inauguration was even sponsored by BP.

· Palin is extremely anti-choice. She doesn't even support abortion in the case of rape or incest.

· Palin opposes comprehensive sex-ed in public schools. She's said she will only support abstinence-only approaches.

· As mayor, Palin tried to ban books from the library. Palin asked the library how she might go about banning books because some had inappropriate language in them—shocking the librarian, Mary Ellen Baker. According to Time, "news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor."

· She DID support the Bridge to Nowhere (before she opposed it). Palin claimed that she said "thanks, but no thanks" to the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. But in 2006, Palin supported the project repeatedly, saying that Alaska should take advantage of earmarks "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

P.S. If you haven't seen it, check out the Daily Show clip on Palin. It's worth a watch

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=24753&id=13709-8383510-gCUf5lx&t=5