Bring It On!

Anyone Know What This Is?

September 11th, 2008 | by Cranky Liberal |

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • e-mail
  • YahooMyWeb
Sphere: Related Content

  1. 28 Responses to “Anyone Know What This Is?”

  2. By Ken Grandlund on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Multiple Choice:

    (A) Required reading for GOP presidential hopefuls

    (B) A primer for new GOP governors who want to run for national office

    (C) Top secret binder cover for NIE reports that tell a president that there is no way terrorists would fly an airplane into American skyscrapers

    (D) The longest book George W. Bush ever read out loud

    (E) All of the above

  3. By Steve O on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    The one book Sarah Palin wanted to ban?

    Required reading material for RNC admittance?

  4. By admin on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    LOL Ken thats great.

    SteveO I guarantee the book is sacred to Republicans because Fearless Leader is so fond of it he couldn’t put it down.

  5. By Steve O on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Aaaahhh, was it what he was reading on 9/11?

  6. By Steve O on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    After My Pet Goat, of course.

  7. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Can anyone possibly care what it is? There are ewer than eight weeks before election day and Obama is floundering. This is what you all are talking about? What about the planet? The children? The economy? The wars? Palin’s pregnant, unmarried, 17 year old daughter?


  8. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    That should be “fewer than eight weeks”, not “ewer“.

  9. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Or is this the way liberals entertain themselves out of their depression over Palin-mania?

  10. By Lisa on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Obama is getting desperate. He asked the Clintons to campaign for him. Remember what Bill did to Hillary by campaigning?
    Oh wait. Go Bill!!!!
    If he needs the Clintons so bad why didn’t the dems nominate Hillary then,she had it in the bag.

  11. By Ken Grandlund on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply


    I think you over estimate the “depression” over Palin. More like incredulity.

    Apparently you seem comfortable having Palin so close to the presidency. Were you a Dan Quayle fan too?

    Do you really think Palin has what it takes to reform America’s abysmal energy policies? Can she energize our economy? Will she cut through the waste and pork of DC?

    Because even though she’d only be VP, she has a shot at the top job should the oldest man ever to run for a first term run into serious health issues. Comfortable with her far-right religious faith? After all, Palin’s congregation is at least as far right as Obama’s was far left, and if I recall, that was a big problem for you conservative types.

    All your rips at Obama that now apply to Palin seem to have vanished into the wind. Interesting turn of opinion from the GOP, no?

    I’m not depressed about Palin, only distressed that so many in America are eager to give the Bush ideology another run. Talk about slow learners…

  12. By Megan on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Craig, are you serious? Have you not followed politics very much or for a very long time? Or have you followed politics and you just wish to incite? The snapshot of this election, at this moment…you call that “Obama is floundering”?

    Also, it is the McCain/Palin ticket and the Republicans who can’t seem to stop talking about the pregnant daughter. It is not at all “the” talking point from the Dems. Just a distraction offered up by her own mother. If you want the topic dropped, I suggest you, the Republicans, and the McCain/Palin camp stop talking about it.

  13. By admin on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Craig I’m not depressed over Palin. Far from it. Bring it On! Lets debate her. Hell i’ll debate her. Oh wait, thats right, she’s not allowed to go out in front of that meennnn old wiberal media because they might hurt her lipstick wearing feelings. She’s peeking like a Britney Spears video.

    And why does anyone care what it is? Because it has historical signifigance thats why. On 911tm Day, all the little symbols come out don’t they? Bush and McCain sure like to trot them out so I’m just trying to help.

    BTW Obama is up in Ohio and tied in Florida so yeah I’m not really worried about Palin or McCain.

  14. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    I know you don’t spend a lot of time here at BIO! so you can be forgiven for not knowing this but I am no fan of either McCain as President or of Palin as his v-p pick. My first comment here was highly critical of Palin on two counts: 1. she’s lean on experience, hence muting the Republicans’ criticism of Obama on experience as well as the likelihood that Palin will not be able to convince voters that she’d be a credible president should McCain be unable to finish his term and 2. she’s under investigation for corruption, hence feeding into legitimate criticism of Republicans as “the party of corruption”. I called the Palin pick stupid and McCain stupid for making it.

    I haven’t seen much of anything to alter my perception on those points.

    Not more than a day or two ago I wrote that I am not committed to voting for McCain-Palin on just these counts. They are going to have to prove themselves in the time remaining. Palin has got to show herself not just a shrewd politician, which I think she’s already shown herself to be, but also a credible v-p and possible president before the press and in the v-p debate and she’s got to come out clean from the investigation over Troopergate if they hope to get my vote.

    So I carry no water for McCain (co-sponsor of the vile Bipartisan Campaign Reform bill and pusher of comprehensive immigration reform that I opposed) or Palin (for the above reasons). That doesn’t mean I won’t defend them from some criticisms if I don’t think they are true or don’t think they matter or think they are hypocritical criticisms coming from liberals (as I’ve done over the last nearly two weeks) but I don’t even plan to vote in November unless my concerns can be shown to be unfounded.


    See my comments to Ken.

    Additionally, yes, I follow politics quite a lot. I follow, for example, the recent polls which all show McCain-Palin to be either ahead of Obama-Biden (in one poll among likely voters by 54% - 44%) or deadlocked within the margin of error. I follow polls that show independents and women flocking to McCain-Palin and the enthusiasm disparity between Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin narrowing since Palin was chosen. I’ve followed the liberals in the media and blogs embarrassing themselves on a near daily basis by floating lies and half-truths about Obama and blatently hypocritical arguments about unwed teen mothers and whether a woman with a family can really handle power. I’ve followed the speeches at the campaigns and noticed that the virtually unknown Palin attracted very nearly as many viewers as Obama’s and that McCain’s speech attracted more viewers than Obama’s. I’ve watched as the Democrats Convention and Obama’s speech were wiped completely off the collective consciousness with the Palin pick and watched as liberal babbling made Palin the gal nobody outside of Alaska had ever heard of into the candidate whose favorable numbers are higher than Obama’s, Biden’s, or McCain’s.

    Honestly, it’s been the most entertaining two weeks that I’ve had in years.


    I’m sorry. I still don’t understand what the significance of the story-book is. I suppose it’s supposed to be self-evident but it’s just not. If it’s supposed to be a slam at Bush on 9/11/01, great. But Bush isn’t running for anything. What? You guys have gone from running against McCain’s vice-presidential pick to running against the out-going president who isn’t even on the ballot?

    Smart move…

  15. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    And you all might not personally be depressed but there does seem to be some angst among Democrats over the trend of things. But keep running against Bush. I’m SURE that’s the winning message. ;-)

  16. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    And, from that Politico post, it does seem as though SOME Democrats ARE depressed:

    A major Democratic fundraiser described it a good bit more starkly after digesting the polls of recent days: “I’m so depressed. It’s happening again. It’s a nightmare.”

  17. By Ken Grandlund on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply


    You’re right, I don’t get to spend as much time here lately as I was able to in the past, and even less time perusing the comment threads. Something that I hope to be able to get back to with more regularity in the not too distant future.

    That said, I accept your comments here on your position vis-a-vis the McCain-Palin ticket (i.e. you’re not totally “on board” with that choice).

    As for the “running against Bush” comment farther down- what else is there to say? After all, McCain seems to be so like Bush in this campaign and in his recent voting record, and so many Americans are disgusted with the Bush administration and its record, that for DEMS to continually remind voters that McCain=Bush seems a fairly valid campaign tactic to me.

  18. By Cranky Liberal on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Did I say it had anything to do with Palin or McCain? Did 9/11 have anything to do with Palin or McCain? Does the world revolve around those two now? Do I have to write everythign about How much John McCain and Sarah Palin lie? No.It’s Patriot Day and I just wanted to remind everyone what fearless leader did the morning of the attacks.

    If you would like me to continue to point out every scummy, decietful lie of Palin and McCain I can, but of I am under no obligation to do so. Sorry that you were under than misconception.

  19. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply


    But, again, as an existential matter, Bush is not McCain and McCain is not Bush and, so, not every criticism of Bush is valid against McCain and surely reading a children’s book to children even after being informed of the attack on 9/11 is one of those criticisms that are not valid. Others would include Bush’s stance on torture (both as to whether harsh interrogation techniques including water-boarding are permissible, an issue over which McCain opposed Bush and clearly stated his disagreement with Bush or, to take another example, the surge; McCain favored a change in both numbers and strategy in Iraq long before Bush came around). There are clearly ways of tying McCain and Bush together but you cannot use something with which McCain had nothing to do (the story book, for example) as a valid complaint against McCain.

    Or, rather, you can…but I’m not going to let you get away with it without challenge if I catch you trying to do it.

    You could point out that Bush voted for the Iraq war and Obama opposed it. But that opens up the criticism that Joe Biden, Obama’s pick, also voted for it. You could point out that McCain, though he initially voted against Bush tax cuts, now wants to make them permanent. You could tie them together in any number of policies and it will be up to the Republicans to counter with ways in which McCain is NOT Bush and to show that, in those ways in which he is like Bush, he’s right for the country.

    In that way, Democrats can validly tie McCain to Bush and Republicans can make their case and the voters make their choice. But story-books? Please!

  20. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply


    Hey, you can post on anything you want. It’s your forum. I’m just a commenter commenting.

    Carry on!

  21. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply


    I also want to say that I miss you when you’re not around and I like reading your stuff when you are. I hope you’ll be able to spend more time here.

  22. By Ken Grandlund on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    Thanks Craig. Me too!

  23. By Steve O on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    SO what the fuck is it? It’s not My Pet Goat so what is it? C’mon, already!!!!

  24. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    I don’t know. I’ve asked too…twice and haven’t gotten an answer. The only thing I can think of is that it has My Pet Goat in it. Otherwise, it’s just nonsense altogether.

  25. By Ken Grandlund on Sep 11, 2008 | Reply

    It is the book Bush was reading to grade schoolers on 9-11. “My Pet Goat” is a story in this book.

    OR- See my initial comment at the top and go with any of those.

    (But really, this is the book that had “My Pet Goat” in it.)

  26. By Paul Watson on Sep 12, 2008 | Reply

    Didn’t McCain actually vote to support the torture provisions? I’m not 100% sure, but I think he did. If so, his opposition to torture appears to be rather soundbite deep.

    But then again, when a maverick votes with their part 90% of the time, I might need a new dictionary. Maybe his has different definition of ‘opposition’ and ‘maverick’ to the OED

  27. By Liberal Jarhead on Sep 12, 2008 | Reply

    McCain has -
    1. Switched from vocally opposing torture to supporting it;
    2. Gone from angry denunciation of the oil companies, before they gave him a suitcase full of money, to putting on his “Ooh, drill here!” cheerleader skirt and grabbing his pompoms to back their current attempt at another land grab (never mind that he knows that they’re already sitting on years worth of undrilled reserves, waiting for prices to go up some more, and that all the offshore drilling rigs in the world are already booked solid for the next five years, so they can’t drill more anyway);
    3. Gone from calling fundamentalist televangelists “agents of intolerance” to buddying up with them and picking Palin as his running mate to try to please them; and
    4. Made ringing speeches about campaign finance reform, then used a loophole he carefully kept his mouth shut about to try to build a massive campaign fund no different in principle from those he’d denounced.

    The things McCain has stayed consistent about are amassing one of the worst truancy records in the Senate, making Reagan/Bush-like factual errors in press conferences, and sucking up to the same Rovian apparatus that kicked him in the nuts when he ran against Bush.

    Palin, for her part:
    1. Ran for office as a reformer, but got into ethical trouble over financial chicanery and abuses of power almost as soon as she was sworn in, first as mayor and then as governor;
    2. Consistently lies or exaggerates when she talks about her political history in Alaska;
    3. As governor, has sought to strip native communities of their subsistence fishing and hunting rights and tried to bar them from being able to get election documentation in their own languages;
    4. Has made impassioned speeches about how it’s God’s will for the petroleum companies to be able to build a gas pipeline (somehow it’s hard to imagine the Almighty getting worked up about that) and sued the government trying to get the polar bears taken off the endangered species list to clear the way;
    5. Is active in a church that practices speaking in tongues, preaches about the Jews being evil, denies evolution and global warming, and preaches an apocalyptic version of end times theology;
    6. As mayor, tried to impose her own Pentecostal values on her entire community via banning books of which she disapproved from the public library, and tried to fire the librarian who wouldn’t play along;
    7. Until a couple of years ago, was affiliated with a radical far-right fringe party that was trying to get Alaska to secede from the US;
    8. Reportedly publicly responded to the news that Obama had enough delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination by laughing and saying, “Sambo beat the bitch!”; and
    9. Appears to be, based on recent interviews, comfortable with the idea of war with Iran and/or Russia.

    Considering the above, I think it really is likely that, mind-boggling as the concept is, a McCain/Palin administration would be even worse than Bush/Cheney has been. Dumber, crookeder, meaner, crazier, and more reckless, none of which I could have imagined even a year ago.

    And you know that while they’re running, they’re putting up the best front they can - kind of like Bush’s “compassionate conservative” rap before we saw him in action once he took office.

    If this is their best behavior, can you imagine what they’ll look like when they take off their masks?

  28. By Paul Watson on Sep 12, 2008 | Reply

    Items 6, 7 and possibly 9 are not correct.

    6) She asked if there was a procedure for banning books but did not actually use it. The librarian things seems more like a political turf war than a “you wouldn’t ban my books” thing

    7) Her husband was a member, she attended meetings with him but wasn’t a member.

    9) Craig posted a transcript in another thread here where she says she doesn’t want a war, or even a Cold War, but does support trade sanctions (the fact that that would likely lead to war or at least a trade war doesn’t mean she wants it. She’s already proven to be fairly good at ignoring inconvenient realities)

    You also missed out one about how her town’s policy while she was mayor as to make rape victims pay for the forensic tests. I haven’t seen this one confirmed as being her policy or not yet. It appears to be policy during her time as mayor, but may have been an existing policy of which she was unaware.

  29. By Steve O on Sep 12, 2008 | Reply

    That was the cover of My Pet Goat? Huh, I thought it was different.

    Do I get a prize for participating?

Post a Comment