posted on August 30, 2008 09:06:12 AM new
That's the title of this piece, by Ralph Elisberg on the Huffington Post, which is long but very interesting and worth reading if only for the last few paragraphs.
---There was a TV ad for deodorant that said, "Never let them see you sweat." The John McCain campaign has just showed the world that it is drenched.
Selecting Sarah Palin as its choice for a vice presidential candidate is perhaps the worst such choice in American History. To be fair, maybe there are worse choices, but I don't know how bad William O. Butler was when he ran with Lewis Cass against Zachary Taylor.
But it's far worse than Dan Quayle, who was a sitting senator. Worse even than Geraldine Ferraro, who at least served in Congress for three-terms. And far worse than William Miller, a choice so obscure when selected by Barry Goldwater that he (honestly) later did an American Express commercial asking, "Do you know me?" And that ad was after the election. But even Miller had been a Congressman for 12 years. And been a prosecutor during the Nuremberg War trials against Nazis. Sarah Palin lists her credits as a hockey mom.
There was a point during the Republican primaries when I was trying to figure out who I hoped got the presidential nomination. Someone so weak he'd be easy for the Democrats to beat, or someone more challenging who at least wouldn't be a disaster for America. I decided on the latter because America has to resolve its serious problems and can't afford risking some glitch where another George Bush got elected. And so I felt that John McCain, for all his weaknesses, was the lesser of all evils and was glad he got the nomination. Throw that out the window. McCain-Palin is an unthinkable disaster.
I completely understand the reasoning behind the decision for John McCain to select Sarah Palin. Absolutely. It's the thinking that settled on Sarah Palin that's missing.
No doubt John McCain will get some women to vote for him who wouldn't have otherwise, and even some independents. But he will also probably lose as many Republicans uncomfortable with a woman on the ticket - let alone a woman with so little experience as Sarah Palin. Not to mention that the choice will cause many undecided Democratic women to be aghast and push them back to following their Democratic beliefs. And further, it will lose all the independents who look at the GOP ticket and say "This is who I'm supposed to give my vote for the next four years to lead and protect America??" It may even appeal to right-wing evangelicals for her strong pro-life stance and get some to vote - but that position and others related to it are specifically what loses even more women voters. And men. Ultimately, the nomination will lose far, far more votes than it gains.
But this is not the reason the decision is so terrible.
Story continues below
advertisement
It's always said that the most important decision a presidential candidate makes is their pick for vice president. It shows their thinking and judgment. John McCain, in his first decision, has just told the world that he believes Sarah Palin is the most qualified person to be a heartbeat from the presidency. Forgetting all the available men for a moment, if John McCain felt it critical to select a woman in an effort to somehow grab the Hillary Clinton supporters, look at his choice of women he had available: Christine Todd Whitman, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Elizabeth Dole, Susan Collins, even - for goodness sake - Condoleezza Rice. Or Carly Fiorina. Each of these have marks against them, and perhaps some might not have wanted to run, but it's near-impossible to look at the list and suggest to the American public that Sarah Palin is the best choice of Republican women to be vice president. And again, this is ignoring the men he who could have been chosen.
It's not that Sarah Palin is inexperienced. It's that this is gross political misconduct.
Sarah Palin has been governor of Alaska for just a bit over 18 months. Alaska has a population of 683,000. (Though that doesn't include moose.) This would only make it the 17th most populous city in the United States. Just ahead of Fort Worth.
Before that, she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. Population 9,000. I know Republicans like to promote "small town values," but this is taking things to ridiculous extremes, don't you think? I'm from Glencoe, Illinois, population 8,762. It's so small it doesn't even have a mayor, it has an appointed village manager. I'm sure that Paul Harlow is doing wonderfully at his job in the village - but I don't expect that he sees himself as even wanting to be a heartbeat from the U.S. President in 18 months. You know what the top news story is on the Glencoe website? "Fire Hydrant Painting Underway." (To be fair, it's the #2 story. The top news is a clarification about displaying political signage.)
Do you know what the first two "powers and duties" are for the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska? Check their municipal code:
1. Preside at council meetings. The mayor may take part in the discussion of matters before the council, but may not vote, except that the mayor may vote in the case of a tie;
2. Act as ceremonial head of the city;
Swell.
If you live in small town America (and I mean really, really small), look around you and be honest - do you see your mayor (or village manager) as a heartbeat from the presidency in 18 months?
But that's not the reason either that the decision to make Sarah Palin the VP nominee is so terrible.
It's one thing to discuss how unqualified Sarah Palin is. That's a national matter and huge. But on a grassroots political level, her nomination takes away the Republicans' ONLY weapon in the campaign - calling Barack Obama inexperienced. They haven't even been trying to run on the issues, or on the eight-year record of George Bush, which John McCain has supported almost 95% of the time. They've only been running on the faux-issue of Barack Obama's experience of 14 years in federal and state government. Yes, Sarah Palin is merely running for VP, not president, but with a 72 year-old candidate with a history of serious medical issues, this is who they're saying is able to step in as president in a heart-beat. She has so little experience that she makes Sen. Obama look like FDR, Winston Churchill and Julius Caesar combined. So, the Republicans pulled the rug out from under themselves. They have no issues. The economy? Housing? The national debt? Education? The Environment? Iraq? Afghanistan? Nothing. All they have is "Dear Democratic women: please pretend our VP candidate is Hillary Clinton. Just forget that she's pro-life. And against most things Democrats stand for."
But that's not the reason the decision is so terrible.
Because if the hope for John McCain is to get women to vote for him who otherwise supported Hillary Clinton - if anything could get Hillary Clinton campaigning in full force and fury...this is it. She likely would have campaigned hard, but it's in Hillary Clinton's best interest to be the leading voice for women, and the leading woman candidate for president in the future, so having another woman as the potential Vice President (and potential President) is a significant challenge to that. The Republicans just opened Pandora's Box and brought Hillary Clinton roaring to Barack Obama's side on the Democratic train. And Bill Clinton, too.
Yet even that's not the reason the decision is so terrible.
What this does in the most profound and grandiose way possible is give lie to John McCain's pompous posturing that he Always Puts America First. And that undercuts the most prominent campaign issue of his entire career, that everything he does is for reasons of honor. There is nothing honorable about making Sarah Palin your vice presidential nominee. Nothing. Unless you define honor as "blatantly pandering."
But that's not the reason either that this decision is so terrible.
But before we get to that, let's look at the actual announcement to make Gov. Sarah Palin (AK - pop. 683,000) the Republican nominee for president, and put the horrible decision in perspective.
First, John McCain stood at the podium, looking up-and-down reading his speech. It's impossible not to compare that to Barack Obama giving his majestic speech the night before that even conservative analysts were admiring in awe.
Second, the cameras were polite enough to avoid it, but there were empty seats in the gym. It's impossible not to compare that to a stadium of 75,000 people that Barack Obama spoke to the night before.
Third, when people around the nation were waiting to hear about Sarah Palin's qualifications and gravitas to be Vice President of the United States, the first five minutes of her speech were spent talking about her husband being a champion snowmobiler.
Fourth, when she finally got around to her qualifications, pretty much all we discovered was that she fought to cut property taxes. And then, she basically stopped there.
She did, however, mention becoming energy self-sufficient - by talking about how she supported drilling in Alaska!!! Perhaps to Republicans this is being an environmentalist, but to most of America, not so much. Then again, she's also against putting polar bears on the endangered species list (which the government did), so maybe her environmental qualifications are more lax than she thinks.
And then, finally, she spent the rest of her time praising John McCain. Fine, that's very supportive of her...except that the one question on everyone's mind was not -- "can you say John McCain is a swell guy and tell us that he was a POW", the question on everyone's mind was - "Who in God's name are you, and please tell us why you should be a heart-beat from the presidency?"
In the end, the only case she herself made for being on the ticket was praising Hillary Clinton! That's it, period. Now, it might be enough to attract some women -- but it doesn't make a case for the ticket. Why? Hint: some women did vote for Hillary Clinton solely because she was a woman. But most women voted for Hillary Clinton because she was a Democrat, as well as a woman, who stood for important Democratic values they seriously believed in. If Sarah Palin wants to praise Hillary Clinton, go for it. But at least understand what you're praising. Because it will likely come back and bite you.
It was a thin, nothing, empty speech. It was a speech to be head of the Chamber of Commerce. Compare that to the speech by Joe Biden when Barack Obama introduced him. Eloquent, soaring and explaining in blunt detail why John McCain should not be president. Joe Biden must have been watching Sarah Palin's speech, in order to take notes in preparation for his debate with her and thought, "This isn't fair."
And all that's not even the reason the decision is so terrible.
The reason is because the election is not about Sarah Palin. Or about Joe Biden. As much as TV analysts want to be excited by the balloons and hoopla, tomorrow the air will be let out, and there are still over two months to go for the campaign.
The campaign is about Barack Obama and John McCain.
Sarah Palin's nomination doesn't change that. In fact, it reinforces it. Nothing about putting Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket changes a word that Barack Obama said in his vibrant acceptance speech - about himself, about his issues, and about John McCain's repeatedly faulty judgment on the critical issues facing America.
What Sarah Palin's nomination does do is focus attention on John McCain's age. Indeed, the nomination was made on his birthday, when he turned 72, the oldest man ever to run for president. As the crowd sang "Happy Birthday to You," you almost sensed that through John McCain's clenched smile, saying, "Thanks for reminding me," that what he was thinking underneath was "Please, oh, please, don't sing the 'How old are you now?' part." And how good a message was it that he's saying he supposedly forgot it was his birthday?
Vice presidents are usually selected as people who are adept at blasting the other side's presidential candidate, because it's only the presidential candidate that matters. Joe Biden has already done that - twice - at length, spoken as someone who knows John McCain well and likes him. Sarah Palin had her first chance...and whiffed. Didn't even try. And it's hard to imagine what she has in her arsenal that will remotely allow her to do so in the future.
The election is about the presidential candidates. And the selection of Sarah Palin now allows Barack Obama to campaign untouched by the Republican ticket. John McCain's only other option is for himself to personally become negative for two months - which is disaster in presidential politics.
Now add on all the problems expressed above. Sarah Palin's inexplicably laughable lack of substance, most-especially on the foreign policy stage. Her taking away the one issue, experience, Republicans were even attempting. Her pushing away voters who might otherwise be willing to vote for a senator with 26 years in the Senate. Her bringing Hillary Clinton aggressively back into the campaign. Her inability to offer anything to off-set Joe Biden. Her standing as supposedly the most-qualified Republican woman as John McCain's first decision.
And, in the end, it all focuses back on Barack Obama, with his indictment of eight years of the Bush Administration and of John McCain's flawed judgment - and John McCain's defense of all that.
Republicans might be dancing earlier today, because there was a lot of fun music playing. But the music has stopped. The actual campaign has now started. For Republicans, it might have ended.
_____________________
[ edited by roadsmith on Aug 30, 2008 09:07 AM ]
posted on August 30, 2008 12:40:55 PM newSelecting Sarah Palin as its choice for a vice presidential candidate is perhaps the worst such choice in American History.
posted on August 31, 2008 06:09:22 AM new
coach81938,
Very good question...considering his age and previous cancer, there is a good chance that he might die in office.
posted on August 31, 2008 06:30:51 AM new
If so,that should get all the women to vote for him so they can have a woman president in the White House!
*
Gulag-a Soviet era concentration camp is now reincarnated as EBAY with 13,000 rules.
posted on August 31, 2008 10:31:53 AM new
Hwahwa, for God's sake! HOW DUMB DO YOU THINK WOMEN ARE?! I sure don't want the wrong woman in the white house.
Are you, as a man, the same as you assume we women are? Will you be tossing a coin this election, since any man in the white house will be fine with you? Or will you sit it out, not caring one way or the other?
Is there a woman in your life? If so, ask her if she'd want ANY woman in the white house. And please share with us what she says.
_____________________
posted on August 31, 2008 11:49:27 AM new
I have a close friend, pretty much a politico and a died in the wool Democrat, who says McCain is going to win by 2% because of this selection.
He's wrong a lot about the weather though, so I don't buy it. I still think it's such a sleazy move that most folks are going to see through it. She may be a gun totin' babe, but do we really want her at the helm when McCain's Melanoma comes raging back? I'm just optimistic enough to think most people will have a tough time saying yes to that, even the ones who may like her on some NASCAR kind of gut level.
posted on August 31, 2008 12:31:35 PM new"I always thought hwahwa was a lady. Don't know why I thought that. Hwa, is you is or is you ain't a lady?"
Hwahwa could be more than one poster with one gender. The Id may be used by a man and a woman or a few men and a few women or more than one man or more than one woman...many possibilities.
posted on August 31, 2008 02:57:42 PM new
I hope your friend is wrong, Profe. It also seemed like a transparent, "gimmicky" selection to me. I heard Mike Murphy, a Republican campaign strategist,say that McCain had wanted Lieberman, but the testing on him did not pass with the party. He is desperate to be looked upon as a maverick again, so when Lieberman didn't fly, he picked Palin. Sure hope the voting public doesn't fall for it.
posted on August 31, 2008 08:21:10 PM newHwahwa, for God's sake! HOW DUMB DO YOU THINK WOMEN ARE?! I sure don't want the wrong woman in the white house.
posted on September 1, 2008 10:39:23 AM new
Okokok - all you that have teens or are a teen, be careful before you post an ugly.
I realize your children are virtuous and are indeed virgins. And those that are teens are all virgins.
However sometimes teens do engage in sex , and girls get pregnant,boys just walk away,
It is true and McCain was aware of it before he chose Sarah
Palin says unmarried daughter is pregnant
Updated Mon. Sep. 1 2008 12:26 PM ET
The Associated Press
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Sarah and Todd Palin say their 17-year-old unmarried daughter is pregnant.
The couple said in a statement released by John McCain's presidential campaign that Bristol will keep her baby.
Sarah Palin is McCain's vice-presidential running mate.
The Alaska governor says Bristol intends to marry the father of her child.
posted on September 1, 2008 10:44:25 AM new
I don't either. But it seems that the kind of folks that are touting Palin's abilities are the same folks that dominated our school board meetings, arguing that sex education should not be taught in the schools. They insisted that the schools offer instead an "abstinence before marriage" curriculum (without discussion of birth control or even the correct anatomical names for reproductive parts of the human body - and god forbid, no discussion of any kind of family besides the standard two parent kind). OK then, provide sex education at home and you'd better talk about birth control or masturbation or some way for those poor kids to deal with those raging hormones.
I think it's very sad that this mother of 5 is sending her 18 year old son to Iraq and marrying off her 17 year old daughter.
-------------------------------------
posted on September 1, 2008 10:45:20 AM new
Shame on her for accepting her "punishment*" and not having an abortion!
*"I’ve got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby." B. OBama
posted on September 1, 2008 10:47:28 AM new
deur - I don't know whether or not my kids are virgins. I made sure that they knew we would like them to wait until marriage (or at least mature enough to make those kind of decisions) but if not, they knew all about birth control and how to get it.
-------------------------------------
posted on September 1, 2008 10:50:15 AM new
As a mom, I would never turn my back on a 17 year old of mine.
I really do not understand folks that will fight until their dying breath over a tree not being cut down, to save an owl.
Then advocate that life of an unborn is valueless.
posted on September 1, 2008 10:55:20 AM new
neglus
most all 17 years old know about birth control and how to get it.Those that do not know,would have to be intellectually challenged.
17 year olds know about birth control!
-- yet pregnancy happens, just like it does to married couples that are carefully planning to not start a family, sometimes birth control fails and along comes a bebe.
No form of birth control is 100% effective.
posted on September 1, 2008 11:09:32 AM new
Q: Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education
instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and
the distribution of contraceptives in schools?
Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.
posted on September 1, 2008 11:29:54 AM new
Pixia - I didn't read that but I guessed it.
The ONLY 16 yo in my daughter's class of 500 to get pregnant was the daughter of the lady who led the campaign against sex education in the school. Very sad. She maintained that if you taught about sex, kids would want to HAVE sex. Kids want to have sex and to deny them the proper tools and knowledge to deal with those urges is like an ostrich burying its head in the sand! The lady changed her position but it was a little too late for our school system which had already implemented as its primary sex education curriculum "Abstinence before marriage". Students could opt in to "Abstinence based" with parental approval but sadly, uninformed parents had no clue.
-------------------------------------
posted on September 1, 2008 11:39:03 AM new
I didn't say I would advocate abortion (anyway it's too late) to get rid of the problem. I am not discussing my position on that in a public forum.
Yes "mistakes" do happen, but not as often as people think. Birth control can be 99.9999% effective. I think that if sex is openly discussed as a normal part of the human condition, children are much better prepared to handle situations. In fact, I think they are better equipped to "Just say no". To leave education about birth control out of the school curriculum and then not talk about it at home is a recipe for disaster. This is a disaster. That is not to say that the child will be a disaster - every child is a blessing and miracle - but a disaster in terms of the daughter's failure to mature before becoming a wife and mother.
-------------------------------------
posted on September 1, 2008 11:59:17 AM new
"The ONLY 16 yo in my daughter's class of 500 to get pregnant was the daughter of the lady who led the campaign against sex education in the school."
I think you mean the only 16 year old who got pregnant and decided not to abort it, right?
I seriously doubt that the kids who got knocked up and chose to have abortions would announce such a thing to the community.
