Vice President Palin

lagonda · Senior Member

Vice President Palin

motherof2 · Senior Member

I love her! I hope she goes to Washington and makes some big noise. I was on the fence, but have found my voice in the race.

lagonda · Senior Member

The whole thing fascinates me. It is clear that they are going for an "everyman", but the risk is not in the campaign, but after the election. The republicans put in one of these before, with Dan Quayle, and the country survived.

There are some who support her just because she is a woman, and that is not something to be ignored, because it is history in the making.

If there is some major faux pas committed or undiscovered skeleton in her closet, that will probably set back women in the political arena for decades. Look at Ferraro. If she makes it and can rise to the job, then it could be a major political milestone.

It is very risky, either way.

Even with Cheney, Rove and surprisingly enough, Tom Delay showing up in the shadows, the republicans are making a polished display that they can present a "Jimmy Carter" candidate: someone who is an anti- (you fill in the blank here) candidate who has had absolutely nothing to do with the way the country has been run. It's a great fantasy. I dig it. Also surprising that anyone buys it.

If Tom Delay doesn't go to prison, he may have a good chance of getting into this administration.

Palin is presented as the vice president who "does" hold on to her guns and religion, doesn't believe in evolution or abortion for any reason, opposes sex education in favor of abstinance dogma and walks the walk with it's obvious consequences. She has said that the Iraq war is a mission from God. She clearly is a loose cannon in diplomacy.

She did well on her speech, but keep in mind, it was written by Bush's speechwriter. She just read it. Next hurdle is the debate.

There are a lot of very qualified women they could have picked, but she plays the Barney Fife to McCain's "everyman Andy" in this election. It worked for Carter, maybe it will work for McCain. The only problem with "everyman" presidencies is the outcome after they are elected. Remember the Iran hostages that Carter wasn't politically savvy enough to fix?

I have said that I was going to wait and see about the election. I can't believe the way it has turned out. Both parties have a much stronger candidate than I would have ever imagined, and either way, it will change U.S. history forever. It is a neat time to be alive and watch this stuff develop.

Mother of 2, is it her politics and beliefs that you support or the fact she is a woman, or from a small town or what?

blah · Senior Member

I believe Palin supports abortion in instances which the child presents serious health risks to the mother...90% sure I saw this somewhere.

I really question Palin's experience in politics...or anything else for that matter. Six years on a city council, eight years as a mayor...but lets face it we're talking about Wasilla, Alaska here. I don't see how serving for the governor as two years would qualify as experience in John McCain's definition of the word, especially considering how harshly he has criticized the Obama campaign on the same issue. Would it not hold true that the Vice President needs to be just as experienced as the president?

I have also seen quite a few blunders, so to speak, from Palin's time in her respective offices that lead me to question her judgment. For example, while mayor she required the heads of depts to gain her approval before talking to the press...which leads me to believe there is a possibility of her trying to censor what they would have to say.

Another issue that raises my brow is her flip-flop on the "bridge to nowhere". While running for governor, she pretty much had a platform of building the bridge because it would help the local economy and what not. When Congress changed the earmark for the project however, leaving it as a grant to Alaska which it could use however she choose, Palin started calling it the 'bridge to nowhere' and didn't fund the project. She seemingly went along with pressure from those higher up in the Republican party, because her move to stop working on the bridge gets her high marks with those who oppose 'frivolous spending'.

My last issue with Palin is the most recent thing that has come up, having to do with her dismissal of the Public Safety Commissioner...long story short the guy is claiming that the reason he was dismissed is because he refused to fire an Alaskan State Trooper that was Palin's former brother-in-law and so happened to be going through a custody lawsuit with Palin's sister at the time.

The three examples have led me to seriously question Palin as a Vice-Presidential candidate. Like Lagonda points out, anybody can stand up and deliver a well-crafted speech with enough practice, but what am I supposed to take out of that considering that it is nowhere near her own words. I guarantee you that I could deliver the same speech just as convincingly, as I have been well practiced in the arts of public speaking and persuasion. To me, the only way I can pass judgment on Palin is by looking at the things she has done, as to date none of them have convinced me to put confidence in her.

As for my take on why the Republicans choose Palin, I think it's pretty simple.

1) McCain has lost his 'maverick Republican' status, seeing as he practically had to sell his soul to unite the Republican party. Palin offers a higher level of unpredictability (well seemingly, I disagree with this, I believe that she is more of a tool who will do as told, reference the bridge issue) and also a differnt approach to politics than the current admin. This should intrigue most Republican voters who were on the verge of abandoning ship due to their disgruntle with current administration and fearing that McCain would just be George's third term.

2) I also think that McCain is using is VP pick as a clever ploy to gain quick votes and more media attention. By picking a woman, he has more of a chance to attract those who are tired of seeing a lack of women in powerful political positions. I believe that she will draw him more votes because of her gender, and although it may only be a small margin at best, it still leaves his campaign better off than before. Picking a 'maverick' and a woman also guarantees that the press will be all over his campaign, as witnessed shortly after the announcement when Obama and Biden were all but forgotten. The McCain campaign is hoping that this will spark more media interest into a campaign that had been running pretty flat for quite a while. Inevitably, more media attention and more of a buzz around the campaign will lead to more votes.

Eh, I might chime in more later, but I'm tired now.

-- Edited by blah at 16:48, 2008-09-08

Don Quixote · Member

I think Palin would be ok. It's obvious that she doesn't have the political "seasoning" of an old "Washington Insider". However, this may work to her advantage in Washington.

I tend to land where some would call on the "right" on the political spectrum. Not sure where these labels come from.

"Remember the Iran hostages that Carter wasn't politically savvy enough to fix?" Good observation. Ever think, What would have happened if we'd had a Reagan or W., or McCain in office at that time? Not that these men were perfect, but, They are & were TOUGH, and not afraid of a fight. Jimmy Carter was weak as watered down kool-aid. Looks good in the glass, but, tastes horrible.

It's also notable to me how so much of the "mainstream media" has literally pounced on Mrs. Palin. While not much is said of Joe Biden. Biden has more baggage than a UPS truck.

Palin is not a nobody.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=35249
"In early August, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama endorsed Palins bill, about one month before she was chosen to be the GOP vice presidential nominee.

We should work with the Canadian government to finally build the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline, delivering clean natural gas, and creating good jobs in the process, Obama said Aug. 4 in Lansing, Mich."

I think that the Democrat party will regret throwing Hillary under the bus. yawn

D.Q.

wypall · Member

I think it shows how easily American woman voters are easily swayed and undermined. It shows McCain irrational decision making all for a ploy to take disgruntled Hillary voters (and no way does she come close to what Hillary has accomplished).. McCain chanted Experience EXperience and now flopped to CHANGE Change!lol But here we have people like motherof2 making there pick on One puppet speech she gave,(you do know McCain will not allow her to talk to anyone atm) no disrespect to you motherof2 they're millions of women like you.
She was a mayor of a city that she only needed 616 votes to win, a govenor of a whole state that has a population about the size of Oklahoma City..no way no how would McCain make this pick if she was a Male... I'm just as curious as to why Pallin made your pick for McSame? It cant be because of her morals? She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. or are people just that gullible...

me2 · Veteran Member

I voted brilliant, simply from a Obama supporter point of view. I strongly feel that once they get down to the nitty gritty, people will see through her speeches. When I listen to her, I feel like I am watching a high school pep rally, not a presidential campaign.

lagonda · Senior Member

Is it just me, or did anybody else notice that they were claiming the press was beating up on her before they actually said anything?

I don't remember any time in my life (that's a long time pardner) that the press has been as soft on any political candidate, whether running for a local board of education or for vice president of the United States.

It's been 10 or 11 days and she has not had a single press interview?

It sounds like Palin (or her handlers) are trying to pick a fight with the press, but they're not paying any attention.

Biden is clearly afraid to debate her for the fear of publicly embarrassing or intimidating her and coming across like an aggressive misogynistic "bad man", by accident.

But, from a practical sense, what kind of softball question could you ask her that you could know in advance that she could hold her own on?

It is really paternalistic and patronizing (and should be insulting to her) to not treat her as a political equal to ... say... Cynthia McKinney or Christine Todd Whitman. That seems to be what they are going to do, though, to treat her as if she is politically fragile.

Weird. I've never seen the like of it.

Don Quixote · Member

Hey group,

here's a thought. found this on abcnews. An ex-Clinton staffer who thinks and actually admits, that he thinks the media is tougher on Palin. (maybe that's why he's an EX-stafffer)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/11/politics/politicalplayers/main4442492.shtml

Lotsa stuff in this interview,...hope you can open the link.

Democratic Strategist Mark Penn:" I think here the media is on very dangerous ground. I think that when you see them going through every single expense report that Governor Palin ever filed, if they don't do that for all four of the candidates, they're on very dangerous ground. I think the media so far has been the biggest loser in this race. And they continue to have growing credibility problems.

And I think that that's a real problem growing out of this election. The media now, all of the media not just Fox News, that was perceived as highly partisan but all of the media is now being viewed as partisan in one way or another. And that is an unfortunate development.

CBSNews.com: So you think the media is being uniquely tough on Palin now?

Mark Penn: Well, I think that the media is doing the kinds of stories on Palin that they're not doing on the other candidates. And that's going to subject them to people concluding that they're giving her a tougher time. Now, the media defense would be, "Yeah, we looked at these other candidates who have been in public life at an earlier time."

What happened here very clearly is that the controversy over Palin led to 37 million Americans tuning into a vice-presidential speech, something that is unprecedented, because they wanted to see for themselves. This is an election in which the voters are going to decide for themselves. The media has lost credibility with them."

D.Q.: Sen. Clinton has gotten by terribly easy these last few years (till she faced Obama & they threw her under the bus)

Missing files? I don't know where those got lost...
Vince Foster? Who's that?
Travelgate? I don't remember.
Arkansas? Where is that? Don't know anyone in Arkansas
She's had her share of free passes.

D.Q.

blah · Senior Member

I didn't know that Palin and Gibson were such great friends...Charlie? haha

Palin didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was.

She pretty much cut and pasted scripted answers "...terrorist who are hell bent on destroying America..." and Gibson would try to pin her down onto a yes or no answer and she wouldn't do it, she repeated the same phrase as answers to like 3 questions.

lagonda · Senior Member

It's called bullet points.

It consists of a memorized answer that you give to a question, no matter what the question is.

It seems like an answer, to those who are easily side-tracked, but if you look closely, some of the answers have nothing to do with the questions.

Condi and Shrub are experts at it and McCain and Obama do it too. Apparently Palin is learning, but she is not as good as the pros. They must all think we are stupid.

It's one of the things wrong with national politics.

Very superficial.

If I were a newscaster and someone gave me one of those fake answers, I'd go for the throat.

Maybe that is what they want. Draw a foul. High level politics and news is very sophisticated.

Don Quixote · Member

"Palin didn't know what the Bush Doctrine was."

Ah yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Food for thought, check this out. From a Washingpost writer:

Charlie Gibson's Gaffe

By Charles Krauthammer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

"I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term."...

"Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed "doctrines" in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines which come out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few other contradictory or conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -- while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and "sounding like an impatient teacher," as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage."

The writer correcty asserts that he was the first to use the term. Also, writing for the Post, he's not what would be commonly labeled as "rightwing". No, he's writing an honest thought through assertion. His writing is worthy of note.

Don Quixote · Member

It's one of the things wrong with national politics.

Very superficial.

For real!!!

You never get to really know who you're voting for. Aside also is the fact that only rich people can afford to run for the office. (Obama is an exception, in that he really doesn't have much $$, just some big $$ people banking him or banking on him)

But, your assertion is correct. The way we choose a president is not good. It's a popularity contest.

But, am sure what we have is better than the Communist model, or the Arab model, or the Chinese model, etc., etc.

Being a true patriot like I am, I say "God Bless America!!!"

Some other people would say something different, but, that's for another blog.

lagonda · Senior Member

L.O.L

Krauthammer. He was caught out in front of God and everybody printing that one of George Bush's speeches was "revolutionary" and compared it to one of JFK's historic speeches about freedom and liberty.

He just forgot to mention that he (along with Bill Kristol) was a consultant that helped to write the speech for George.

That is what FAIR says, but he says no. It was not speechwriting, it was a presentation to the White House that had nothing to do with the speech. FAIR says his presentation was the speech. Hmmmm.

He has been a political speechwriter since the 80's basically working for whoever pays the best money. He started with Carter and lately worked for Bush as a NeoCon.

He's a really brilliant smart-guy, but as a hired gun, I think he is more politically connected than politically neutral.

Who knows who he is working for now?

Probably can't use him as a baseline.

blah · Senior Member

Everyone knows if you're the first person to use the term then you get to define it's meaning, duh!

I wonder how he came up with which one was the most common use...

lagonda · Senior Member

Actually, Krauthammer was credited with naming the Reagan Doctrine. It was after a number of references to this doctrine and that doctrine basically, trying to make a buzzword about a modern president that was similar to the only historical doctrine, the Monroe Doctrine (which kept european influence out of the western hemisphere). Because the Reaganites were proud of the reference, they adopted the Reagan Doctrine as a shibboleth. The NeoCons have been referring to each of the presidents as having a doctrine, which is fairly harmless and just good clean fun. It goes very well with a cold beer.

George Bush has been trying pretty hard to come up with a legacy and is all behind having a "doctrine", but when the president's doctrine has changed 4 times during the administration, then it all turns very meaningless.

Both McCain and Obama will be undoing the "Bush Doctrine"(s).

No wonder Palin didn't know what the hell Charlie was talking about (although she should have known at least one of them - they "do" teach this stuff in high school now).
I can define all 4 "doctrines", but still don't know what the "Bush Doctrine" would possibly become after he is no longer president.

It is definitely not the Monroe Doctrine.

I think everyone will remember W for what he was, what he did, and what condition he left the U.S. in, and not for some buzzword "doctrine" that has changed from month to month during his administration.

hahaxor · Member

McCain's pick was nothing short of "shock and awe" and only cements how desperate and unsubstantial the McCain campaign is. McCain had to grab the national stage in any way he possibly could and it worked for a bit but it sure is backfiring now. I personally find it amusing.

What is not so amusing are the Americans who continue to support this campaign and blindly pledge votes based on empty promises and historically inaccurate records. McCain/Palin are not reformers, they are pathological liars.

You owe it to yourself, to your family and your community to become an informed voter. Anything short of this and you are making a mockery of the election process.

With all that said, this woman terrifies me equally if not more then McCain himself.

I love being Right · Veteran Member

McCain is a reformer and votes against his party on issues he believes in. You will find alot of Democrats on record that say so too. The media say he votes with Bush 90% of the time, but doesn't tell you that Obama votes with the Democrats 97% of the time -- so how is he a reformer? What is it that you think he is going to do for you?

I truly believe in John McCain and he is an honorable man. Most informed/educated people would agree he is honorable. Where do you get off calling him a liar? What makes you think we are blindly pledging our votes on empty promises, but you believe every word that Obama says? What makes you think he will really do anything he is saying? Have you ever watched an election before? They alway promise a bunch of crap and Obama knows exactly what to say to you to get you to follow him. I can't believe people fall for this stuff. He believes in socialism and class warfare and evidently you are buying into it.

I'm truly excited about Palin -- she is a wonderful person that alot of American's can relate to. In fact, I can relate to her more than any politician in my lifetime. What is so scary about that? Because MSNBC told you they were scared -- I bet they are.

This election is truly getting ugly and more negative than I have ever seen. I am hoping that it is going to awake the silent majority as it did in 2004. Keep up the negativity and that's what's happening!!

motherof2 · Senior Member

I feel like I can relate to her, too. She's a conservative who (at least in my opinion) has taken a stand against both the government and the big oil companies. I'm sure she is not perfect, but I can relate to that, too. Also, I have been a woman trying to compete in a man's world/career. Many of the things which are being said about her have been said about me at one time. I can REALLY relate to that!

I used to consider myself a democrat, because they were supposed to represent the working man/woman. However, I have come to believe they are more about distribution of wealth or some sort of socialism. I feel like their strongest interest and focus is on the lower class. While I am not against all forms of welfare assistance, I believe it needs a haircut. I think it should be reserved for those who truely need it. I have seen too much abuse of the system. Welfare today is not what it was intended when created. People use to have to work for the money. Isn't that how some of our brick streets were laid?

On the other hand, I do not believe in rewarding companies who send jobs overseas. I have heard some say that our current tax policies are actually forcing corporations to leave. Others say they reward them for doing so. ?????? Either way, I do know this... if the corporations continue to experience higher taxes they WILL all leave our country, shut down, or raise the price of their goods.

A working man/woman is dependent on these companies and corporations for jobs. So, I guess the benefit of the upper class has more of a positive influence on the blue collars. How does handouts to the lower class benefit me? Maybe it prevents crime in my neighborhood? I guess I'm just a little stubborn and believe "John and Susy" down the street should not be living higher on the hog than I do because they are working the welfare system while my husband and I do it the honest way. (names changed to protect the innocent :) )

When you find a presidential candidate who represents my views, let me know. In the meantime, I'll have to give my vote to McCain/Palin. Oh, and I'll wager on this one. The party who will take the White House will be the one who promises the bigger "stimulus check". If I remember right, Bush bought our votes for $500@? Was he worth it? America needs to wake up and quit selling out!

JakeTheHawk · Veteran Member

Tina Fey = Sarah Palin

Same person, amirite?

I love being Right · Veteran Member

I hope that was meant as a funny -- because even my 4 year old knows that's not right.

JakeTheHawk · Veteran Member

Comedy? Me? No...

Of course it was a joke...
I was merely pointing out the huge similarity.
But still, people are entertained by one and fall asleep while being told OVER and OVER about the others preggo daughter.

blah · Senior Member

Don't worry though, teaching abstinence only works!!

lagonda · Senior Member

Anyone can look like Palin. It's the glasses.

JakeTheHawk · Veteran Member

"teaching abstinence only works!!"

If only she taught her daughter that...

- - -

Meh... Not the glasses in my opinion. I seriously did a double take when I saw Palin the first time. Thought they had Tina on the TV.

blah · Senior Member

Thanks Jake...that was the joke...glad we're on the same page....

lagonda · Senior Member

Teaching "abstinence only" without teaching birth control or other non-intercourse options sets up the kids for an uneducated and ignorant unwanted pregnancy. There are very few things that you can neglect to educate your kids about that can screw up their lives more than this.

It's OK to have some philosophy about your own life and your own sexuality, but it is another to use this attitude to keep your kids ignorant and at risk for important things they were not told about. It sure ignores the realities of today's life for adolescent kids.

It is like denying your kids penicillin because of your religion, even though it threatens their life. Personal philosophy has to stop when it interferes with the well-being or future of those who depend on you for the right decisions.

This is a real issue here with my opinion of Palin. The last thing we need is a "leader" who prefers putting the head in the sand rather than proactively dealing with issues.

The kid is still not married. Maybe they are waiting to find out if Palin wins before doing it.

Boy, talk about a shotgun wedding. Imagine how the boy feels. Having sex with the Governor's daughter when she lives in the mansion, all of these political handlers acting like he's their best friend, etc. Bet that feels really important and special.

If she loses, he's toast. Dirty socks. Bye Bye. Bet he's not getting any now. Anywhere.

me2 · Veteran Member

DOG GONE IT LAGONDA.....I THINK YOUR........RIGHT!

blah · Senior Member

I hope that was not directed at me, lagonda, I fully support safe-sex teachings. I was only joking about abstinence only teachings, but I can see how one might miss that.

I also was intrigued that Ark City declared Palin the winner of the debates...based on the opinions of about 9 people...

JakeTheHawk · Veteran Member

lagonda wrote:

It is like denying your kids penicillin because of your religion, even though it threatens their life.

*coughcough*Scientology*cough*