Tag Archives: Sarah Palin

Republicans have drank the kool-aid

Posted on by
Reply

The Palin talking points are amazing as is the ability of he Republican talking heads to sell it as if she’s Condeleeza Rice.  ”Alaska is close to Russia.”  

I saw this on Brendan Nyhan’s excellent political blog.  CNN’s Campbell Brown simply embarrasses McCain spokesperson Tucker Bounds as he tries in vain to describe Palin’s commander in chief experience.

Sarah Palin: Shrill, Shriller, and Shrillest

Posted on by
11

I couldn’t bear to watch Sarah Palin last night. I got through maybe 5 minutes, and decided that I’d watch television from people paid to write fiction as opposed to fiction from people who spout it as truth.

And what do I think of Palin? She spent the entire speech attacking Obama, but didn’t talk policy at all. Surprise, surprise – the Republicans don’t talk the issues. Here’s a woman that we’ve never heard anything about – who has no experience and they don’t go over her past, her experience, her story. No introduction to the people. Just shrill, shriller, and shrillest. Why – because she had nothing to say of value about herself or policy. Palin is worthless as a candidate because she is worthless as a President if that happens. If you listened to the Democrats last week, the attacks were all about his policy deficiencies – his support of George Bush; his lack of a plan for the economy; his temperament; this is what Democrats discussed. The Republicans? “Obama is all words”. “Obama is flashy”. Shrill and nasty attacks. Low and despicable. When you’re behind, misdirection is a good way to go. Make sure people don’t look at your failings by lying and creating false issues. They spent significant time attacking the media. Last I checked, CNN wasn’t running as a 3rd party candidate.

We knew this wasn’t going to be about issues when McCain hired a neophyte to be his running mate. Instead of getting a highly experienced running mate, he hired a better looking (not hard) Ann Coulter.

I don’t know if I’ll watch tonight. Conventions are for party members and the press, otherwise they’re useless.

This next 60 days can’t end fast enough for me.

Ladies and gentlemen: She’s got a uterus!

Posted on by
10

First off – I’m not here to diminish Sarah Palin herself – she’s simply not qualified to be President of the United States. Yes she’s the governor of Alaska.  She was also a small town mayor – with all this she brings the reputation of a straight talking reformist.  She balances out the McCain ticket when it comes to  ideology which will appeal to right wing nuts – I mean voters.

Basically, if you close one eye, squint with the other, and look at this, it all makes sense.

Who is Sarah Palin? Here’s some basic background:  

  • She was elected Alaska’s governor a little over a year and a half ago. Her previous office was mayor of Wasilla, a small town outside Anchorage. She has no foreign policy experience.  
  • Palin is strongly anti-choice, opposing abortion even in the case of rape or incest.
  • She supported right-wing extremist Pat Buchanan for president in 2000.  
  • Palin thinks creationism should be taught in public schools.
  • She’s doesn’t think humans are the cause of climate change.  
  • She’s solidly in line with John McCain’s “Big Oil first” energy policy. She’s pushed hard for more oil drilling and says renewables won’t be ready for years. She also sued the Bush administration for listing polar bears as an endangered species—she was worried it would interfere with more oil drilling in Alaska.
  • How closely did John McCain vet this choice? He met Sarah Palin once at a meeting. They spoke a second time, last Sunday, when he called her about being vice-president. Then he offered her the position.

It’s quite obvious with this pick that the McCain is attempting to woo Hillary Clinton voters disappointed with Barack Obama’s nomination.  As if everyone voted for her simply because she’s a woman.  It would be as if Alan Keyes would be a valid replacement for Obama because they’re both black.  It’s insulting.  And I’m sure that some former Clinton supporters will fall for it.  Problem is, those voters were never going to vote for Obama anyway.  But anyone who voted for Clinton based on her progressive record, healthcare advocacy, support for reproductive rights, her wealth of Senate experience – well, they’ll be sorely disappointed that John McCain thinks that Palin matches up to her.

You believe this pick was made on qualifications?  Ask yourself this: until last Saturday, Hillary Clinton was still in the running for the democratic VP nomination; do you think that Palin would have received the nomination if Clinton was chosen?  There’s nothing she brings outside of her gender that couldn’t have been brought by another candidate in that case.  Mitt Romney brings a conservative rep.  Rudy Guliani brings the tough talking.  

OK – she brings one other thing – her youth. Kay Bailey Richardson would have been more sensible a choice, but at 65, she doesn’t fit the need. She does have loads of experience having been in the Senate since 1993.  There’s that word: experience.

Which McCain are we to believe? The one that railed against Obama’s inexperience or the one that chose someone 3 years Obama’s junior, with  significantly  less experience than Obama (Obama has 8 years as an Illinois State Senator and 2 years as a U.S. Senator) as a possible Presidential replacement?  Palin has no experience that shows her capable in regards to dealing foreign affairs, the defense, the threat of terrorism, or the management of the world’s largest economy.  You have to wonder about his judgement and pragmatism.

Listening to the Republican spin on this is amazing.  They’ve decided this was a brilliant and bold choice. To me it seems shortsighted and dangerous. I wondered how Republicans would respond in their national convention to the successful DNC.  It appears now that their response is one of defiance and insult. Instead of bringing substance to the campaign with their choice for VP, they’ve decided to counter program with a choice based on visual and emotional appeal as opposed to policy expertise.

I thought Mitt Romney would have been a big mistake of a choice – since that would have put two multi-millionaires at the top of their ticket, but that would have made much more sense than this.