Picking Palin is a Bold Move
Submitted by Tom Rinaldo on August 29, 2008 - 10:42am.
Democratic politics
So was invading Iraq. So is calling for the privatization of Social Security. McCain knows Bold alright. Forget about the importance of Experience. And who cares about good judgment, when we can be bold instead?
McCain - Palin: A Bold Choice for America. Ready to bomb Iran on Day One. You want Bold? That's your ticket.
Nobody thinks any more, Tom.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
If it was Rommney, folks would have said without thinking; "Oh he is a competent man who knows a lot about the economy" and not gotten much deeper.
Now that it is Palin the surface take will be the reverse, and damaging. McCain really had to work to find someone with less experience than Obama on the national scale from someplace more exotic than Hawaii.
They didn't care.
How much did you have to think in 2004? Didn't matter.
You can't beat Republicans on merits. The truth will not set you free.
This is very scary. Now people will be able to vote for McCain and think it's not a sign of bigotry because they're voting for a woman, afterall.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
riding the popularity of Ronald Reagan. It was viewed as the continuation of a popular presidency with a very safe (and healthy and younger at the time) Bush, Sr at the top of the ticket.
Today's political environment is completely different. McCain's age and health is completely different.
I agree that this undercuts the most logical reason for supporting McCain. I just don't think there's any logic behind most votes. If there were, we wouldn't be in this mess. Kerry would be president.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
It's valid of course, but I still feel this is a net negative for McCain. On top of undercutting his main rationale for the Presidency, it is too manipulative by half, which also undercuts his "straight shooter" integrity image, which is the second strongest rationale he has for voting for him other than sumply rejecting Obama.
He just sent a message to whatever number of disaffected Hillary supporters who aren't supporting Obama. "They SAY they speak to the issues, but which party actually has a woman on its ticket?"
If he'd picked a boring guy, it would have been the boring guys vs. the exciting guy and the boring one.
If he's picked a minority male candidate, he's have been accused of trying to copy Obama (are there any good minority Republican men in the pipeline?)
If he picked an older woman, she'd 1) possibly be attached to the current (failed) administration and thus be a "Washington Insider" or have the same net negatives as Hillary.
Instead, he picked a genuine outsider, an actual unknown who has the benefit of being intelligent, competent, effective - and pretty. Granted, he's way older than she is, but it still evokes the older-man-younger-woman-power-couple dynamic.
Still disagree with them on, well, everything, but can't deny the brilliance of the move - nor of its timing. Is anyone still talking about the Convention at all?
Palin has a strong record of campaigning against corruption in her own party, including distancing herself from Ted Stevens. She beat Frank Murkowski and has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country.
By picking her, McCain is sending a signal (could just be just total window dressing) that he IS an outsider. He picks an unknown, non-Washington person to be his running mate. Plus, he taps into the "candidate for change" and continues to exploit the cultural fault line of "minority vs. woman" in power.
Plus, McCain is at the top of the ticket. Obama is running against him, not against Palin. Palin is running against Biden. Yes, Biden is infinitely more experienced than Palin is, but that just reminds the undecideds that McCain is more experienced than Obama is.
This election just got a lot more interesting and unpredictable.
An ideal VP strengthens the President by sharing their wisdom and experience. A good leader is a good listener.
A VP will be ready to be President. That is, if the President was responsible in their choice of VP.
McCain's choice was abject irresponsibility, for she can neither inform McCain of anything, nor is she ready to lead.
He may be getting senile.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
Clarkie since Summer, 2003
She has small-town, local, rural and gubernatorial experience, which he lacks.
She has a son in the military: his own service was years ago.
She is much younger, so she has a different worldview.
And so on. McCain has strong Washington insider credentials, legislative and foreign policy experience. He doesn't need those things from her.
Biden can advise Obama on foreign policy, as well as the ins and outs of Washington, but neither of them have ever been a chief executive. Granted, there are other governors who have far more experience than Palin does (on both sides), but she is also a strong evangelical and social conservative and will appeal to the base.
This selection was about getting elected for him. He probably figures that she can learn on the job - and she does seem very capable. I do feel as though I've fallen asleep and woken up in an odd version of "Commander in Chief," though.
...versus the DNC picking some guy in the Illinois legislature to actually be President (rather than being in line for it).
I'm not counting his "experience" as a Senator since I don't think he was there much (preferring to run for President instead)
Luring the Democrats into a trap if they try to attack Palin's experience. Of course, some of us don't believe that professional politicians should be running the country anyways.
He mocked his strogest position. At age 72 with reoccuring Melanoma, McCain knows that his VP is always one heart beat away from being President, and the nation does also.
Running for President gives far greater experience over an 18 month period than just sitting in the U.S. Senate would. Obama has had to study international and national policy questions non stop to attempt to be up to speed. He gathered a seasoned group of policy advisors, and his grasp on all the issues was tested daily.
Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Palin became Governor in 2006. Before being elected Senator Obama served multiple terms in the IL State Senate working on State wide issues in one of America's largest and most diverse states. Before being elected Governor of Alaska, Palin was Mayor of a small city. Since then Obama has been on a steep international learning curve. Palin has studied Alaska.
But the point is it is about judgment now, McCain just made sure of that. In their first important decision for America, McCain chose Palin and Obama chose Biden. A pretty dramatic difference.
And while I am not a big fan of professional politicians being the end all in politics, Palin is a professional politician also, just like Obama. She simply has less experience than even him. We all know the book about General Clark. He was better prepared to be President than any other Democrat with the arguable exception of Al Gore. Is anyone making that argument for Palin?
Geraldine Ferraro redux? I never thought Dan Quayle would look good. This is a terrible pick for a 72-year-old with cancer and PTSD.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
Wasn't Obama all about bringing change and "new politics" to Washington? Yet he picked one of the oldest men, seniority wise, in the US Senate. He did it to shore up the weakness of inexperience, not unlike Bush choosing Cheney. McCain picked Palin to win over disaffected Hillary voters AND to make the social conservatives happy, many of whom were thinking of staying home. Who knows, maybe he also did it to make sure no one on his own side slipped anything into his warm milk at bedtime.
Point is, you're right that Palin makes it harder for McCain to attack Obama for inexperience. But Biden makes it harder for Obama to attack McCain for being a Washington insider.
And for some funny reason, I don't think the GOP movers and shakers are all that worried about Palin being in line to run in 2012 or 2016. I don't think they'd have a single qualm about dumping her by the side of the road, and could find any of a number of ways to do so.
His last occurrence was 8 years ago. With most other cancers, passing the 5 year mark is considered cured. I'm not saying that it can't recur, but to hang all the arguments on this dignosis is probably not fair.
Looks like a smart move, instead. McCain's first job is to get elected; this will help him draw the indies and fence sitters because of how Hillary was crapped on by the O people.
None of the Above; we need Wes Clark as Secretary of State!.
It wasn't just about electing a woman. That is why it was so hard for many of us to see the nomination go to Obama instead, who does not have a long track record of achievement.
Hillary earned the nomination. Picking a fresh pretty female face to replace her is like picking a trophy VP.
The BBC made an interesting comment as they waited for McCain to show up. They weren't convinced that Palin would bring Clinton supporters rushing to the Republican ticket but the 18 million votes that Clinton received means its not really a big deal to put a woman on the ticket now.
Barry
Are you safer today than you were seven years ago?©
Sara Palin will solidify the conservative base around McCain and that is likely first and foremost the reason she was chosen. Sure, Pawlenty could have done that, but he's not too exciting and didn't have the reformer persona that she does. Romney was a little too slick and they didn't have a good relationship. She fulfills many of the things he needed and just happened to be an attractive woman. If that means other women will give the ticket a second look, then all the better for him. But I think above all, its the conservative base issue and that has been borne out today to be positive for his campaign.
isn't an olive branch to Hillary's core constituency. I seem to recall that many Clinton supporters felt it would be an insult if Obama picked Sellious instead of Hillary.
McCain could have picked Kay Baily Hutchinsen if he wanted a credible woman rather than window dressing for his campaign.
And the truth is that outside of hard core political junkie circles who have been tracking this for a long time, most voters are only tuning in now and from watching the convention it would seem that Obama is acting very appreciative of who Hillary Clinton is AND WHAT SHE HAS ACCOMPLISHED.
could not because she is pro-choice:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kay_Bailey_Hutchison
Kay Bailey Hutchison
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Abortion positions
"Hutchison is against outlawing abortion.[5] She also believes that the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade was appropriate and secures a constitutional right, and that it should not be overturned.[6]
Hutchison is currently considered to be liberal on abortion issues, at least compared to most elected Republicans from Texas..."
Like with Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge who are also pro-choice, McCain would have faced a huge revolt from the GOP activist base if he had put Kay Bailey Hutchison on the ticket!
"if he wanted a credible woman rather than window dressing for his campaign"
===
At least we're seeing in this campaign how Democrats really view women and keep trying to pull out the "pro-choice" card to keep them in line.
Good way to lose the election
I don't think that women are simply window dressing which is why I was such an active and outspoken pro Hillary blogger this year.
But McCain is using Palin as "window dressing" IMO and that is completely cynical. This isn't a pick like Ridge or Lieberman who McCain knows well personally and trusts. He is not close to Palin and he sure as hell didn't pick her for her credentials.
She's good looking enough to be, but there is strong conviction and substance behind that woman. It is insulting to imply that she is window dressing or a trophy running mate. I may not agree with all she believes in, but she is no slouch of a leader in her state. Let's give credit where credit is due.
My understanding is that is she hunts,fishes, pilots an airplane, rides a motrocycle, and has more experience in elective office then Obama. 13 years altogther.
So if Obama is ready to lead, Plain must be even more ready.
In fairness she seems like a very talented and capable women, but she was a mayor of a town of 7,000 and Gov. of Alska for less the a full term. Is she remotely ready to be the CIC?
Taken straight from the proud official web site of the city that Palin was Mayor of before becoming Alaska's Governor one and a half years ago:
Classification First Class City
Year of Incorporation 1974
Population 6,715
Educational Facilities Mat-Su Borough School District
Mat-Su College/UAA Campus
Form of Government Elected mayor / 6-person City Council
Total Local City Annual Revenue $12,695,563
Median Family Income $53,792 (2000 Census)
No. of Business Licenses 1,249
City Sales Tax 2.5 percent
Annual Sales Tax Revenue $8,876,374
Property Tax City: 0.0 mills; MSB 9.64 mills;
Fire Service Area: 1.42 mills
Accommodations (Bed) Tax Borough: 5 percent
Public Water System City: serves 746 customers
Public Sewer System City: serves 523 customers
Heating Primarily piped natural gas
Police City Police Department: 21 officers
including chief and communication officer
Fire/Rescue Matanuska-Susitna Borough Fire Department
Ambulance Matanuska-Susitna Borough
Medical Mat-Su Regional Medical Center
Public Transportation MASCOT operates 20-passenger buses in the local area
http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=49
She's probably a smart woman. But if folks say Obama moved too quickly to the national stage, Palin must have gotten her hands on a Star Treck transporter.
you're really running scared. Palin was a brilliant choice; she has more experience running things than O ever had. and certainly seems to fit in with what "main street" America likes. (I don't like her repub views, but that's not going to matter with most voters.) She's going to be in-training for the top job for 4 years; wouldn't it be a stich if she and Hillary were running against each other in 012. What would the woman-haters in the msm do? If McCain conks out, as you insinuate he might at any day, then wouldn't it be a stich, also, if the first female president of the United States was a republican!
None of the Above; In any case, we need Wes Clark as Secretary of State!.
...to now be calling someone with Palin's resume "a brilliant choice". She's a change from the same old alright, if change is what you value.
I don't know how long John McCain will live and remain healthy. It might be 18 years. But when Ronald Reagan ran for President at an advanced age he chose George Bush Sr. for Vice President, and no one argued about his qualifications to step in immediately if need be. That was both a shrewd and wise choice.
Obviously, it's not good for the country. But that doesn't mean it won't play well with the electorate.
Perhaps she even makes experience a more powerful argument (because it'll be more obvious). You can take the risk that McCain will die in office and have an inexperienced person take over, or you can vote for Obama and be sure. As everyone here so likes to point out, there's no real third choice.
They are probably going to push them like this:
If it's youth you want, the Republicans have got it. If it's experience you want, the Republicans have got it. And on the Republican ticket, it's experience at the top, where it belongs.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
But I have already read a lot of commentary calling this "a Hail Mary pass".
This clearly conservative blogger has it right I think:
"The Unfortunate Palin Gamble
Don’t kid yourself…John McCain just put all his chips on the table and rolled the dice.
Over the past many months, McCain’s team had skillfully underscored the natural impressions of Americans – that Barak Obama was the lightweight in the race; the candidate of risk. Now, with a single stroke McCain has undercut his most effective argument. He has weakened his case for wisdom and experience, and elevated a one-term governor of a small-population state based on her gender.
McCain had plenty of safe choices. Choices that would have bolstered Americans’ inherent understanding of McCain’s competency and ability; choices that would have underscored the longstanding notion that whatever gimmick the Democrats try, the Republican Party remains the serious one.
With the electorate evenly split, McCain’s first job was to pick a competent running mate that would not undermine his standing, and would reassure voters that should something happen to the oldest man ever to be nominated for president, a competent, experienced leader, ready to serve as commander-in-chief in a time of war, was waiting in the wings.
The former Miss Congeniality, and hockey mom from “the last frontier” is a bizarre choice.
McCain’s pick today has all the hallmarks of a political gimmick and a hail-Mary pass. While it is likely to excite some conservatives, his choice will refocus the entire campaign away from Obama’s status as a political neophyte and will reshuffle the risk calculus in the favor of the increasingly familiar, and always-eloquent Obama. With Biden on the ticket, Obama has lessened the sense that he poses a serious danger to the electorate. McCain’s selection by contrast is likely to shake voters and cast uncertainty on the wisdom and safety of a McCain presidency.
With competent and proven individuals waiting in the wings such as Governor Mitt Romney, the selection of Sarah Palin is a most unfortunate choice.
John McCain may have just lost the 2008 election…cue the hurricane."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2070626/posts
Tom, it took O right off the front pages. I don't like her politics, as I said above, despite what one-track-mind Kevin says, I don't support McCain, (can't stand him, either) but she's a republican and she fits right in with that crew. She seems moderate enough on some issues, at first look, to appeal to the indies and pissed off democrat women. We'll have to wait and see. It's amazing how everyone jumps to rock-hard conclusions at the drop of a hat. It will be interesting to see how the woman-haters club in the MSM acts.
I think it was a good move on McCains part; you don't. Neither one of us is a certified prognosticator. At the very least, it will make things very interesting. Until today, most of us, including yours truly, didn't know she existed. We do now. Stay tuned.
None of the Above; America needs Wes Clark as Secretary of State!.
And it certainly did short circuit the buzz frmom the Democratic Convention, no argument there. Agreed that it is an interesting choice, and I suspect that personally she will strike me as likable enough aside from my differences with her on issues.
as I've got a sneaking suspicion that many, many people haven't a clue about the issues but vote strictly on who is most likable. The have-a-beer-with type. Biden seems "likable," enough, but, if you notice his full frontal crushing hugs with Michelle Obama, I would caution anyone to let him too near your wife. Maybe a little too likable? :)
None of the Above; Wes Clark as Secretary of State!.
But I would have said exactly the same thing about Dan Quayle. Wait... I did say exactly the same thing about Dan Quayle--except the woman part.
It definitely reinforces the point that they have no intention of winning on the merits. I find that fact scary.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
donjo, give it up. You are doing nothing but pushing mccain on a Democratic blog.
It is so tiring.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden 08
This whole thread is talking about whether she'll hurt or help McCain's chances. Donjo's not saying whether he thinks she's good for the country or not. He's talking about whether she's a good choice to help McCain win. If we can't discuss that without being accused of misusing this space, I don't know what we can talk about.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
He was my high school principal and is now the mayor (officially "village president") of the small town I grew up in. I'm sure Obama would have picked him, but he's also from Illinois and the VP and POTUS can't be from the same state.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
so I'm sure she's capable on one level or another
It's her anti-choice/pro-big-oil ideology, as well as her lack of that "revered must-have-experience", the "X-factor", that makes the Palin choice a ludicrous one.
I know several people who loved Hillary and hated what Bush did to this country, but were set to vote McCain on the experience argument alone. I wonder what they think now?
Now a strong argument can be made that McCain's VP, who has some real chance to be President during McCain's first term due to his age and health, has much less experience at the state level than Obama had before he was elected US Senator. It may weaken McCain's support among voters who value experience, especially elderly voters.
Of course, she could portray herself as the next Teddy Roosevelt so who knows.
If he dies or becomes incapacitated-- or more importantly-- if people think that this could happen, his experience is useless.
I suspect his aqe and health will now create fear, uncertainty and doubt. As Tom said, picking another woman like Senator Hutchinson would have been completely avoided this and demonstrated good judgment.
So, I believe that he is going to have to appear energetic throughout the campaign to avoid losing his experience advantage.
He certainly does not seem as vital as Reagan did at nearly the same age.
...of any woman who is a Republican. My ex was a lifelong Republican until Reagan. She said that she would have to change either her gender or her party, and she thought that the party-change would be easier.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
"I question the judgment of any woman who is a Republican"
Why not question the judgment of any person instead? The hidden sexism in the Democratic party runneth over.
I said that the way I did because my ex, a feminist to the bone, thought that women should be especially sensitive to the sexism in the REPUBLICAN party.
And if you are accusing ME of hidden sexism, then you don't know thing one about me.
Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
Wes Clark -- Make America All It Can Be!
McCain Selects Anti-Choice Sarah Palin as Running Mate
Selection of anti-choice Palin shows just how extreme McCain presidency will be
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 29, 2008
Washington, D.C. – Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said that Sen. John McCain’s selection today of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate is further evidence that a McCain presidency will be just another four years of the same old Bush-style anti-choice policies. Just like McCain, Palin opposes a woman’s right to choose. Palin has also stated her opposition to abortion even in cases of rape or incest.
"John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate proves just how rigid and extreme his administration would be when it comes to a woman’s right to choose," Keenan said. "For 25 years, McCain has opposed a woman’s right to choose, and we know that he will continue to push anti-choice policies in the White House. McCain’s pick of anti-choice Sarah Palin is further evidence that his White House will be just another four years of Bush-style policies. Any remaining doubts about McCain’s extreme anti-choice position should be put to rest when voters learn about the combined anti-choice records of Sarah Palin and John McCain."
Palin, a member of the anti-choice group Feminists for Life, said during her campaign for governor that she is opposed to abortion, even in cases of rape or incest. [Juneau Empire, "Abortion Draws Clear Divide in State Races," accessed 8/29/08 and Anchorage Daily News, "Governor’s Race: Top contenders meet one last time to debate," 11/03/06.]
"Americans are tired of the kind of divisive anti-choice policies that Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin have pledged to continue to support. The contrast between pro-choice Sen. Obama and anti-choice Sen. McCain is clear. Voters are looking for a leader who respects women’s freedom and privacy. Barack Obama is that leader."
Sen. McCain’s selection of Palin as his vice-presidential running mate is especially troublesome for the unique audience of women voters NARAL Pro-Choice America is targeting: Independent and Republican pro-choice women in suburban and exurban swing districts. These women play a pivotal role in the presidential election. Recent polling confirms how, once these voters know McCain’s extreme opposition to a woman’s right to choose and family planning, they will switch parties to support Sen. Barack Obama.
NARAL Pro-Choice America, which tracks all choice-related votes in Congress and ranks all 50 states on the status of women’s reproductive rights, classifies Sarah Palin as anti-choice.
Information about the polling can be found here. Learn more about NARAL Pro-Choice America’s actions to educate voters on McCain’s anti-choice record at www.MeetTheRealMcCain.com.
http://www.naral.org/elections/election-pr/pr08292008_palin.html
Does anyone dispute that invading Iraq was a bold move? Lucky us, a chance for another "bold" President with horrible judgment.
Do people think it is just a fluke that McCain still supports having invaded Iraq? Or that privatizing Social Security is just nifty keen by him?
I don't think either of those things will factor into this election.
It'll be about "national security" (that is, who can protect us from the baaaaad Muslims) and who you'd rather have a beer with. And voting for a woman VP will appease their consciences.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
sort of like I assumed minimal common sense I suppose. Nah, no one needed a conscience to vote for McCain. Remember? He's a former POW and Obama isn't. That's all the "cover" anyone needed if cover is what they needed.
But this Palin pick does undercut McCain's national security argument, especially on the heels of Obama picking Joe Biden. And I agree that National Security was always going to be McCain's strong suit. So this will only work to undermine that now.
John McCain wants to unit the Evangelicals but not America. I hope this christian group will look beyond their horizon. The stakes are to high. Once and for all this election is not about John McCain it´s about us.
It's Fr...en stupid move.
Obama and Biden can now go wind surfing for the nexrt month or two with Kerry and just show up at the inauguration in January.
Maybe McCain thinks this makes him look younger. Maybe they decided that the experience angle wasn't working because McCain was just looking old and senile while Obama was looking young and vibrant. So they pair him up with a 44 year old and he looks fatherly instead of ancient. As a bonus, it activates the strict father family model. And maybe the Alaska thing will figure into drilling somehow.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
It will look more like he's running for President with his grand daughter. A running mate perhaps ten years older than Palin might have made McCain look younger. But this contrast both makes him look too old AND her look too young.
...but "they" also thought Guilliani was a sure fire ticket to winning the White House. But now hardly anyone even threw out his name as a possible VP pick.
It's another "New Coke" if they are banking on McCain now seeming youthful.
Rich older men have been running around with younger women, in large part to make them feel younger if not look younger, probably for as long as there have been men and women. It's probably a fairly common phenomenon in Republican circles. Bet there are a lot of poorer men who only wish they could do likewise.
To be honest, I don't know it'll play out on that score. It'll be interesting to see.
But I do think Palin will bring a lot of disaffected women to McCain, especially if the Democrats make the mistake of attacking her as a woman (see my post below). This morning, I heard Stephanie Miller call her a bimbo. I don't take it too seriously coming from Stephanie, since she's notorious for making fun of feminists, and often playes the bimbo herself. But if we start hearing that kind of trash from Randi Rhodes or God forbid any of the male talkers, pundits or bloggers, it will be a big mistake.
I assume that she is a rather impressive woman all things considered. But she is less than two years past running a police force with 21 officers, and that makes up most of her national security experience.
She's not a bimbo, but McCain is using her for VP like a gimmick.
Or a tactic. Either way, he obviously wants to woo those 4-6 million Hillary voters (more if you extrapolate to people who don't bother with primaries) who say they will not vote for Obama.
My main point was that human society has a rather long history of accepting an older man parading around with a younger woman as proof of his virility. A young male VP might have made McCain look older. Not sure a young female VP has the same effect.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/us/politics/29text-palin.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1
"I think -- I think as well today of two other women who came before me in national elections. I can't begin this great effort without honoring the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and of course Senator Hillary Clinton, who showed such determination and grace in her presidential campaign. It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America but it turns out the women of America aren't finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all."
Nothing that points out she's almost the complete opposite of Sen. Clinton on nearly every issue.
Wonder when McMuffin will become mad at her & call her the "c" word?
According to reports, Palin's a member of Assemblies of God, which has been agressively targeted by Dominionists with many churches "Steeplejacked" and brought over to a very hard line fundementalist viewpoint.
Palin's views on Abortion and Creationism are very much in line with Dominionist belief.
In addition, she was also a member of the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes", which has heavy dominionist ties.
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/8/23/142836/277
"At least one member of Bearing Fruit's board of directors (T. Ray Grandstaff) is a former Senior VP for Fellowship of Christian Athletes. FCA has been linked to dominionism in numerous ways; they are well known for "bait and switch" evangelism (in fact, they and Athletes in Action are among the two groups most frequently banned from public school campuses due to bait-and-switch "altar calls" marketed as anti-drug talks to the school administration). More info here. (Such tactics are a favourite of dominionist groups explicitly targeting youth.) It's also well known (and, apparently, explicitly by design) that Fellowship of Christian Athletes rather aggressively "dominionist-ises" any team they are let into (this tends to be bad even within the NFL, but even more so within FCA groups run in colleges and high schools)."
The selection of Palin looks like an attempt by McCain to make nice with the fundamentalist wing of the GOP and at the same time try and court disaffected Clinton supporters with a cynical "see, my VP has lady bits too, so vote for her."
Her pastor, Mike Rose, has ties to Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries, which has been "listed as influential in spreading dominion theology"
The infiltrated big time. They had signs all over our hallways saying things like "God Wants You to Join the FCA." It really pissed me off. The FCA ran the school store. Can you believe it? There was nothing I could do about it.
We learn. We change. That's progress. If we don't do that, well, we're GWB.
"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants."
Gen. Omar Bradley
No.. no it isn't.
I'm guessing we can rest easy with the Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton attacks from McCaindyland.
Wonder how the right wingers will take to this one.
is a photoshop fake.
Here are the real photos...
The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off. ~Gloria Steinem
but I believe it will be easy to portray Gov Palin as more of a soccer mom (or hockey mom, if you will) than anything else. This is a line of attack that would have to come from Hillary, as Obama/Biden might not want to risk alienating the soccer mom vote.
Then the question will be, does America really want a creationist soccer mom to be a heartbeat away from being president and commander-in-chief? Yeah, it could pick up a few votes from creationists and some soccer moms, but I think that would be offset by the real security-minded conservatives and indies.
You recognize that branding Palin as only a soccer mom is a sexist attack, but it'll be okay if Hillary is the one to make it?
There's a lot wrong with Palin, but it truly disgusts me that so-called progressives have no problem at all with misogyny. And it will be bizarro world indeed if it ends up that the GOP is the party to defend against just such an outrage.
I guess that's what comes from refusing to listen to the PUMAs just because you supported a different candidate. You have NO CLUE what is driving so many women away from our Party, and quite possibly straight into McCain's arms.
Let me ask you, can you imagine the reaction if Colin Powell were on the Repub ticket and you were to suggest Jesse Jackson attack him for getting where he is by affirmative action?
Attack Palin on the issues by all means. That shouldn't be hard.
Leave her gender out of it.
Any woman who would deny choice to her sisters is the worst sexist of all.
That's my opinion as a woman, yes, but it's also an issue. How do you leave gender out?
In fact, it's sort of sexist, if in a forgivable way, to think that it's worse for a woman to be anti-choice than for a man. Forgivable because it's human nature, and not the bad side of it, to hold our own to a higher standard.
Similarly, I hold Democrats to a higher standard when it comes to sexism.
Are you trying to tell you me you would not have ample grounds to attack a man for being anti-choice? Why can you NOT leave gender out?
Why give Republicans the moral high ground?
I would absolutely attack a man for anti-choice, and have done so.
I readily admit that I don't *necessarily* leave his gender out of it tho.
This was a purely political act. The GOP knows National politics. It will be analyzed a million ways, but when the GOP message machine kicks in, it can be sold. That is the way it is because we live in a misogynist country. We live in a racist country also. I'll bet the GOP knows all the odds on this move, and they are in their favor. This was timed to destroy the convention bounce that conventional wisdom (k rove on fox) that O should get an 8-9% bounce. This will dominate National News if they really support McCain. I've already heard talk that Sarah gave Hillary more respect than O in his speech last night. This is Hollywood-Madison Avenue. Only time will tell if it was the right choice, if that means getting elected. I think at this point it was an astounding choice, it distracts from the real issues (again kr's MO). If the ageism attacks on McCain are true, she could end up making history in one of the ironic twists. Nothing surprises me in politics. I think O could have made a smarter choice for VP but we have seen what the GOP brain trust did there.
but please try to stay-fact based. Cause right now, you're wrong as two left feet.
You recognize that branding Palin as only a soccer mom is a sexist attack, but it'll be okay if Hillary is the one to make it?
#1 Sarah Palin is a self-described ''hockey mom." Feel free to check this fact on my link. In other words, this is not a sexist branding, because this is how she brands herself. The same rules would apply if some guy branded himself a NASCAR dad at age 44, and sported an exceedingly thin political resume.
I guess that's what comes from refusing to listen to the PUMAs just because you supported a different candidate.
#2 No matter how many times you say I supported another candidate, it won't be true. That's a lie, and I've refuted it many times before. I jumped on the Hillary bandwagon as soon as Gen Clark endorsed her. And I respect his judgement enough to respect his endorsement of Obama.
Good luck with you next attempt to accuse me of bad behavior!
The only crossed swords I can remember were about the Gallup data on married women voters. But I gave up there because you obviously had no clue what I was saying. Ummm... just like now. But I'll try one more time.
It doesn't matter of whether Palin called herself a "hockey mom." What you said was, "more of a soccer mom (or hockey mom, if you will) than anything else." I took the liberty of shortening it to "ONLY a soccer mom." Either way is sexist because it diminishes any other accomplishments she might have (meager tho they might be).
Riddle me this: If it wasn't sexist, then why did you say Hillary would have to be the one to say it? Or this: Can you imagine Palin saying in public, "I'm really more of a hockey mom than anything else"?
Your NASCAR dad example otoh doesn't hold water. People don't think about dads the same way they do about moms. Identifying as a dad just does not limit the perception of accomplishment outside of the home the way identifying as a mom does.
As for the PUMAs... okay, I admit I may have got the REASON you didn't listen to them wrong. But regardless of who you supported at what point, it's clear to me that you don't understand what all us "bitter women" (the ones Sybil thinks have no lives of our own... I guess making LTC isn't good enough for her) are angry about now.
Look, the bottom line is that if the Democrats or the media, the latter of which we have little control over, use sexism against Palin, it will only help McCain. Remember that 44% of married women for Kerry that was trending down to 39% for Obama? Expect it to keep going lower if our side screws this up.
It doesn't matter of whether Palin called herself a "hockey mom." What you said was, "more of a soccer mom (or hockey mom, if you will) than anything else." I took the liberty of shortening it to "ONLY a soccer mom." Either way is sexist because it diminishes any other accomplishments she might have (meager tho they might be).
It's called politics. See Quayle, Dan and Obama, Barack, and Clinton , Bill
Riddle me this: If it wasn't sexist, then why did you say Hillary would have to be the one to say it? Or this: Can you imagine Palin saying in public, "I'm really more of a hockey mom than anything else"?
It's called politics, and just like Gen Clark is better suited to address McCain and Vietnam, Clinton is better suited to address "soccer mom" vs political experience.. See above examples.
If you called her stupid, like Dan Quayle, that would be politics. A man or a woman can be stupid.
If you called her inexperienced like Barack Obama, that would be politics (also true). A man or a woman can be inexperienced.
If you call her "slick" like they call Bill Clinton (among other things), that would be politics. A man or a woman can be slick.
If you call her not much more than a hockey mom (or however it was you worded it), it's sexism. Only a woman can be a mom, and only a mom would be assumed less qualified than a dad.
Butcha know, that's fine. You go ahead and assume you know more about what sexism is than I do, and you go ahead and make your arguments to as many people as you can. I already believe Obama is going to lose big time. I think Palin will make it worse. No point in arguing it. We don't have to wait much longer to find out.
From wikipedia:
In North American social, cultural and political discourse, soccer mom broadly refers to a middle-class woman who spends a significant amount of her time transporting her school-age children to activities such as soccer practice. The male equivalent, soccer dad, is less-used.
She's young and she's unknown. She was the mayor of a small town just a couple of years ago. Now she's governor of a small state with just 3 electoral votes. She has dubbed herself a "hockey mom". Along with her very thin resume, her self-definition implies she spends significant time transporting her kids to games.
You can debate the merits of this line of attack, but I hardly consider this obvious political opening sexist. In my opinion it would be a very fair and politically effective shorthand for asking if this person is qualified to be POTUS.
She might not like the portrayal, but I'm sure Michael Dukakis and John Kerry didn't like they way they were portrayed either. Being a hockey (or soccer) mom is no more of a qualification than being a POW.
I'm just not sure how that line of attack would be helpful, given that there are more than an election's worth of women who would relate to a characterization like that and find themselves defending Palin and subconsciously moving away from the attacker.
As far as the "sexist" ism of the thing. I don't know. I think if someone has been doing beauty pageants, they kinda set themselves up for at the very least righteous indignation from those who don't appreciate the "Basing" of womanhood in such ways.
Shades of an ism I spose, but just like was discussed, how NASCAR dads and soccer moms are seen differently, it's a difference, one that need not come with a sexist judgement. Much in the same way that Palin, and certainly many women, would likely defend herself, themselves, that they like feeling "Sexy" or whatver.
Anyways, I don't see it as a viable way of gaining support for Obama vs Peeling support from McCain. I think the strategy would help McCain.
Yes it preserves his "maverick" status, but it puts "maverick" into perspective. Dennis Hopper is a "maverick". Mavericks are associated with erratic and unpredictable behavior. McCain campaigned as the calming seasoned captain for a ship on troubled waters. Now, at age 72 and having already battled twice with deadly melanoma, he picks a 44 year old women who two years ago was the mayor of Wasilla Alaska for the direct line to the Presidency. You never know what to expect from McCain is the message being sent here, and that is not the message that America wants to get about someone seeking to be President. McCain just trampled on his campaign's best attacks against Obama.