It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who contend that experience wasn't that important call Sarah Palin inexperienced.
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who contend that a woman shouldn't have to stay home and watch the kids, who seem to think that stay-at-home mom's just don't quite get feminism, to question whether it's right for Palin to "abandon" her children for a run at the Vice Presidency.
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who championed Hillary's run for the presidency as a wonderful historic achievement for women (as they should) call McCain's pick an insulting, sexist ploy that somehow insinuates that women will vote for a woman regardless of her political beliefs and party.
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who recoil with derision (as they should) at conspiracy theorists claiming Obama has some hidden Muslim agenda spew forth theories that Palin's infant son is actually her grandson and other such rubbish.Can you please provide links to
( ... )
I suppose I don't mean "the same persons" as much as the same wing of people. Of course, it's a broad generalization and should be taken as such (I maintain that, like bias, there's nothing wrong with generalizations as long as they are understood). So, you're correct in that I can't name for you a specific person who was saying "experience doesn't matter" and is now attacking Palin as inexperienced, but the general line from the Obamanation was that his relatively little experience did not matter and now the general line from the Obamanation is that Palin is inexperienced. It may be different people, it may not be. I was speaking more of the collective attitude of the left.
And before you dismiss the source, the Seattle Times is very middle of the road (unlike its competitor which is unabashedly liberal) -- socially liberal, but never a fan of excessive government and even less so of tax hikes.
Based on my assumptions about the enormous gulf in policy preferences between the two of them. Although to be fair, you're right, aside from her well-known positions on abortion (only in cases where the mother will die) and drilling for oil (yes, please, even though neither the state nor the oil companies own the land in question) I don't know too much about her in the big picture sense. However, one would assume that the Hillary supporters would still support the party nominee, or at least not take direct action to defeat him, but it is the Democratic Party after all. All assumptions should be carefully vetted and compulsively re-examined until Obama takes the oath in January.
There are two equal and opposite absurd assumptions about women voters in this election:
1. The vast majority of women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama will vote for McCain because Palin is a woman.
2. No women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama will vote for McCain because Palin is a woman.
There will be a contingent of women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama - many of them likely disaffected former Hillary supporters - that want to see a woman on the winning ticket. Perhaps some of them already had their doubts about Obama's leadership ability and substantive experience and Palin puts them over the edge. But there will be some voters like that. The only question is whether it will be a significant contingent or not.
Actually all the dirt they're finding on her has been my entertainmentubersaurusSeptember 3 2008, 20:58:44 UTC
I think she's incompetent and has some very bizarre stances on issues. Like her telling a crowd that we're in Iraq doing "God's Will" and that God's will is what allowed her to get some earmarks for her state. Or her "Creationism in public schools plz" stance. Her anti-sex education stance is well publicized. And then you get into her history - firing a state trooper because he's in a custody battle with her sister? Spending state money to defend herself from allegations of impropriety? Being a member of Alaska's Secessionist movement for a good while, and then even as recently as this year praising what they're doing
( ... )
Re: Actually all the dirt they're finding on her has been my entertainmentcaspian_xSeptember 3 2008, 21:05:50 UTC
I haven't been able to spend as much time researching her as I'd like, but if I recall correctly, the God's will stuff was to a church group. There's a difference between making God's will part of your public policy and speaking about your beliefs to a church group.
Plus, given McCain's age and health, it's a very good chance she would become president.
Um, sorry, no. McCain's got a clean bill of health. More likely to take over than Biden? Sure. "A very good chance"? No.
Apparent haste? What are you talking about, he picked her at the time he should, right before the convention same as Obama. AFTER Obama. How is that hasty?
Re: Actually all the dirt they're finding on her has been my entertainmentubersaurusSeptember 3 2008, 21:10:00 UTC
Check out the Washington Post or the New York Times; both are running stories that McCain was leaning towards two other choices up until early last week, when he realized that both, being pro-choice, would have fucked him over with the Republican base. I think one was Leiberman. They also report that he didn't start vetting Palin until Wednesday, met her Thursday, told her she was his VP pick, and, well, there you go. He was running out of time. So although after the Dem convention was smart, the fact that he practically grabbed her at the last minute leaves me to say "apparent haste."
Also, McCain's health records were available to select reporters for 3 hours the Friday before Independence Day weekend. They couldn't take pictures, or make photocopies; all they could really do was collaborate to go through the dozens upon dozens of pages. That doesn't sound like the behavior of a man in good health to me.
Re: Actually all the dirt they're finding on her has been my entertainmentclayfootSeptember 4 2008, 11:45:40 UTC
Lieberman (Independent) is rumored to have been the first choice, but the Republican party may have staged a convention revolt, and nominated another candidate for vice president.
my biggest problem with her is that she once wanted books banned from libraries for language. And then fired a librarian who stood up to her. Any other issues aside, that pushes huge personal buttons for me.
Fair enough. I don't know much about that incident so I'll look into it more. The only time I could see such a thing being acceptable would be a children's library or something like that.
Even if the story is true without excuse, I think everybody makes some bad calls from time to time. I'm sure I could find some pretty disturbing calls (BAIPA for example) from the opposition ticket.
Here's what the NYT has to say about it:Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.
Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin’s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. “They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,” Ms. Kilkenny said.
The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to “resist all efforts at censorship,” Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.
In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were “rhetorical. Sounds like a bit more
( ... )
even raising the possibility of banning books is too much for me.
Like I said, personal hotbutton issue. Probably wouldn't affect everybody the same way. It says to me that she finds the notion of censorship acceptable.
I also found another source (a link I can't find again, of course) stating that Palin fired the librarian in question (and her town's police chief too) because she felt she "didn't have [the librarian and police chief's] full support". That seems like a pretty wimpy way out and doesn't speak well of her desire to work with people who disagree with her.
Comments 44
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who contend that a woman shouldn't have to stay home and watch the kids, who seem to think that stay-at-home mom's just don't quite get feminism, to question whether it's right for Palin to "abandon" her children for a run at the Vice Presidency.
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who championed Hillary's run for the presidency as a wonderful historic achievement for women (as they should) call McCain's pick an insulting, sexist ploy that somehow insinuates that women will vote for a woman regardless of her political beliefs and party.
It is exceedingly entertaining to watch the same people who recoil with derision (as they should) at conspiracy theorists claiming Obama has some hidden Muslim agenda spew forth theories that Palin's infant son is actually her grandson and other such rubbish.Can you please provide links to ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Would you vote for Cake or Pie for president? What if the tickets were Cake/Cupcake and Pie/Cobbler?
If you say flavor matters, you're a pastry racist. A pastryist.
"My fellow Americans, I come to you with a promise of DELICIOUSNESS!"
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
She might not, however, be as fiscally conservative as one might be led to believe.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008154664_palin03.html
And before you dismiss the source, the Seattle Times is very middle of the road (unlike its competitor which is unabashedly liberal) -- socially liberal, but never a fan of excessive government and even less so of tax hikes.
Reply
...based on? Isn't it a bit soon to tell?
Reply
Reply
1. The vast majority of women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama will vote for McCain because Palin is a woman.
2. No women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama will vote for McCain because Palin is a woman.
There will be a contingent of women voters who would otherwise vote for Obama - many of them likely disaffected former Hillary supporters - that want to see a woman on the winning ticket. Perhaps some of them already had their doubts about Obama's leadership ability and substantive experience and Palin puts them over the edge. But there will be some voters like that. The only question is whether it will be a significant contingent or not.
Reply
Reply
Plus, given McCain's age and health, it's a very good chance she would become president.
Um, sorry, no. McCain's got a clean bill of health. More likely to take over than Biden? Sure. "A very good chance"? No.
Apparent haste? What are you talking about, he picked her at the time he should, right before the convention same as Obama. AFTER Obama. How is that hasty?
Reply
Also, McCain's health records were available to select reporters for 3 hours the Friday before Independence Day weekend. They couldn't take pictures, or make photocopies; all they could really do was collaborate to go through the dozens upon dozens of pages. That doesn't sound like the behavior of a man in good health to me.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Even if the story is true without excuse, I think everybody makes some bad calls from time to time. I'm sure I could find some pretty disturbing calls (BAIPA for example) from the opposition ticket.
Reply
Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin’s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. “They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,” Ms. Kilkenny said.
The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to “resist all efforts at censorship,” Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.
In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were “rhetorical.
Sounds like a bit more ( ... )
Reply
Like I said, personal hotbutton issue. Probably wouldn't affect everybody the same way. It says to me that she finds the notion of censorship acceptable.
I also found another source (a link I can't find again, of course) stating that Palin fired the librarian in question (and her town's police chief too) because she felt she "didn't have [the librarian and police chief's] full support". That seems like a pretty wimpy way out and doesn't speak well of her desire to work with people who disagree with her.
Reply
Leave a comment