| View Blog
|
|
| Problems: McCain & Palin--hastily chosen
|
|
|
John McCain, the 72 year old, two time cancer survivor choses a 44 year old, rookie running mate in Sarah Plain, 44. Many are questioning his "impulsive" (1) decision making on this matter. John McCain said that, his "V.P. pick would be ready to step in as President at a moments notice." Yet, upon closer investigation of Palin's record, this doesn't appear to be the case for her. The worry many from both side of party lines, comes from the apparent haste at which the decision for V.P. was made. It is difficult to say, because of the country's relative unfamiliarity with Palin, if she will be ready. But, her lack of national security knowledge and experience does point to one clue. No.
Ironically, now that Palin has been selected as the VP nominee for the Republican party, she is privy to National Security briefs--the same briefs of intelligence that Bush himself gets. Unfortunately, Palin is the only one of the top 4 candidates that lacks a security clearance. She has not been vetted to have such a clearance, yet has been vetted to be selected as VP. There is a disjoint in logic here that cannot be ignored.
He picked Palin after one meeting and basically a handful of phone calls. Questions were raised at this vetting process. Would he have picked a Secretary of Defense after the same amount of meeting time? Would a Secretary of State be selected after one meeting? Will McCain, furthermore, select his Secretary of Treasury after just a handful of phone calls and one face-to-face meeting? (2) It raises many questions as to her readiness to take the office of President should McCain get elected and God forbid he's fallen ill or dies. "Palin is one melanoma away from the most important office in the country." (3) With such important and relevant questions being raised, looking deeper into Palin's record is much needed. Others further question John McCain's decision making abilities arise because the vetting is seen as less than thorough. A republican pundit on MSNBC said today, regarding McCain's pick of Palin, she "was chosen to satisfy some political requirement." Perhaps to pacify unsatisfied Hilary Clinton voters? That his choice, was somehow more tactical rather than for some governing purposes; "this raises major issues as to decision making abilities. It is not flattering as a decision maker." (4)
Looking closer in to Palin's record, some serious concerns have been raised. Though denied by McCain's campaign, evidence has been turned out to suggest Sarah Palin and her spouse may have had a 2 year affiliation with radical offshoot groups tied to Pat Bucchanan and the Alaskan Independence Party. The AIP, a small fringe political group that was in favor of Alaska succeeding from the United States. According the Joe Volger, an AIP leader, affiliated of this group find "no use for America or her damaged institutions." Such a stance, may prove to alienate rather than excite the republican base and scare away Independent voters.
While some consider Palin a reformer, who as governor in 2003 headed an ethics bill that went against many in her own party, she has also made some policies that are counter to the conservative viewpoint. As mayor, she increased sales tax, she opposed legislation that would provide money to build public libraries and took, as mayor, over 20 million dollars in ear marks. More recently, Palin, Friday during her acceptance speech, told party members that when Washington wanted to give her some pork spending she told them "no thank you." However, Halcrow (AK) who knew her throughout her political career called her on this issue, "a flip-flopper" as she was accepting money in support of the Bridge To Nowhere before she was against. She said to Washington, "Yes, please" before she said "no thank you."
Supports of McCain's choice point to her executive experience yet, when called upon to explain decisions she made in regard to the AK National Guard during her tenure as governor, they had no response. Why? Because, though she was governor for two years, there was never an occasion for her to deploy National Guard. Any National Guard movements were, in fact, pushed by Bush, not Palin. However, other decisions were made during her 2 year stint as Alaska's first female governor. Aside from the above forementioned things, Palin is now embroiled in investigations of abuse of power during her time as governor. Though still developing, this information is bound to raise more questions and issues as to her judgement and temperament.
How will McCain and Palin work together should they be elected? Hard to tell. All evidence points to the fact that McCain knew very little about Palin before he selected her. Yet, McCain is not as radical as Palin on some issues, such as abortion. Palin is a die-hard conservative on this issue and is staunchly opposed to abortion in every form save for one exception; should the health of the mother be at stake. This means, in cases of rape and incest, Palin proposes policies to abolish a woman's right to choice--even under these circumstances! McCain, is not in full agreement.
Furthermore, McCain, who is seen by strictly aligned republicans such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter as "being more liberal than Barak Obama", does not agree with Palin on yet another issue: education. Palin has proposed legislation that would make the scientific teachings of evolution take a shared seat with the evangelical mindset of Intelligent Design; a way of explaining the changes of life on earth from a strictly Christian Creationist model--a very controversial position and one that is not broadly shared.
Then, comes the issue of Palin's 17 year old daughter who, just yesterday, was exposed by Palin herself as being "5 months pregnant" and unmarried. Obama himself has said, "family and children are off limits" yet, the model set forth 8 years ago by Bush's henchman, Rove, makes nothing off limits; everything fair game. Furthermore, matters of the family should be off limits, yet, if the person running is doing so on political platforms contrary to their own life, such inconsistencies must be raised. Additionally, conservative mothers, are questioning Palin's sensitivity to her daughter on this issue of national exposure. (5) It does seem unfair that this young girl would be exposed this way, yet, based on the example set forth by their own party via Rove, only 8 years earlier, complaining about the exposure would be hypocritical.
Many see McCain's choice as a counter to Obama's Change platform; that racial and gender lines will be shattered no matter which party wins. While it is true that glass ceilings will be broken regardless of party, change is not something McCain can claim. He voted with bush 90% of the time on all matters, he supports tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of Americans, supports the Stay-the-Course model for the Iraq war and it's cost of billions per day, and is also strongly affiliated with controversial washington lobbyist. He's weak on the economy and even staunch republicans stated publicly they would not be voting for him.(6)
At a time when recent pols show 37% of registered republicans stating they would have rather voted for Hilary Clinton than John McCain and 38% of republican voters stating that they would rather have anyone else other than John McCain as their choice, McCain's temperament and judgment on issues further than Palin come in to serious question; he's got a bit of a problem. Currently, 50% of Americans surveyed will be casting a vote for Obama, compared to 42% for McCain. The recent surge being blamed for the energy of the DNC and his thoughtless choice in Palin and VP.
(1) Amy Lobuchar (D-MN)
(2) MSNBC Chris Matthews
(3) CNN
(4) pundit on Fox News
(5) Fox News
(6) Ron Paul (R) Fox News
|
|
Posted by KateTheShrewd on 2008-09-02 19:35:23 | Rating: | Views: 117
|
|
| |
|
|
| Blog Comments
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, I would rather see her running for president. Her international experience is no less than Obama's and as governor, she has more experience in running a government than the three senators that are in this race. McCain's pick was great for conservatives and tactically wise, but whether that translates into votes in November remains to be seen. Your concerns are valid though and I think we'll find out much more very soon. It is good to have questions.
|
|
Posted by qmark
on 2008-09-02 20:56:46
|
|
|
|
|
I dont like McBush... sorry McCain. I still think they have an edge over the democrats. Oh well, just have to wait and see. Great post Kate.
|
|
Posted by anonimo1922
on 2008-09-02 21:56:08
|
|
|
|
Good post and I have found that on an open forum I have decided to stay on the fence when it comes to political views... to many people can not act like adults. and to many people get heated and such. But I will say...
We vote on our president with only a handfull of speaches, and what the media tells us they are about... no face to face meetings, not secrete service investigations, no team of lawyers to go over every detail of their lives for us and tell us what is real and what is smoke and mirrors. So weather I like Obama or McCain I believe that this rash choice that was so called thrown out there is not as rash as we are lead to believe. It would be verry scary to have a soccor mom as president.. or even as VP... but are we really as daft to think that reguardless who is voted in that they will controll anything? They have veto power yes, but anything they try to push through has to be voted on. and if we are to tie people to bad affiliations lol we need to take a closer look at Obama's x-pastor and long time family advisor. I am still on the fence about this but I believe in not looking at one side with rose colored glasses and the other with a microscope. I believe in being fair. Honestly I don't like either one of them, I guess in the end I have to sit back and pick the lesser of two evils. But I will be fair about it.
|
|
Posted by DouglasMB
on 2008-09-02 22:23:28
|
|
|
|
Doug, your comment about the apparent lack of control of our current Presidents raises so many other interesting questions, of which, your premise, I agree. I don't think presidents these days... probably not since Washington and his autocratic approach (he realized this and thus, resigned after only 2 years) have we seen presidents with autonomy. As it should be. That said, I don't think Bush is wholly to blame. But, when you look at presidents are realize all but ONE had foreign policy experience and had traveled abroad to other countries, we realize such international exposure to be crucial! The president who did not travel before he became president? Bush Jr. And look at what a mess he's gotten us in to in the eyes of other nations. My fear of the republican ticket is multipronged; Palin has many concerns and one of which is her obvious LACK of travel and experience abroad.
qmark, while I fully acknowledge and agree with you, Palin's executive experience is more (as gov.) than Obama, Biden and even McCain himself; no one but her has had experience running a microcosm of government that could translate to presidency. However, her lack of foreign policy (and travel) experience is an issue we cannot overlook. Hers is even less than Bushy-boy and he's really gotten us into a "clusterfuck" as my DH would say.
Anomino...McBush is accurate. At least, uhm... 90% of the time. (LOL)
Again, back to Doug.... we must remember that political discussions are only worthwhile if we approach them with OPEN minds! It's a discourse... not an ambush. It's to be an argument... not a fight. It is possible to discuss and grapple ideas with RESPECT for those who hold differing opinions. We all know when someone feels like they've been trumped and are losing... they resort to juvenile name calling. (FActual knows all too well about this and am thus surprised he's not raised his sexist face here yet... give him time.) BTW: sexist isn't name calling--read his posts to me and you'll see that its a fact. He hates women. That's neither here nor there.... It is possible to disagree respectfully. I promise to delete any comments on my political blogs that have resorted to such childish means.
KT
|
|
Posted by KateTheShrewd
on 2008-09-03 12:41:14
|
|
|
|
BTW... Obama's x-pastor raised multiple roaring RED flags for me! It was, however, at a time when I was die-hard Hillary. As a former registered republican, there was a time when I was a fan of McCain. However, after I saw how he politically inserted his nose up in to the rear of Bush after Rove and the henchmen, I lost much respect. Then, his record of support further demonstrated my concern for his temperament and judgement. Had he picked Lieberman, however, I would have taken another closer look at him.
That all said, as a current Independent voter, I too, weigh the lesser of two evils against track record, ideals and by looking at the type of ppl the candidate surrounds him(her) self with. Obama has demonstrated wisdom in his campaign decisions and organizational abilities and by selecting ppl to run his campaign in a MOST successful way. (Taking down the Clinton juggerknot was not coincidence nor luck... it shows skill and leadership.)
McCain, aligning himself so closely with Bush who, in turn, was a puppet of Cheney (the devil on earth!), Rove, Rumsfeld, seeing how Powel jumped shipped spoke volumes for me! tells me that those around McCain, who had deflated his Maverick balloon by bullying him in to a Palin pick, scares me.
We'll see.
In any case, it's great politics these days! Full body armor time...
|
|
Posted by KateTheShrewd
on 2008-09-03 12:47:12
|
|
|
|
|
bullet proof for sure...
|
|
Posted by DouglasMB
on 2008-09-03 12:52:40
|
|
|
|
The fact is, Palin has been in politics longer than Obama. Palin has executive experience, Obama does not. Palin's stances on the issues are staunchly conservative, which is what the Conservative base is looking for, whereas McCain is a moderate.
Just because you hadn't heard about Palin doesn't make her less viable as the VP.
|
|
Posted by SmoothOperator
on 2008-09-03 13:26:53
|
|
|
|
I agree Smooth... but it is EXACTLY because we haven't heard about her that many of her issues, records and politics will be uncovered. So far, those issues, records... policies do not speak to me, moderate registered INDEPENDENT-- the diamond voter they all cream over to get.
Why?
1) I'm strongly against legislation that is mandated and is proven time and time again NOT to work. Palin: Abstinence Only. Wrong move for government. Obviously, wrong move in her own experience. As it was wrong move in so so so many other homes. Why make it policy for ME if it FAILED?
2) Hypocrisy, Flip Flops. I do not appreciate nor do I support ANY politician that says one thing then does another. Now, for this, I do not mean to include ideals/stances changed as MORE or BETTER information is gathered. To me, the ability to change ones mind in the face of better more informed choices speaks as a positive; the flip side, holding strong to provenly failed policies does not. McCain in his support for the war in Iraq, that was initiated from flawed if not altogether disingenuous intel put forth by the Bush-Cheney machine. The terrorists were NOT in Iraq until they learned American GI's could make quicker pickin's there, perhaps... they needed only cross a few borders not the Atlantic Ocean. Terrorists were in Afghanistan and Pakistan. You're bright, I needn't tell you all this minutia. I could also speak to McCain's support of Bush after Rove and Henchment devastated him in 2000. There are many more flip-floppy McCain records that were changed not from BETTER intel, but from just some flop. Unless you would like me to go into McCain's hypocrisy, I won't. On to Palin: Bridge to Nowhere, the bridge built on earmark dollars that McCain himself has made a platform to protest, was by Palin accepted to the tune of almost 30 Million bucks during her time as Mayor. She ran for Governor on the platform of continuing to accept these pork barrel projects. It wasn't until she was already elected... when congress was catching HELL for this Bridge To Nowhere, that she changed her mind; she said "no thank you" when the money was no longer up for grabs anyway.
3) Radically conservative or radically liberal religious based policies. I am a firm believer, standing strong with the American fore fathers, those who wrote the constitution with a simple idea: Separation of Church and State. Legislation and laws, then, under this belief, should not be tied to any specific religious belief to the exclusion of another. Policies can, however, been personally moral or of ethical standards but only if they represent a a view NOT tied directly to religious dogma or doctrine. For me, and our for fathers before me, religion is a personal thing that has NO BUSINESS in politics. This is not, as you will agree, an easy task to accomplish as religion being so personal, infiltrates so many of our personal stances... thus, our politics. Yet, no matter how difficult it may be, it must be attempted... the separation of church and state... as our Constitution deems. This, as you know, is not some liberal point of view; I am VERY conservative in this regard--upholding our Constitution. It simply, should not, be messed with. (Side note: Bush and his surveillance laws have attempted to, with success, to unravel our Constitution. Bush has tampered successfully with it!)
That all said, McCain, only in his support of Bush and his domestic surveillance, has UNDONE the Constitution of the United States. That is an aside to this note, though.
Palin, has her own set of history that mucks the line of church and state: most obviously, her proposals to put in to law the teaching of Creationism. Many might not know this, but, Creationism, as it is being proposed, is a staunchly Christian ideal. It does not include the over 35 creation stories of native american people, nor does it address Asian ideas or classical concepts of creation. NOr should it. Yet, as all creation stories are based on FAITH and not FACT, not TESTABLE and tangible models, they should not be included as a substitute or outright replacement of scientifically proven models. If Palin, or anyone else wants creation stories taught in school, they should propose a new curriculum, under history or philosophy (NOT SCIENCE) and should include many creation stories as to propose just ONE... is not separation of church and state. Strictly Christian ideas should not bound in public education.
4) Censorship... McCain has no claim here, yet Palin has, as governor outright BANNED books from public libraries.
5) Though I am someone who strongly disagrees with abortion under MOST circumstances and thinks the emphasis on reducing abortion needs to take precedent over taking away women's autonomy of choice, I can, then, only call myself Pro-Choice, though that definition isn't fully worn by me and comes with many wishes that we lived in a utopia world that wouldn't require it. tbc
|
|
Posted by KateTheShrewd
on 2008-09-04 10:38:11
|
|
|
|
My computer ran into some technical difficulties... to be continued.
5) cont....
Palin proposes laws that will abolish a woman's right to choice save for one narrow circumstance--should the mother's health be at jeopardy. Under most cases, abortion sickens me. I do not think it should be used as contraception and a cure for a night of "ut oh". Yet, there are unfortunate circumstances such as violent rape (any rape for that matter) or incest where a mother should have the RIGHT TO CHOSE what is best for her, under these circumstances. Not many women can conceive of a pregnancy by incest that is mandated to go full-term. ICK! on so so so many levels. I won't go in to my biologically-based ideas of when an abortion if not OK, is at least stomachable (if it isn't used as contraception), yet, to take away a woman's right to chose in those two other crucial areas is WRONG!
My position on this does not come from religion, as Palin will admit hers does, thus coupling another instance where she is unwilling to separate church from her state policies... it does, however, come from some ethical common sense... some moral premise that a woman should not be forced to carry her father's (or uncles, or brothers) baby. Palin would disagree with me (and the majority of women of this country, for that matter) here: her influence as VP on the US Supreme Court on this matter, frightening.
If anything, if Roe V. Wade should be overturned, it should be thrown back to the STATES to decide... not warped and relegislated to have the federal government abolish freedom of choice.
When it comes to matters of experience, it is no argument that Palin has more executive experience than Obama, Biden AND... yes, AND John McCain. She was Mayor. She was governor. I do not need to point this to undermine my other, more foundational disagreements with her.
I watched as the GOP did a brilliant job last night rallying the base (the purpose of the convention), taking shots at their opponents (well done!) and getting their base excited about Palin. They succeeded where they aimed. But, unless McCain himself lays clear, a plan for what he'll do with America, that brilliant speech of Palin's will become nothing but SNARK and condescension and right-flung-rhetoric if not some blatantly disingenuous statements of their opponents. Some real issues will need to be addressed. The majority of citizens of this country fall within a dying and evermore failing middle class. A middle class, the Bush adminstration has done little to help and much to hurt. If McCain can't separate himself from Bush, the GOP will not win moderates and will lose the Independent vote.
Yes, as it were, I am not up for grabs here. I have made that clear. My support of the Republican party of which I was affiliated for 10 years, has all but petered to an end. They no longer look like me. They don't put forth policies that represent me. They don't even look conservative anymore with the massive superfluous spending they've done. But, my husband is up for grabs as are so many others. We want to hear about CHANGE... not snarks. We want policies laid forth. Not merely slamming the efforts of the opponent; at least they've put forth ideas.
In any case, it is an exciting political season. I'm proud to see American come this far!
|
|
Posted by KateTheShrewd
on 2008-09-04 10:54:05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email This to a Friend 
