Thought to continue on this side of Labor Pains Weekend…
Now that a lot of vitriol, misdirection, shock, and awe are out of the way, are we any closer to understanding who she is and what her V/presidency would entail?
[ul]
[li]Troopergate[/li][li]Forget the Alamo (I’m birthing in Alaska!)[/li][li]Alaska Firsters [/li][li]No SexEd for you! [/li][li]My experience is bigger than your experience (and what the hell is experience anyway)[/li][li]I’m on a bridge to nowhere (come on inside, takin’ that ride…)[/li][li]Vetted or not – seems vetbridge has some ‘splainin to do![/li][li]Is she really Rove’s New Coke?[/li][/ul]
She’s still the same unqualified, anti-choice, Creationist, ethically suspect, anti-American separatist, natally irresponsible Caribou Barbie doll she was in the weekend thread.
She’s also a pro-lifer who repeatedly gambled with the life of her youngest child when she was eight months pregnant with him.
And she’s a pro-family politician who, in order to quash the ‘babygate’ rumors, revealed her teen daughter’s pregnancy, rather than revealing her own medical records.
(At this point, the ‘babygate’ allegation that Trig was really Bristol’s kid, and Gov. Palin was covering up for that, is the most charitable interpretation I can think of.)
Plain and simple if McCain wins and the unthinkable happens 2 months after he is sworn in - we will have a complete unknown as our POTUS. That is a gamble this country cannot afford to take. Period.
I believe she is a fully-vetted sacrificial lamb being used to show that the Democrats aren’t really for women’s rights. They already have the smirky attack ads ready for when she steps down in tears-“We tried to put a woman in the White House, but those hypocritical Demos persecuted her!” Romney, or someone like him, is already waiting in the wings.
I’m beginning to wonder just who all turned him down. Romney, Lieberman, Huckabee… all granted, but how far down the list did he get before he came to her? My guess is he just started calling Republican governors alphabetically by state, Alabama’s Bob Riley (who actually would have been a good choice- like McCain he’s a rep for stepping across partisan lines and even has a decent approval rating from democrats) was in the bathroom, so he just went on down to Alaska.
I still predict that Palin will soon give a schmaltz “As much as I love my country, my family needs me more” speech and withdraw within the next few days (at which point McCain’s keepers will tell her in which abandoned mansion her children are being held) and the replacement choice will be someone who makes sense. Palin will never be spoken of again by McCain.
I can’t see Leno, Letterman or SNL out here, so I don’t know if they’ve started jokes along this line yet, but I could easily see a jocular theme developing that rhymes with “Might Clash”. Sorry if it’s offensive, but I don’t know of another term that quite captures that particular vibe someone gives off, you know?
I just don’t think that a realistic possibility is changing the vice presidential candidate. That’s simply not happening. It’d be suicide as far as this campaign goes.
McCain still wanted Lieberman or Ridge as lates as the middle of last week.
He punked out on choosing who he really wanted because the fundy children in his party would have thrown a temper tantrum. He passed over Romney and Pawlenty because he thought they’d be too boring, and he went with Palin, who was vetted with a Google search and hired a few minutes after he met her.
The VP choices in this election show about as stark a difference in judgement and priority as you could possibly see.
“Punked out,” “children,” and “temper tantrum” aren’t really fair. Whether or not you agree with their positions, the base of the Republican party has strong, clear convictions on certain issues, and spurning these—maverick or not—would likely so alienate a large enough segment of the base to cost the election. You may have preferred that outcome, but McCain’s trying to avoid it was not unwarranted.
Consider, if Obama was considering someone who was pro-life, wouldn’t you expect one of his advisors to grab him by the lapels, shake him vigorously and ask “what the hell are you thinking”?
Not that Palin helps/hurts, just that he didn’t punk out, and the right wing wasn’t acting like a child throwing a temper tantrum. And, if the Times article is correct, it was foolish of McCain not to recognize the political implications of a pro-choice candidate or the expediency of choosing an outsider much earlier (to get the vetting process going much sooner).
It’s funny, but I remember Rush or Sean (probably both) in the week leading up to Obama’s VP announcement declaring that his obvious milking effort was actually the product of an “inability to make a decision.” How are they treating the Times article?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCpCAcyJGDI Heres a utube giving the rundown. She is a problem. She does galvanize the radical righties though. It was a political calculation that McCain made to give him a chance to win over the anti abortion and fundie crowd. It seems to have worked.
Today Lieberman speaks at the convention. He has to go along with the choice. Who do you think he believes was better qualified, he or Palin. He has to bite the bullet.
Like Tim Kaine, you mean? He was on the shortlist to the very end.
I think the Democrats would tolerate a pro-lifer who otherwise brought a lot to the table. Not so for the Republicans. They’ll put a few in the Senate, but on a national ticket it just isn’t going to happen.