I am asked:
So is there even a half hearted attempt to make a fair evaluation of Sarah Palin or are you just going to be her booster come hell or high water?
My response … not really … or at least I think in the torrid political clime it is next to impossible to make a “fair” evaluation of Mrs Palin … and I will in fact continue to be “her booster” come hell and high water, for the same reason my left-leaning democratic interlocutors will stick with Mr Obama come “hell or high water.” [aside to the Obama supporters reading this: To that notion, what at this juncture could Mr Obama do or say which would lose him your support? If nothing ... why criticize My "boosterism" of Mrs Palin?]
While my political notions don’t match up exactly (or even very well) with the GOP, they surely match up far less well with the Democrats. For one such as that, no matter which side you’re on, the election is over. The election for those who are in stark disagreement with the other party, i.e., the “non-uncommitted”, is called “the primary.” The primary is over. There is little left to be said.
However, a few personal thoughts of mine on Mrs Palin might be not untoward:
- Mrs Palin is running as a VP running mate. She is highly unlikely to be stepping into the Presidency in the next four years (we’ve had 43 Presidents and how many VPs stepped in … 3? or was it 4? How many of those made a darn bit of difference in what was left of there term, I make that as exactly one (Mr Truman).
- That being said, my Democratic interlocutors make the claim that Mrs Palin is being sold as non-exceptional. I haven’t seen that, except from those remarking on her from the left. From what I understand her rise in state politics has been largely driven by rising in the froth of a fight against state corruption. We could certainly use some more of that.
- Much has been made of her lack of an “academic” and (for the remarks) lack of a “political” interest mostly prior to her gubenatorial post. Her non-attentiveness after becoming governor I understand is largely because she’s focused entirely on learning the ropes of the Executive office (which it might be repeated, experience Mr Obama and Mr Biden and for that matter Mr McCain all lack). Again, given the former “bullet-point”, that is not unsurprising. She has bluish collar background and within that context seems exceptional, and I am not enough of an intellectual elitist to require intellectual elitism of the politicians I support.
- As for Academic credentials being a qualifier for Executive office, it might very well be argued looking at the example of Kings and Emperors from Rome (both sides), and England that academic leanings make for a poorer not a better Executive.
- Finally, she has, apparently, a similar talent to Mr Obama in that she has the makings of a demagogue. Good public speaking and being telegenic is a talent with which she is gifted. Bob Dole, for example had the reverse. Apparently in private company, Mr Dole is a very friendly very funny engaging guy. That never came across his in public speaking. In the fifth grade, I resolved that Mr King Jr and Mr Hitler shared the property of being demagogues and decided that demagoguery itself is a publican’s vice and I would never support it. I still remain resolved never to vote for a demagogue, as their ability to inspire men to stop thinking and vote purely on emotions evoked is something which we need less of in the public square. I remain committed to that resolution these many decades later.
Mrs Palin is running as a VP running mate. She is highly unlikely to be stepping into the Presidency in the next four years (we’ve had 43 Presidents and how many VPs stepped in … 3?
I believe the actuerial tables tell us that a man of McCain’s age has a 10% chance of death before swearing in, 40% before 4 years. Unlikely to step in maybe but highly is not.
From what I understand her rise in state politics has been largely driven by rising in the froth of a fight against state corruption.
You seem to be making quite an effort NOT to understand. If I didn’t know better you are constructing a case of plausible deniability.
She has bluish collar background and within that context seems exceptional, and I am not enough of an intellectual elitist to require intellectual elitism of the politicians I support.
So this is an exercise in class warfare? She’s blue collar (although I don’t know what makes her blue colar) so it doesn’t matter what she knows or doesn’t know? Is this how you think blue collar people think? “I’m a carpenter but heh I can’t hammer a nail…let’s have a beer!” I think real blue collars can make due without your charity in the name of anti-intellectual elitism.
still remain resolved never to vote for a demagogue, as their ability to inspire men to stop thinking and vote purely on emotions evoked is something which we need less of in the public square. I remain committed to that resolution these many decades later.
It sounds like that is exactly what you’ve done with Mrs. Palin. YOu’ve stopped thinking and are voting purely on emotions (or at least supporting her on emotions, you can say you’ll vote for McCain but still think he made a bad choice for running mate).
She didn’t have time to read the newspaper or at least the relevant clippings to stay abreast of what was going on in the world outside Alaska? Never went online to read up in detail on the war her son was going to join?
Why is it that you and I know more about this stuff than she does? Don’t you think it’s INSANE to install someone like that in the office of Backup President?
You tell me there’s “only” a 8% chance or so she’d actually become president if her ticket wins. We’re supposed to expose the country to that risk? We need serious people who know what the hell they’re talking about. We don’t need someone with “executive experience” and no domain knowledge, we need someone who will be able to sort the wheat from the chaff in the torrent of advice they will be getting from their advisers.
This whole “executive experience” canard is BS. What was Kennedy’s? How did it help Bush? By the GOP’s logic, someone who’s managed a 7-11 for five years has more relevant experience to be president than McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden combined. It’s the same thing you always do, find some characteristic that is different, no matter how insignificant, and insist it changes everything.
Maybe a year stint as governor could be enough to be President if it was backed up by a serious record of engagement with ideas or at least the issues. Maybe….
But that doesn’t alter the fact that McCain made experience the selling point for his ‘brand’ only to put someone on the ticket that is the very opposite of experience. It’s like a restaurant making a big deal about being a family place suddenly announcing they were still a family place but were going to have the waitreses dress up in skimpy outfits ala Hooters. I’d say that such an outfit was having trouble thinking and communicating coherently and that is an issue not for Palin but for McCain.
Since you don’t read Sullivan you may want to make yourself the Anchorage Daily News’s summation of the Troopergate results:
The only real item of substance you posted in Palin’s defense was that she was a reformer who took on a corrupt system. That her rise supposedly was driven by “a fight against state corruption”. Yet this case demonstrates a gleeful willingness to use state office to persecute personal vendettas as well as a callous disregard for the ‘little people’ whose jobs were threatened even as they desperatly tried to counsel their governor against such meddling. Combine this with the deception and lies about the bridge to nowhere and there’s not much left to the only real point of substance you have in Palin’s favor.
Boonton,
“A man of McCain’s Age”, it seems one can zero in a little more carefully on a personal history before we note that. McCain is in good health, last summer walked in and out of the Grand Canyon with his son, I recall. He’s unlikely to have a smoking or drinking problem. I’d put it as unlikely.
I have not seen any other narrative to describe her gubernatorial run from her post at the board. Oddly enough, while dismissing it you provide no alternative … likely because there isn’t one.
No the reference to blue collar was more to note that I have a number of blue-collar in-laws, often work with them at my job, and I find the lack of academic interest not important. As i noted above, the mediocre claim is yours and the lefts. It is not one that is repeated outside of that context. I have no idea why you bring it up.
No, I’m not voting on emotion. I’m voting in fact primarily against the horde of small “c” communists, progressives and worse getting the thousands of patronage jobs “running” Washington.
What I am saying with that remark, is that if she really does become a demagogue, like Mr Obama, she won’t have my vote in the primary. In the general election … we shall see, but that will be a major strike against her.
JA,
You need to get to know me better. From 1980 to 1990 I read nothing but the comics in the newspapers and watched almost zero television [note: I forgot ... I also read Mike Royko's column in the Trib, which was funny if political.] After the 2nd Reagan election, on a whim, I decided to avidly read and attempt to believe everything I read on alt.conspiracy (this was before browsers). I’m assuming you know what newsgroups were. I was the guy who thought the best reaction to the South Africa “divest now” movement regarding U of Chicago investments was to stencil a “Divest Now” t-shirt with “Take off your Clothes” on the back as a punch line.
I’m only reading and following politics today to the degree that I am because of my exegesis of Jesus command to “render unto Caesar” and my interpretation of what that implies to a member of a Democracy, i.e., my participation is the chief coin I owe. I hadn’t had a conversion to Christianity 4 1/2 years ago, I’d likely be doodling with mathematics with my time instead of blogging.
No, I’m telling you that (regarding the chance she’d take office), that there’s only a 2% chance that it will matter. Of the 43 Presidents only 1 has mattered in taking office, that being Mr Truman. Is there another?
What experience did Kennedy have? Well, he did swimmingly in the Bay of Pigs and the Missile Crises and getting us neck deep in Vietnam … oh, I forgot what was your point? Are you claiming Mr Kennedy was one of the great Executives leading our nation?
Actually, I’d be interested in hearing why you think Joe Biden is such a wonderful choice, he of the zillion stupid ideas, the guy who decided Anita Hill would a good idea in the Thomas confirmation, the guy who can’t get more than 3% of the Democratic vote in the Democratic primary, who in this election campaign has entirely vanished.
Re Biden:
There’s a difference between someone being not in your top ten picks for pres and someone being too ignorant to hold the office.
Mark
1. McCain for all his good health and potentially good genes (on his mother’s side let’s hope) is nevertheless very old. A life insurance company would still charge a pretty premium to insure him for the next 4 years as should the voters. More to the point, the primary duty of the vp is to be able to step into the role of p at any time. This doesn’t mean that the vp needs to be as notable as the top of the ticket, but it does require someone that we can be comfortable with holding the job. I’ve yet to see a real good reason from you why Palin is ok to be President. Yes she ran against corruption, big deal. As if there are people who run for high office on a platform for corruption! Evidence is she was corrupt during her brief time in office and that she has lied about her record since.
2. I feel you’re trying to play games here with lack of knowledge by pretending we are talking about a ‘lack of academic interest’. Palin has two problems. First is a lack of basic knowledge. She has contradicted her bosses foreign policy, has flubbed key facts and other errors that reveal she doesn’t understand the issues. Granted this alone could be corrected with ‘cramming’ as well as quality advisors. But she also lacks thinking ability. The ability to see how different ideas interact with each, reinforce or contradict each other, and so on. I think her response to questions about Roe and the SC illustrate both problems. Many non-lawyers would have trouble citing cases by name, but we are also talking about the whole philosophy of the debates over the SC. She casually said yes to a right to privacy being in the Constitution and it didn’t even seem to register that a right to privacy is probably the cornerstone of the Roe decision, which she disagrees with. It doesn’t even register to her that for her to reject Roe as bad law but accept a right to privacy she must craft an idea that navigates around many conservatives who reject constitutional privacy but still end up against Roe.
No, I’m not voting on emotion. I’m voting in fact primarily against the horde of small “c” communists, progressives and worse getting the thousands of patronage jobs “running” Washington.
Yes, it would be really bad for there to be like a horrible natural diaster and discover FEMA was run by a political hack or that NASA’s PR dept was being run by a nutcase college drop out with a fake resume.