Sunday, August 31, 2008

Vice President Sarah Palin? I like It!


WOW! John McCain made a stunningly brilliant choice for Vice President! Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska is a great choice, I couldn't possibly be more pleased! [And regular readers know I was expecting the worst.]

Now I was unable to prepare this entry moments after her announcement as I would have liked to do. Travel and computer difficulties prevented me from making this entry in a timely manner. But if I had, I was going to predict, exactly as I had done for Senator Biden before, that she was in for one bumpy ride. The attacks would come immediately. Of course, had I been on line and made that rather obvious prediction, I would have been quite right.

Still, I am so disgusted by the personal and totally bogus attacks from the left that I am simply heartsick. Why do so many bloggers and television and radio advocates feel they must absolutely destroy and totally demonize any opponent on a personal and human level? Trust me, if John McCain had chosen Barack Obama's identical twin, the attacks would be a ferocious, as hateful, as unfair and as meaningless.

But the Democrats and many of the left leaning commentators have really missed the boat on the Palin nomination. They are underestimating her talent, her ability and her
appeal. This is a game changer, not because she is a women, not because of Hillary voters, and not because she is young, but because she is Sarah Louise Heath Palin, one of the best, brightest, most honest and most honorable public servants in office today. She is the real deal.

At a time when 95% of politicians are plastic, poll driven and expertly manicured by teams of advisers, she's the real deal, a woman charts her own course. In that way she is much like John McCain. She is his perfect Vice Presidential choice.

And she is a powerhouse! Those waiting for Senator Joe Biden to blow her away in the debate are in for a real shock. And I'm a Joe Biden fan.

Now liberals and Democrats don't need to support her. We don't have to agree with her positions on choice or guns or marriage or oil drilling or hunting or much of anything else. But we really should respect her.


Why shouldn't we cheer when a great candidate is nominated?

We ought to debate issues and positions and even qualifications (although in my opinion Palin is
more qualified to be President than Barack Obama). Alas, I'm afraid this type of substantive debate really isn't going to happen.

But I do wish Democrats, progressives and liberals would follow the sound advice of K McKiernan blogging over at The Ikonoclast in her
Letter To Democrats Who Want to Win in November:

With the latest news that Sarah Palin is John McCain's running mate, we have to tread very carefully or we will lose...not just lose, but lose soundly. We will not just lose the election, but we will lose the gains we have made for women and men who support women and their rights.

It will become far too easy to try to attack Palin for being "inexperienced" or "only chosen because she is a woman." We cannot win (the election or the larger goal of equality) if we try to tear her down through gendered stereotypes and constructions. Already I have heard (and the news is only 2 hours old), from Democrats, "How could he pick someone so inexperienced?" Well, we say Obama has enough, right? Well, Palin has governed and run a state. She has enough.

I have already heard from a Democrat that "she has 5 children, one with special needs, so why is she not at home with that 4 month old child?" We, as Democrats, do not want to win by becoming archaic, fundamentalist and sexist. We will push those who already feel slighted by the loss of Hillary Clinton further into the McCain camp. And in the long run, we will devastate what we have fought for with regards to women and equality.

3 comments:

Vigilante said...

Wizard, the greater part of your shrill attack on Democrats is at straw horses, and I think McKiernan has already made all of your major points.

This is the one issue with you I would raise, as I have before: You say,

Why shouldn't we cheer when a great candidate is nominated?

This is a statement I would expect from some one who sees himself primarily as a spectator (speculator) of politics; some one who sees politics merely as sport or game; someone who, like most of the MSM, delights in the closeness of his game. You never seem to think about what's good for the country or yourself! (There are 674 words in your column and not one of them addresses her positions, or your feelings about them.) You do not seem to think of yourself as a stakeholder in the outcome, in terms of your own values.

You constantly write as if the only stake you have is in the enjoyment of the game and its drama. You are not alone. But I am a disappointed reader.

K McKiernan said...

I linked to your "more prepared" than Obama. One thing is... the source is a very extreme conservative source, which makes me question it immediately.

Still, the point I most value here is the concept of governing... Obama has great ideas to govern, but has not done so yet. She has, yet she is being crucified as not being experienced.

Its funny... Hillary was more experienced and prepared than Obama, and people said that did not matter to them. But now, the perception of lack of experience (which is very sexist driven)is becoming the only talking point.

There are many talking points. Her stances on issues are not good for us. Let's all talk about that.

guzide said...

Estetik

araç kiralama

rent a car

oto kiralama
tabldot yemek

yazgulu

yazgulu
rent a car
diyet
sohbet
yazgulu sohbet
şiirler
yazgulu
chat
burun estetiği
yüz estetiği
minibüs kiralama
araç kiralama
web tasarımı
hosting
oyun
estetik
Saç ekimi

oto kiralama
burun estetiği
Saç ekimi

toplu yemek
smartlipo
Lazerlipoliz
Smartlipo
slimlipo
koçluk
tabldot yemek
tabldot yemek
toplu yemek
web tasarımı
hosting