Sarah Palin selected by McCain for VP slot

[Vespasiano 0]

If I were a Democrat, I'd be very, VERY afraid of Sarah Palin.

As an American, I'm very, VERY afraid of Sarah Palin and what her wing of the GOP would do if left to their own devices. That's not the wing of the GOP that we need in power. From my experience, the moderate Republicans (who join the party because of its traditional economic positions) tend to be the most productive and least offensive politicians. Jim Edgar of Illinois comes to mind. A popular governor who kept government spending down, he had serious national political aspirations before health issues forced him to step down after 8 years (he was once rumored as a possible running mate for Bush I). The GOP considered "drafting" him back in 2004 when the original GOP nominee dropped out, but he turned it down. He was about the only candidate who could have (and probably would have) beaten Obama. On fiscal issues, he matched up quite nicely to Palin (and for two full terms, no less). At the same time, he was pro-choice. He was religious in his personal life, but kept it to himself and never campaigned on it.

But this is a quite different issue from the one I raised in my brief post. Now that you have raised it, I will say that with all her shortcomings (and I clearly agree she has them), Sarah Palin is superior to either of her Democrat opponents.

[ewv 0]

If I were a Democrat, I'd be very, VERY afraid of Sarah Palin.

As an American, I'm very, VERY afraid of Sarah Palin and what her wing of the GOP would do if left to their own devices...

But this is a quite different issue from the one I raised in my brief post. Now that you have raised it, I will say that with all her shortcomings (and I clearly agree she has them), Sarah Palin is superior to either of her Democrat opponents.

And superior to McCain. There has been no indication that Sarah Palin has any desire to impose "theocracy" on the country. If in particular anyone did try to force parents to have children with Down Syndrome or force schools to teach creationism as science it would blow up in their faces and bring the kind of public scrutiny to those issues the advocates would not like or survive. There are no ideal candidates and one must always be wary, but Obama and Biden are the ones to be frightened of in this election.

[Jack Wakeland 0]

What do people think? Does that improve the McCain ticket? She seems to be an anti-abortion, creationist wacko. The other tidbits I was able to find are rather good. She's easier on the eye than any other politician I can recall....

Vice presidents usually get the first shot at running for president after their boss's term of office is up. This gives them an unusual oportunity to influence the ideological course of their party. In the case of Sarah Palin, McCain's choice has given her a radical political promotion from Governor of a state removed from the awareness of most Americans to (litterally) center stage.

One other interesting thing about the importance of John McCain's V.P. choice was brought up by one blogger (who's name escapes me). Being one heartbeat away from the presidency bears a special relevence when the president is a 72-year-old man. According to this blogger, the actuarial data on a 72-year-old man is that he has a 10% chance of dying in his first term in office; a 27% chance in is second.

It has occured to some enthusiasts of Sarah Palin that "one heartbeat away" should be a T-shirt.

[Free Capitalist 0]

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

KPO'M, do you realize how long a list you could write about just about anybody? Don't you think that nothing less than a book would do for McCain? What about Obama's cemetary of skeletons? The article author you mentioned piles on Palin's dislike of a city librarian, while Obama has one of the most left-wing voting records in the whole country? Is this all that's wrong with her? She disliked a school librarian and fired a police chief? When you put that letter in context, it sounds almost like wishful thinking, though when looked abstractly by itself it does make her look iffy, sure.

I draw your attention to some of the comments which seem to have mentioned off-handedly -- sure she raised the city's spending, but when financial windfall came from today's oil prices, she wanted to spread that money to everybody in the city. This is a creationist lady who has made absolutely no issue of creationism in all of her years in office; a pro-life lady who has had that play only in her own life and not in anybody else's. Isn't this almost too good to be true? I keep expecting that we find some real faults in this lady because she can't be as good as it for now appears.

[KPO'M 0]

But this is a quite different issue from the one I raised in my brief post. Now that you have raised it, I will say that with all her shortcomings (and I clearly agree she has them), Sarah Palin is superior to either of her Democrat opponents.

But here's the point everyone's missing. When Democrats have "full" control over the legislative and executive branches, they fight and bicker amongst themselves. Carter got nothing done with a Democratic Congress. Clinton fell flat on his face and wasn't re-energized until forced to work with a GOP congress. Here in Illinois, the Democrats hold every statewide elective office, and the divisions couldn't be starker. Pelosi and Reid have no idea what's coming to them if Obama is elected, no idea at all. The unofficial motto of Illinois politics is "Ubi est mea." If Obama is anything like his mentor, State Senate President Emil Jones, or Richard Daley, or any host of politicians (Democratic or Republican), he'll be less concerned with ideology and more with passing around the pork. Yes, we'll endure 4 or 8 years of patronage hires, but at least Obama's kids won't be old enough to take his place when he's done (the worse excess of Illinois politics), and it may likely divide the Democratic party, as well, creating the ideal scenario of extremists on the left and right being purged from both parties. Witness how Obama nearly managed to sear the party apart merely through his nomination.

As for McCain, listen to his intro. Also witness the mindless "USA" chants (though his recovery from the heckler was pretty witty - assuming it wasn't staged). Put your country before yourself (translation - my country, it must be right). In my worldview, our country exists to serve us. My country, as long as it is right.

[KPO'M 0]

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

KPO'M, do you realize how long a list you could write about just about anybody? Don't you think that nothing less than a book would do for McCain? What about Obama's cemetary of skeletons? The article author you mentioned piles on Palin's dislike of a city librarian, while Obama has one of the most left-wing voting records in the whole country? Is this all that's wrong with her? She disliked a school librarian and fired a police chief? When you put that letter in context, it sounds almost like wishful thinking, though when looked abstractly by itself it does make her look iffy, sure.

FC, Palin's opposition to a librarian on political grounds is evidence of how petty SHE is, not her critics. Most people couldn't care less what political party the local librarian is, so long as he or she is competent. Palin wanted to fire her because she wouldn't pull some books she wanted banned. That's NOT someone I want in line to be elected to the presidency in 2016 (or coming to it sooner through other means).

As I pointed out, a lot of what Ms. Kilkenny views as negative about Palin I actually view as partially redeeming qualities (she's but a faux enviro). Something to consider, though, is that Palin has been governor for 2 years, and small town mayor for 8 years before that. The "laundry list" for her mayorship should be a few zoning requests she turned down.

[styg50 0]

Here's some more info on Palin. Some positive, some negative. I and a lot of people here are likely to view some of the "positives" and "negatives" in a different light than how the author intended it:

....

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

....

I would suggest that anyone interested in the nature of this letter do just as Anne suggests and Google her name. The letter is little more than second-handed gossip, and carries very little value, except perhaps to prompt an unnecessary course of discovery.

No offense, KPO'M, but letters like this go to Objectivist Forums to die...

[KPO'M 0]

I would suggest that anyone interested in the nature of this letter do just as Anne suggests and Google her name. The letter is little more than second-handed gossip, and carries very little value, except perhaps to prompt an unnecessary course of discovery.

No offense, KPO'M, but letters like this go to Objectivist Forums to die...

Not really. Palin hasn't disputed any of the facts. It's all over the Politico, so it is getting noticed.

[KPO'M 0]

One other interesting thing about the importance of John McCain's V.P. choice was brought up by one blogger (who's name escapes me). Being one heartbeat away from the presidency bears a special relevence when the president is a 72-year-old man. According to this blogger, the actuarial data on a 72-year-old man is that he has a 10% chance of dying in his first term in office; a 27% chance in is second.

It has occured to some enthusiasts of Sarah Palin that "one heartbeat away" should be a T-shirt.

To be fair, with Obama, there's the risk that some deranged nut will make a martyr of him and stick us with President Biden. Think JFK and LBJ. JFK might have been an obscure one-termer. Instead, LBJ got free rein and messed things up royally.

[Genius Aspirant 0]

It is tragic that some of her values are seriously wrong, but given that she seems to be such a valuer, the odds are they are innocent errors of knowledge.

Which values are you thinking of, and do you think she will change?

[Betsy Speicher 0]

It is tragic that some of her values are seriously wrong, but given that she seems to be such a valuer, the odds are they are innocent errors of knowledge.

Which values are you thinking of, and do you think she will change?

I was thinking of the fact that she hasn't distinguished between an actual life and a potential life. As a result, she gave birth to a Down's Syndrome child and encouraged her daughter to marry and bear a child at a very young age.

She may learn, at some future time, to make the distinction, but it would be too late to undo the consequences.

[KPO'M 0]

Regardless of who becomes President, Sarah Palin is the winner of this election season.

No, the real winner is Levi Johnston. He gets an audience with the potential next president of the United States and national attention, all for getting his 17 year-old girlfriend pregnant.

A poster on the Politico brought up a good point. If Obama's daughter were 17, and a few months pregnant by her black boyfriend, whom Obama announced she would be marrying soon, do you think the GOP would be making the same gushing statements they are making about Bristol? Or would they be chalking it up as an example of "another thing wrong" with our inner cities and loss of "family values"?

[KPO'M 0]

In spite of their own flaws, the Republicans are finally making some very HARD-HITTING and UTTERLY VALID points:

GIULIANI:

Rudy Giuliani blasted Barack Obama Wednesday as “the least experienced candidate for president in at least 100 years” in the most biting speech so far delivered at the Republican National Convention...

portrayed Obama as an inexperienced, tax-happy, liberal whose presidency would threaten the very existence of the United States.

Giuliani mocked Obama’s record in the Illinois Senate, noting that he voted ‘present’ nearly 130 times.

“He couldn’t figure out whether to vote yes or no. It was too tough,” he said to laughter. “I didn’t know about this vote ‘present’ when I was mayor of New York City. Sarah Palin didn’t have this vote ‘present’ when she was mayor or governor.

“It doesn’t work in an executive job. The president of the United States is not good enough to be ‘present.’ You have to make big decisions.”

How many times do I need to point out the "present" thing is a red herring. Everyone votes "present" in the Illinois legislature because it's a common procedural tactic to continue debating. Given how close Tony Rezko is to so many Republicans in the Illinois general assembly and even former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, (not to mention former GOP governor George Ryan) the GOP would be wise not to mention Illinois corruption so much.

[KPO'M 0]

If a conservative candidate for president gave a speech from amidst a phony set of ancient temple columns, to announce that a light from the sky was going to strike you, you would vote for him, and the sea level would then cease to rise--would ANYONE doubt that he was a DANGEROUS MEGALOMANIAC?

If a LIBERAL candidate trotted out his pregnant 17 year-old and treated her boyfriend like some sort of celebrity, would ANYONE doubt that he was out of touch with reality?

[KPO'M 0]

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

Anne Kilkenny

August 31, 2008

To me, this is the key observation from Anne Kilkenny's letter. Is Palin little more than a "tax less now but still spend like a drunken sailor" Republican like the ones who have occupied Congress and the White House for the past 8 years? Saddling a town of 7,000 with $22 million in debt while claiming to "reduce taxes" is a bit disingenuous, particularly considering what it was used for. That's about $3,000 in future taxes per resident just to pay the principal.

[Free Capitalist 0]

A poster on the Politico brought up a good point. If Obama's daughter were 17, and a few months pregnant by her black boyfriend, whom Obama announced she would be marrying soon, do you think the GOP would be making the same gushing statements they are making about Bristol? Or would they be chalking it up as an example of "another thing wrong" with our inner cities and loss of "family values"?

Look, Politico began this season as a fairly balanced reporter of interesting information, but they are quickly tumbling down the Leftist path well-worn by MSNBC, and aren't even noticing it.

The facts are, the inner city is a deep mess and a travesty for American values, while the small town is exactly the place where American values are left in such strong force. Politico likes to continually drop context and compare the incommensurables; and if they are pointed out the facts they indignantly stub their toe at political incorrectness.

[Scott A. 0]

For those interested in polls, Rasmussen has one with some very interesting data regarding Palin here. The story was linked at Drudge. Here is some data and a few excerpts:

Favorable: 58% (40% very favorable; one point higher than both McCain and Obama)

Unfavorable: 37% (18% very unfavorable)

Before her acceptance speech, Palin was viewed favorably by 52%. A week ago, 67% had never heard of her.

There is a strong partisan gap when it comes to perceptions of Palin. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of Republicans give her favorable reviews along with 33% of Democrats and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party.

She earns positive reviews from 65% of men and 52% of women. [bold mine]

The Palin pick has also improved perceptions of John McCain. A week ago, just before he introduced his running mate, just 42% of Republicans had a Very Favorable opinion of their party’s nominee. That figure jumped to 54% by this Friday morning. Among unaffiliated voters, favorable opinions of McCain have increased by eleven percentage points in a week—from 54% before the Palin announcement to 65% today. [bold mine]

Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans say that McCain made the right choice while just 69% of Democrats said the same about Obama.

Among unaffiliated voters, 52% said that McCain made the right choice for his running mate and 45% said the same about Obama.

However, following the Wednesday night speech, voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether Palin or Obama has the better experience to be President. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin.

There was also a piece of data that supported my statement from an earlier post (if you'll excuse the presumption): "It seems that Palin is being almost universally embraced (not just accepted) by the core Conservative base for (many) of her stated beliefs and the story of her life. Conversely, she seems almost universally hated by the Left for the same reasons, which, in a way, further endears her to the Right."

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans believe that most reporters are trying to hurt Palin’s campaign, a fact that may enhance her own ratings.

If this data is an accurate measure of trends playing out generally, then it is stunning, and devastating to the Obama campaign.

[KPO'M 0]

The facts are, the inner city is a deep mess and a travesty for American values, while the small town is exactly the place where American values are left in such strong force. Politico likes to continually drop context and compare the incommensurables; and if they are pointed out the facts they indignantly stub their toe at political incorrectness.

I'm not sure what idyllic fantasy world you are imagining, but the reality is that the modern small farming town is held together by irrational government farm subsidies and is superficially friendly but largely intolerant. The "melting pot" that created the unique American identity worked its best in the big cities. Let me ask you this, do you agree with Palin's condescending use of the word "cosmopolitan"? It's in cosmopolitan cities like yours and mine where generations of immigrants (from the Irish and Italians in the 19th century to the Eastern European, Asian, and yes, African immigrants today) arrived here with nothing, toughed it out, and made better lives for themselves.

[KPO'M 0]

There was also a piece of data that supported my statement from an earlier post (if you'll excuse the presumption): "It seems that Palin is being almost universally embraced (not just accepted) by the core Conservative base for (many) of her stated beliefs and the story of her life. Conversely, she seems almost universally hated by the Left for the same reasons, which, in a way, further endears her to the Right."

Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans believe that most reporters are trying to hurt Palin’s campaign, a fact that may enhance her own ratings.

If this data is an accurate measure of trends playing out generally, then it is stunning, and devastating to the Obama campaign.

Perhaps, but it's also devastating to this country. If McCain wins, Palin is set to be his heir in 2016 (or sooner). If McCain loses, Palin may inherit the nomination in 2012, much the way Reagan did in 1980. Unlike Reagan, though, Palin wears her religion on her sleeve and harbors anti-city values, as expressed by her disdain for cosmopolitan cities. Palin doesn't seem to understand that you can admire small town values without insulting big cities. Reagan, who was governor of the most populous state, did just that.

The mistake the Democrats made was in releasing all this stuff before she gave her speech. The hypocrisy of the "family values" family with the pregnant teen would have been more powerful if they didn't have the chance to make Levi Johnston a household name and celebrity in his own right. It also gave them the opportunity to exploit Trig and pass him around like a prop on national TV.

[Free Capitalist 0]

The facts are, the inner city is a deep mess and a travesty for American values, while the small town is exactly the place where American values are left in such strong force. Politico likes to continually drop context and compare the incommensurables; and if they are pointed out the facts they indignantly stub their toe at political incorrectness.

I'm not sure what idyllic fantasy world you are imagining, but the reality is that the modern small farming town is held together by irrational government farm subsidies and is superficially friendly but largely intolerant. The "melting pot" that created the unique American identity worked its best in the big cities. Let me ask you this, do you agree with Palin's condescending use of the word "cosmopolitan"? It's in cosmopolitan cities like yours and mine where generations of immigrants (from the Irish and Italians in the 19th century to the Eastern European, Asian, and yes, African immigrants today) arrived here with nothing, toughed it out, and made better lives for themselves.

The principle of America is not some disembodied "toughing it out". The principle of America, or at least how the Founding Fathers embodied it, was virtue and republicanism, to which 'toughing it out' is only an optional ancillary selectively applicable to small portions of the country. What makes the 19th century melting pot so admirable is not how New York streets were filled with Irish gangs and hoodlums, but with what strength and ferocity mainstream America imposed, indeed forced, American values down these throats. These American values cannot come from the melting pot, because the pot is where those values come under constant danger, and are imposed on the new-coming population in a semi-hostile environment. The origin and birthplace of these values then must be somewhere else, somewhere safe where these values are cherished and nourished from birth. That's why Jefferson knew that the small-town is where his virtuous Americans were to be born, and why people are crying out that they are a nation of Massillas, rather than a nation of Chicagos.

[KPO'M 0]

That's why Jefferson knew that the small-town is where his virtuous Americans were to be born, and why people are crying out that they are a nation of Massillas, rather than a nation of Chicagos.

Close to the sod and close to god. Jefferson was a man of many contradictions. Those same fields were also the last vestiges of slavery (the absolute worst act of collectivism ever imposed by people in this country), and today are the vestige of a massive expropriation of wealth. It's not the Chicagos of the country clamoring for mandatory ethanol production. We've been forced to use the garbage for 25 years as a sop to farmers occupying the "virtuous" farming towns across rural Americana. It's not the Chicagos who take massive amounts of tax dollars out of Washington. It's Chicago and other big cities who send our wealth to Washington so it can be distributed to all of the Wasillas looking to build their bridges to nowhere while our infrastructure here crumbles (or our local taxes rise to oppressive levels).

The very idea of the melting pot is that every culture is absorbed into it, but also changes it. It could not exist if the US had remained a homogeneous land of English refugees (which is what it started out as). Republicanism (with a small r) in itself isn't uniquely American, and isn't what defines American culture. The Wasillas don't have a monopoly on American virtue (assuming they are virtuous).

[Free Capitalist 0]

Close to the sod and close to god. Jefferson was a man of many contradictions. Those same fields were also the last vestiges of slavery (the absolute worst act of collectivism ever imposed by people in this country), and today are the vestige of a massive expropriation of wealth. It's not the Chicagos of the country clamoring for mandatory ethanol production. We've been forced to use the garbage for 25 years as a sop to farmers occupying the "virtuous" farming towns across rural Americana. It's not the Chicagos who take massive amounts of tax dollars out of Washington. It's Chicago and other big cities who send our wealth to Washington so it can be distributed to all of the Wasillas looking to build their bridges to nowhere while our infrastructure here crumbles (or our local taxes rise to oppressive levels).

Let me close this little aside between us by saying that I don't hold up Tennessee as a model for anything, while Texas has the virtuous gun-toting population and a billion-dollar economy second only to California. Ask any tech person, Austin, TX is the next most lucrative computer field after Silicon Valley, and in some ways more lucrative. Your dichotomy of North Eastern cities as feeding the rest of the country doesn't hold. North Eastern demographics are shrinking catastrophically and NYC has 0 growth, while that same Austin was at 8% tech growth and at 22% population growth. During the 19th century it was a place where people clung to slavery. This is the 21st century, and their great-grandsons are the last bastions of patriotism (while the old greats like NYC are slowly dying out, and Detroit has already become dead).

[KPO'M 0]

Let me close this little aside between us by saying that I don't hold up Tennessee as a model for anything, while Texas has the virtuous gun-toting population and a billion-dollar economy second only to California. Ask any tech person, Austin, TX is the next most lucrative computer field after Silicon Valley, and in some ways more lucrative. Your dichotomy of North Eastern cities as feeding the rest of the country doesn't hold. North Eastern demographics are shrinking catastrophically and NYC has 0 growth, while that same Austin was at 8% tech growth and at 22% population growth. During the 19th century it was a place where people clung to slavery. This is the 21st century, and their great-grandsons are the last bastions of patriotism (while the old greats like NYC are slowly dying out, and Detroit has already become dead).

Where did I say northeastern cities subsidize the rest of the country? I said big cities subsidize small towns. (Since when is Chicago a "northeastern" city, anyway? And no, it is nowhere near dying. It's actually very dynamic, thank you, and still expanding as a metropolitan area). Look at a "red/blue" map more closely, on a county-by-county and district-by-district level and you'll see that urban areas (which are more Democratic) subsidize rural areas (which are more Republican). Funny how you mention Austin. It's a liberal haven. Keep Austin Weird is a local slogan. Also consider California. It's about as blue a state as possible, and, again, LA, San Francisco/Silicon Valley, and San Diego subsidize the rest of the state (which is more red).

[Carlos 0]

The facts are, the inner city is a deep mess and a travesty for American values, while the small town is exactly the place where American values are left in such strong force. Politico likes to continually drop context and compare the incommensurables; and if they are pointed out the facts they indignantly stub their toe at political incorrectness.

I'm not sure what idyllic fantasy world you are imagining, but the reality is that the modern small farming town is held together by irrational government farm subsidies and is superficially friendly but largely intolerant. The "melting pot" that created the unique American identity worked its best in the big cities. Let me ask you this, do you agree with Palin's condescending use of the word "cosmopolitan"? It's in cosmopolitan cities like yours and mine where generations of immigrants (from the Irish and Italians in the 19th century to the Eastern European, Asian, and yes, African immigrants today) arrived here with nothing, toughed it out, and made better lives for themselves.

The small farming town I'm from is overrun with meth-heads, one of whom regularly threatened my father and brother while existing in immunity because he sold drugs to police officers...

Virtually every farm town I've seen in Texas is in a state of gradual collapse, financially, culturally, and often morally.

[Carlos 0]

The south (and particularly the bible belt) also leads America in divorce rates. Most men I've observed in Texas, and especially for rural areas, get married mainly from the momentum of tradition (or they get their girlfriend pregnant, then get married when she should really get an abortion and break up with the guy). As a tentative theory, I think a large part of what makes romance largely a failure for couples in Texas is that men there are worse about introspecting or paying attention to their emotions (particularly with mushy gushy romantic ones), so they end up making very foolish decisions when it comes to marriage or long-term relationships.

Also, the explicit religiosity, homophobia and covert racism in small towns in Texas can be just about nauseating sometimes (though this extends throughout the south; a friend of mine constantly received dirty looks for being in an interracial relationship). This coupled with the stark lack of any kind of refined/not crude culture (when I visited my girlfriend in a large northern city, it was literally the first time I had ever been to a liquor store that didn't have 6ft tall posters of scantily clad women) makes it just a genuinely undesirable place to live.

Don't get me wrong, I've praised the people of these small rural towns many times over on and off the forum--but the fact is that they remain a mixed bag that I simply don't want to live with.