+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: the economist writes off palin (/showthread.php?tid=61455)
the economist writes off palin - robfilms - 09-04-2008
the prestigious political magazine the economist who often looks at global issues in a general republican manner wrote thoughtfully about palin.
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&story_id=12066224
here is the article:
<
John McCain's choice of running-mate raises serious questions about his
judgment
THE most audacious move of the race so far is also, potentially, the
most self-destructive. John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his
running-mate has set the political atmosphere alight with both
enthusiasm and dismay.
Mr McCain has based his campaign on the idea that this is a dangerous
world--and that Barack Obama is too inexperienced to deal with it. He
has also acknowledged that his advanced age--he celebrated his 72nd
birthday on August 29th--makes his choice of vice-president unusually
important. Now he has chosen as his running mate, on the basis of the
most cursory vetting, a first-term governor of Alaska.
The reaction from inside the conservative cocoon was at first
ecstatic. Conservatives argued that Mrs Palin embodies the "real
America"--a moose-hunting hockey mum, married to an oil-worker, who has
risen from the local parent-teacher association to governing the
geographically largest state in the Union. They praise her as a
McCain-style reformer who has taken on her state's Republican
establishment and has a staunch pro-life record (her fifth child has
Down's syndrome). Who better to harpoon the baby-murdering elitists who
run the Democratic Party?
Mrs Palin was greeted like the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan by the
delegates, furious at her mauling at the hands of the "liberal media".
And she delivered a tub-thumping speech, underlining her record as a
reforming governor and advocate of more oil-drilling, and warning her
enemies not to underestimate her ("the difference between a hockey mum
and a pitbull--lipstick"). But once the cheering and the chanting had
died down, serious questions remained.
The political calculations behind Mr McCain's choice hardly look
robust. Mrs Palin is not quite the pork-busting reformer that her
supporters claim. She may have become famous as the governor who
finally killed the infamous "bridge to nowhere"--the $220m bridge to
the sparsely inhabited island of Gravina, Alaska. But she was in favour
of the bridge before she was against it (and told local residents that
they weren't "nowhere to her"). As mayor of Wasilla, a metropolis of
9,000 people, she initiated annual trips to Washington, DC, to ask for
more earmarks from the state's congressional delegation, and employed
Washington lobbyists to press for more funds for her town.
Nor is Mrs Palin well placed to win over the moderate and independent
voters who hold the keys to the White House. Mr McCain's main political
problem is not energising his base; he enjoys more support among
Republicans than Mr Obama does among Democrats. His problem is reaching
out to swing voters at a time when the number of self-identified
Republicans is up to ten points lower than the number of
self-identified Democrats. Mr McCain needs to attract roughly 55% of
independents and 15% of Democrats to win the election. But it is hard
to see how a woman who supports the teaching of creationism rather than
contraception, and who is soon to become a 44-year-old grandmother,
helps him with soccer moms in the Philadelphia suburbs. A Rasmussen
poll found that the Palin pick made 31% of undecided voters less likely
to plump for Mr McCain and only 6% more likely.
The moose in the room, of course, is her lack of experience. When
Geraldine Ferraro was picked as Walter Mondale's running-mate, she had
served in the House for three terms. Even the hapless Dan Quayle,
George Bush senior's sidekick, had served in the House and Senate for
12 years. Mrs Palin, who has been the governor of a state with a
population of 670,000 for less than two years, is the most
inexperienced candidate for a mainstream party in modern history.
Inexperienced and Bush-level incurious. She has no record of interest
in foreign policy, let alone expertise. She once told an Alaskan
magazine: "I've been so focused on state government; I haven't really
focused much on the war in Iraq." She obtained an American passport
only last summer to visit Alaskan troops in Germany and Kuwait. This
not only blunts Mr McCain's most powerful criticism of Mr Obama. It
also raises serious questions about the way he makes decisions.
VETTED FOR 15 MINUTES
Mr McCain had met Mrs Palin only once, for a 15-minute chat at the
National Governors' Association meeting, before summoning her to his
ranch for her final interview. The NEW YORK TIMES claims that his team
arrived in Alaska only on August 28th, a day before the announcement.
As a result, his advisers seem to have been gobsmacked by the Palin
show that is now playing on the national stage. She has links to the
wacky Alaska Independence Party, which wants to secede from the Union.
She is on record disagreeing with Mr McCain on global warming, among
other issues. The contrast with Mr Obama's choice of the highly
experienced and much-vetted Joe Biden is striking.
Mr McCain's appointment also raises more general worries about the
Republican Party's fitness for government. Up until the middle of last
week Mr McCain was still considering two other candidates whom he has
known for decades: Joe Lieberman, a veteran senator, independent
Democrat and Iraq war hawk, and Tom Ridge, a former governor of
Pennsylvania (a swing state with 21 Electoral College votes) and the
first secretary of homeland security. Mr McCain reluctantly rejected
both men because their pro-choice views are anathema to the Christian
right.
The Palin appointment is yet more proof of the way that abortion still
distorts American politics. This is as true on the left as on the
right. But the Republicans seem to have gone furthest in subordinating
considerations of competence and merit to pro-life purity. One of the
biggest problems with the Bush administration is that it appointed so
many incompetents because they were sound on ROE V WADE. Mrs Palin's
elevation suggests that, far from breaking with Mr Bush, Mr McCain is
repeating his mistakes.>>
be well
rob
Re: the economist writes off palin - kanesa - 09-04-2008
The pick for Sarah Palin is all about distractions. McCain probably picked her because her daughter was pregnant. (my own form of sarcasm) Instead of focusing on the issues, the media is running around talking about teen pregnancy and sexism. When Hillary said anything about sexism in the primaries, they told her to stop whining. But leave poor Mrs. Palin alone because she has a DS baby.
Sarah Palin is bait for the Republicans. The sharks go after her rather than John McCain. After all, John is a POW. (How many times do we have to hear that?) It's the Wizard of Oz. Don't look at the man behind curtain. Don't ask about the issues. Send in a snarling pitbull with snide and condescending remarks. The negativity flowed and the American people fell for it. It's like a troll on a forum or an accident, you have to look.
I can almost hear Karl Rove smiling.
Re: the economist writes off palin - decocritter - 09-04-2008
I think the media and the Dems have been just as mean to Palin.
There have been snide remarks all around.
What's new?
Re: the economist writes off palin - kanesa - 09-04-2008
I haven't heard a snide comment from the Democratic ticket about what was said last night except Obama saying he has been called worse names on the basketball court. Please tell me or show me what Obama-Biden said in either of their speeches that was half as negative and snide as what Palin said.
A lot of things said in the "liberal" media is attributed to the Democratic ticket because the Conservatives have the American public thinking that all media is liberal and Democratic. Another fallacy we can thank the Republican party for. If Rush Limbaugh says it enough times, it is true.
Re: the economist writes off palin - mattkime - 09-04-2008
oh god, put the Palin family out there like that....
and then act indignant about the response?
sure, its an interesting move but i'm too serious about our nation's future to laugh at it.
Re: the economist writes off palin - SteveO - 09-04-2008
Nothing to see here, folks, move along, move along...
Yeah, riiiiight.
Re: the economist writes off palin - kanesa - 09-04-2008
And the sad part is I really think Sarah Palin is so naive about the national media and the National Republican Party that she does not fully understand that she is being used. My god, she has a picture of herself with her DS baby on the cover of People. That poor baby has been tossed around more than a football at an NFL game. She is blinded by the attention and the circus of the RNC.
When all is said and done, if the Republicans win, Palin will be shaking hands with dignitaries and attending funerals in some small island nation. I don't see McCain turning to her and asking for any advice on anything.
Re: the economist writes off palin - OWC Jamie - 09-05-2008
She probably could tell him what a gallon of milk costs in Alaska.