Sarah Palin
It is very interesting to read all the commentary about Mrs. Palin. Many on the right think that picking her guarantees McCain will lose. Others think it’s a very smart move, one that significantly shifts the balance in the race.
On the left, some are positively derisive – mocking her for good looks, a somewhat plebian background and no significant intellectual laurels. Others caution that Tim Kaine was a serious contender for Obama’s VP, and he doesn’t have any more experience than she does. Still others seem to feel that McCain is demonstrably more sexist by picking a woman VP, because “she’s a token”
On that last concept, that raises an interesting thought experiment for the people who hold that beliefe – is there a viable Republican woman that McCain could have picked that would not be considered a token?
Then there’s the fascinating rumor that he’s only ever spoken to her twice, briefly. That would be terrifically amusing, if true. That would be proof, to me, that she was nothing more than a token.
Oh, and this Tina Fey fanboy definitely approves of her looks 
To me, Palin is not qualified for national office (for many reasons)for one reason above all: she’s a creationist. She wants schools to “teach the coontroversy.” Go back to the dark ages and leave the modern world alone.
I thought her intro speech was demeaning to women and the office of the Vice Presidency. “I ‘m a Hockey Mom!” OK, that’s great. Tell me your thoughts on Georgia (no, no, the OTHER Georgia), Sunni-Shia tensions, the Palestinian Peace Process, NAFTA, the WTO, minimum wage, health care.. come on…
Qualified Republican women on the national scene:
Liddy Dole
Kay Baily Hutchinson
Olympia Snow
Susan Collins
Comment by Walter R. Moore — August 30, 2008 @ 11:27 am
I did not see her speech. I’m not particularly worried about her positions, since I find pretty much every position of both parties fairly odious. (Also, I find both John McCain and Barack Obama, and, for that matter, Joe Biden to be unscrupulous, corrupt and unbelievably arrogant)
From my perspective, an Obama avalanche is a terrible thing, because Obama and the country will basically hand him a blank check to wreck the country with his policies.
Equally, a McCain avalanche is a terrible thing, for the exact same reason, just with different policies.
The best option, then, is to have a race that’s incredibly close, divisive and really pisses people off, and makes it harder for either of these groups to enact their policies. That’s a win for America.
Thus, my appreciation for Palin. She is already starting to cause a massive meltdown in progressive circles – ‘Brood Mare’, should ‘Stay home with the kids’, ‘Unattractive’.
I’m not keen on her creationism, but I do like the fact that she seems to fight corruption, instead of cozy up to it.
Yes, she’s inexperienced. With just 4 years in the Senate, Obama’s not a paragon of expertise himself.
And besides, many people hailed Obama’s lack of experience as an ‘outsider who will get things done’. Looking at Palin, she seems to get things done as well.
Like I said in the post, she’s probably not the best choice, but it certainly sent the whole election cycle into fibrillation.
Comment by jb — August 30, 2008 @ 2:26 pm