Everyday Opinions on Public Policy & the General Welfare: election

Showing posts with label election. Show all posts

Thursday, 9 October 2008

Why John McCain and America should be worried about Sarah Palin

From the perspective of many Republicans, the choice of Sarah Palin seemed to be a brilliant one. Mrs. Palin is an attractive, ambitious, tough, witty, popular, pro-life Republican Governor that connects with “Joe Six Pack”. She’s got a great story, a nice smile, and a killer instinct. Don’t forget she also took on some of the members of her own party and won, which complements McCain’s “Maverick” brand. What a smart choice! Or was it…

For the reasons listed above Sarah Palin was on my top 5 list of people that McCain might choose, but I didn’t really pay her much attention because I had convinced myself, that John wasn’t really going to try to court the Hillary vote. I figured that Mr. McCain knew that so few of Hillary’s supporters would toss their issues aside and would automatically run towards the female in the election that it wouldn’t be worth going after their votes. Additionally, I figured that at least McCain’s campaign staff would know that the person that started the “PUMA PAC” had donated money to him, so the people leading “PUMA” outrage were already in his corner furthering my belief that John wouldn’t pick Sarah. I figured that the McCain campaign would know that the economy would be the big issue in this election and therefore he would end up choosing Mitt Romney, even though they reportedly don’t get along very well.

You can imagine my surprise when he announced the nomination of Sarah Palin as VP at the Republican Convention. I looked at my husband and said, “Well, it looks like I have some more research to do.” Accordingly, I spent a good part of that following weekend searching through articles from Alaskan news papers and basically found out that all of the characteristics I listed above were correct, but my research found some characteristics that just may end up being bad news for McCain, particularly if he wins…

What else did I learn in my research both that weekend and over the past few weeks?
Well, for one Sarah Palin is no dummy. Palin has a killer political instinct. She may not be the most knowledgeable or well spoken person on any given subject, but she does have a knack for knowing what people want to hear and giving them just that accompanied by a side of home-town pie. While this may be good for a campaign, it’s not necessarily what would be good for a VP, particularly the VP to a President that is a 72 year old cancer survivor that has already lived longer than both his father and grandfather. I am not trying to play the age card, I don’t think his age rules him out at all, it’s just that statistically, he has a higher probability of passing away in office than other candidates like Romney or Giuliani do, which means Sarah Palin has a higher probability of becoming President. With her increased probability of becoming President, she better start hitting the books.
Sarah Palin is a very influential person. I mean this in its truest sense. She has the ability to gain the affection and trust of others and then use that affect what those people think. This of course does not mean that everyone will always agree with her and do what she wants, but many will. Given this fact, she could easily use a velvet glove to get her agenda on the board regardless of what her boss thinks. It would not be much of a challenge for her to strike up alliances with McCain’s advisors and cabinet members and use them to help push through what she thinks should be done.

Sarah loves loyalty. Who doesn’t want someone on their ticket who’s loyal? Oh, I guess I should clarify; Sarah loves those that are loyal to her. In fact, in Alaska she often hired her friends from high school to fill government jobs regardless of their past experience. And what happened to those that were not 100% loyal to her and everything she wanted, she had no use for them. Sarah frequently fired people for not “towing the line”. But, wait a minute, wasn’t she within her rights to do this? Yes, she was in fact within her rights to fire people for this or any other reason but, should everyone get fired if they disagree with their boss? Does anyone here wish that someone had spoken out to Bush about Iraq, or deregulation? I know I do. You see, in Sarah’s mind, if the Mayor/Governor/President says this is what I want to do, and then everyone else should fall in line. She does not tolerate dissenters. She says that if you don’t agree with her that’s OK and you can tell her that but once she says “Thanks but No Thanks”, it’s time for you to shut up and carry out her plans. I guess there are people out there that like this type of leadership, but I do not. It was people willing to go against the power brokers that founded and worked to perfect this country. It has always been the dissenting voice that has made the biggest impact; from Franklin, and Jefferson, and Adams, to Lincoln to Parks to King. The dissenting voice has always been welcome in America, and I would like it to stay that way.

Sarah Palin is very ambitious. She worked to become a sportscaster, a business owner, a mayor, and a governor. I don’t think there is much doubt at this point that she really wants to be VP and ultimately President. Is this bad; No, not in and of itself. It would be a challenge to find a VP that didn’t at one time or another want to be President, but in the case of Mrs. Palin, her ambition seems to affect the way she does her job. She works harder for the next job than she does at the current job. Additionally, when you combine it with the other characteristics listed above, it could prove to be difficult management situation for McCain.

Sarah is deeply religious. Not just your ordinary go to church every Sunday say a bedtime prayer kind of religious, but the crusading end of days is nigh kind of religious. Again, there may be plenty of people that are comfortable or even comforted by someone like this being in the White House, but certainly not me. Now I don’t care if someone is religious or not, your religion is none of my business, but when you bring your religion into your public policy making it very quickly becomes my business. I am not worried about the “Oh, I am Christian so I wouldn’t vote for gay marriage” type of bringing religion into public policy (which is still wrong). I am worried about the type of religious that brings the thought process of “Well, God gave me the thought of bombing Iran so it must be the right thing to do and if thousands of people die in the process, it’s OK because it’s all a part of God’s plan and he will make sure it all turns out well” into public policy. John McCain as a normal go to church kind of Christian should be a little afraid of having someone like this in his administration.

She thinks that the role of VP is whatever she wants it to be. She said (on video) that she would have to make sure that the VP job would be enough to keep her busy before she accepted the job and then she said (also on video) that she’s glad the Constitution would allow for more expansion of power when working with the Senate. Well that is only true if you interpret the Constitution’s wording of “The Vice President of the United States shall be the President of the Senate, but shall have no vote role unless they be equally divided” as meaning that as the “President” of the Senate you can do whatever you want. Historically, the role of “President of the Senate” has meant that you just make sure that proper order is followed and you cast the tie breaking vote, not that you are the Senate’s Operations Manager and you lobby the Senate to do what the President of the United States wants. It should prove to be very interesting (and scary) to see what happens if she gets her wish.

So what does all of this mean for McCain? Many of us realize for now, the future of the Republican Party is Sarah Palin. There are already rumors circulating that regardless of whether or not McCain wins, Palin will be running for President in 2012. Who do you think McCain’s staffers will be aligned with; McCain who has used phrases like “In my term” not “in my first term” mind you but “in my term” meaning only one term as President or Sarah Palin who has used the phrase “in a Palin/McCain administration”? My money is on Sarah. McCain’s staffers will want to stay employed and their best way of making that happen is to be loyal to Sarah rather than to John. When you add this to the list of characteristics listed above, McCain will have a tough time keeping in control of his own administration. I would suggest that McCain go have a little talk with Mr. Bush about what it’s like to lose control of your own administration and party. This could end up being as poor of a VP choice for McCain if he wins as it was for America.

Thanks for reading!

PS. Here are a few links to get you started on your own research:
http://yestodemocracy.org/2008/06/29/puma-founded-by-republicans/
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html
http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/496302.html
http://www.adn.com/front/story/492964.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091302596_pf.html
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/011804/sta_palin.shtml
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/15/bess/index1.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVwG8WMACQk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wk1cCPaTmPk

Monday, 6 October 2008

SNL - You have got to give funny it's due

Wednesday, 30 April 2008

Obama on The Issues

Friday, 4 April 2008

My Candidate

Well, I have quite a bit of feedback on this blog (though most of it has been in email form rather people posting comments) and one of the questions I get the most, is which candidate I support. While I have been trying to keep my cards close to my vest, I have decided to go ahead and put it out there. I support Barack Obama.

I first noticed Barack when he was running for the Illinois State Senate. I remember seeing a portion of one of his campaign speeches and thinking, "Wow, this guy is good. If he ever runs for President, it could be a new day in America." He spoke from his heart about improving his community, and how everyone in his district would need to work together to achieve their goals regardless of their political party, socioeconomic background, or current skill set. It was very moving, inspiring, and true. I was really touched by his speech and the funny thing is, it was merely a piece on how this unknown guy in IL won his senate district by a landslide, and not about, hey we found this really amazing speaker/politician. The MSM side note turned into me feeling like I was discovering my generation's Roosevelt, Kennedy, or Martin Luther King. I thought to myself, "I hope someone in the Democratic Party notices this guy, and that it's not just me that sees his potential." Fortunately, others did take notice and he was invited to speak at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. Once again, he delivered, and was instantly thrust onto the national scene. I could go on, but I am sure that you all are familiar with the rest.

As far as why I support him (besides his inspiring speeches) I support him because of the incredible thoughtfulness, intellect, and analytical abilities he has presented. I really like the fact that he is controlled, considerate, and smart…very, very smart.

I like that he seems honest and real. He makes me want to have him as a friend, but he also makes me want to improve myself, and my community.

I support him because he believes in shaping public opinion rather than blindly ignoring it or blindly following it.

He has demonstrated knowledge about the Middle East. He knows that if you are concerned about a nuclear weapons program in Iran, then amassing a 140,000 person strong occupying army in their neighboring country, isn’t necessarily the best way to make Iranians comfortable with abandoning their nuclear program.

He is worldly. Barack has not always been wealthy, he hasn’t always lived in the US, and he hasn’t always been religious. All of this allows him to see multiple points of view and understand how to interact with people from different cultures and backgrounds.

He understands that government assistance programs are supposed to help someone improve their life not give someone a better life. Most people want a helping hand, not a hand out.

He knows that in order to make changes in a country, you have to first inspire the population to act differently.

I support him because he knows that the Presidential Oath is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and who better to do this then someone who was once a Constitutional Law professor.

He understands that not all of the good ideas come from one party, which leads me to believe that he is the candidate most likely to assemble an outstanding team of advisers based on their skills and knowledge rather than political party.

I think that all of these traits/skills will allow him to better reason through issues to come up with viable solutions to help the country.

There are many reasons why I support Barack Obama, and I hope that this post has at least made you think about what you want in a President.

PS. I would love to read your comments!

Thursday, 13 March 2008

I am so sick of all the fighting.

Enough already! I am really getting tired of all the fighting amongst the campaigns.

The latest "attack" by Geraldine Ferraro (if you can even really call it an attack) is neither vicious nor accurate. While I don't believe Ferraro said what she did because she is a racist, I also don't believe that the tens of millions of people that have voted for Barack Obama voted for him solely because he is black. To say that people voting for Obama are delusional, naive, pro-black racists, caught up in the emotion/momentum, and are falling for a fairy tale is just plain insulting to his voters, his campaign workers, and indeed Obama himself! Additionally, I don't believe that Hillary is actually a monster nor do I believe that McCain is exactly like Bush.

While many of the attacks are "based on truth" the facts have been greatly distorted. It's kind of like watching a historical drama. Although it may be "based on a true story" the details (aka spin) is the opinion of the writer/commentator relaying the story. Let me clarify some of these points.

Fact: Obama has relatives that are Muslim but he is a Christian.
Spin: Obama was raised as and is a Muslim.
Comment: OK, Obama is a Christian, but even if he wasn't, someone please tell me when exactly did we lose our freedom of religion in this country?

Fact: Hillary is a motivated, ambitious female that is not all about flowers and chick flicks.
Spin: Hillary wants to destroy the country, and she is a monster that will stop at nothing to win.
Comment: Since when is being motivated and ambitious a bad thing? Haven't we all heard people say that women are to "soft" to be the Commander in Chief of the Military? So, it stands to reason that a "non-soft female" would be preferred to a "soft" one.

Fact: McCain has said that he supports many of the Bush Administration policies.
Spin: McCain equals a third term for the Bush Administration.
Comment: While McCain says he agrees with some of the Bush policies, he has also voted against the Republican Party Line on several occasions. I can't honestly say whether or not he is saying that he likes Bush's policies because he wants the Republican base to vote for him or because he actually agrees with the policies.

Please don't get me wrong. I understand that "spinning" has become an integral part of all campaigns, but I believe that people should only be "spinning" in order to put their candidate in a more positive light. To use this tactic as an attempt to completely discredit a person who has chosen a life of public service in the end does not really benefit any of the candidates, their parties or our country.

I am sure that some of you are asking yourselves why would I defend McCain in this post. Although, I am a self pronounced liberal and a delegate for the democratic party, I feel that it is just as wrong for the "Left" to "tear down" McCain as a person just as I believe it is wrong for people on the "Right" to try to tear down either Barack or Hillary on personal basis. In my view, incorrect spin is incorrect spin.

Wednesday, 5 March 2008

Foreign Relations...is business as usual good enough?

These days it seems all to easy to think of foreign relations as strictly a matter of security, but as someone who grew up outside of the US I know first hand that there is a lot more involved with this issue than just the military. It ranges from small issues like the way American Tourists act when in another country all the way up to the issue of pre-emptive war.

There are many issues facing the US within the realm of foreign relations. The increasing tensions over illegal immigration, the seemingly uneasy nature of our country's friendship with Russia, the new world standing of China, and the upheaval in the Middle East and Africa, all of which make me believe that foreign relations is and will be the most important role of the American President for the foreseeable future. With that said, this post will focus on the Middle East.

According to the 2007 World Development Report (produced by The World Bank) there are about 100 million people in the Middle East/North Africa under 24. Additionally, this means that there are well over 100 million people in the Middle East/North Africa that are under the age of 35 (including those under 24).

I lived in and visited the Middle East for many years and I know that they do not all hate us. In fact many of the people there like America very much even if they disagree with some of our actions. The Middle East, as in any area/culture, has people on the far right, the far left, and a whole lot more that fall somewhere in between. It appears to me that over the next 10 to 20 years we have a remarkable opportunity to win over the hearts and minds of those within this age group. If we were to start now, we could change the tide of popular opinion about our country, and in turn improve our population's opinion about them.

Are we sure that we want a President that is hawkish about the war in Iraq, or one that has a desire to pre-emptively begin wars with other Arab countries? Are we sure that business as usual is the correct way to approach the current situations there? I think these are serious matters to think about. I know that I personally would like a different approach. I lived in the Middle East after our bombing of Libya and as a result had to live with the ramifications of our country's actions. I also spent time there during the (first) Persian Gulf War, and saw how the population interacted with our military and vice versa. With this in mind, I can not in good conscience support a business as usual policy.

Clearly, terrorism is something to be condemned, as it is a truly barbaric and futile attempt to affect policy, but at the same time starting wars is just as ineffective. If we truly want to have a strong working relationship with the region of the world that supplies a vast majority of the world's oil, then maybe, just maybe, treating them with respect and asking the same in return is not such a bad idea. I am sure that we all have heard of the phrase "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." and whether we want to admit it or not, these are sovereign countries. It seems to me that wanting to occupy foreign countries and being over-eager to kill mass numbers of their populations is a lot more like vinegar than honey.

Everyday Opinions on Public Policy & the General Welfare