McCain Veep Is Woman

[Don]

I am no great fan of Obama but can we at least agree that the man has a much finer intellect and is more cosmopolitan than Palin?

Obama certainly has the "ivory tower" advantage, but that isn't always beneficial.  As for being more cosmopolitan, that isn't a consideration I'd even consider.

[flyingdutchman]

No, I don't toss the term "bigot" around freely, but only use it where it clearly applies.  Most bigots don't think of themselves as such, because they think their prejudices are justified, thus are blind to their true natures.

From merriam-webster's on-line dictionary:
Bigot
Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Oh, goody for you David.  You've learned how to use a dictionary.  Thank you for bringing it out--I'm sure you needed reassurance regarding word meanings to make sure you got it right.

[Hector]

She cannot be related to Michael but her deeply conservative views have a Pythonesque air about them in being almost surreal in there awfulness.

Politically, more of an 'Ugly Queen.'

[SonicMan46]

Well, I've not gone through this entire thread, but have the Pregnancy Coverup Rumors been mentioned yet?  Seems to be spreading around the e-mail circuits according to my wife! True or not? 

[DavidRoss]

Off work today, I flipped around on the network morning news programs a bit to see what's up with Gustav, the RNC, and Sarah Palin.  Caught an ABC Good Morning America feature on Palin that was one of the most shameless examples of partisan editorializing I've seen to date on the major networks, in which the correspondent, David Wright, made several condescending statements trivializing Palin.  Interestingly, on ABC's website, a different version of his report is shown, without Wright's smarmy comments about Palin.

As elitists, the Democratic Party demagogues and their media mouthpieces don't seem to realize how transparent their spin is to most people, the ordinary working class Americans that they claim to support but whom they denigrate virtually every time they open their mouths.  Ridiculing Palin because she's an attractive mother of five from a small town in a rural state, and not a career Washington establishment politician, is going to play only with the bigots on the left, and will almost certainly backfire with the vast majority of centrist voters who have far more common sense than the elitists credit them for.

She's slated to speak at the RNC on Wednesday night.  I suspect I'm not the only voter who will be very interested to hear what she has to say, and to see how she says it.  If she gives a good account of herself, then the October "debate" with Biden may promise to be very interesting, indeed.

[Don]

She's slated to speak at the RNC on Wednesday night.  I suspect I'm not the only voter who will be very interested to hear what she has to say, and to see how she says it.  If she gives a good account of herself, then the October "debate" with Biden may promise to be very interesting, indeed.

Yes, that debate should be a winner.  I have the feeling that Biden isn't looking forward to it at all, because he doesn't want to appear as if he's dumping on a cute mother of five with traditional values. 

In the past couple of days I have had the opportunity to hear Palin offer some of her views; can't say I agree with any of them.  But to criticize her for her small-town background is just crazy on the part of the Democrats; that will back-fire very quickly.  We all know that the primary problem with national government is the Washington connection.

[Brian]

Well, I've not gone through this entire thread, but have the Pregnancy Coverup Rumors been mentioned yet?  Seems to be spreading around the e-mail circuits according to my wife! True or not? 

John McCain has nice legs.






...   

[ezodisy]

At the moment I'm concerned with the moral character of both political parties. 

Thanks for replying. I'm not really familiar with American politics--which is why I'm not going to pretend I know something that I don't like some people in the Russian thread--I just find the above a little surprising, as these parties, if not all parties, seem immoral to the very core, so how they appear in public surely is almost irrelevant if opinions are based on fundamentals. Or maybe I'm too cynical. I just find it amazing that votes would be cast on a mixture of appearances and fashioned morals over the next few months.

But to criticize her for her small-town background is just crazy on the part of the Democrats; that will back-fire very quickly.

I don't think so. This is the biggest world stage, how can pointing out the truth about a small-town background back-fire? Presuming undecided voters aren't going to be swayed by publicity over the next few months (which of course they will be, bless them), then you'd think that pointing this out would be beneficial to the Democrats. I don't know what people in the US think, but here in the UK I do not want someone leading the world's biggest superpower who comes from some backwater town, no offence meant.

[Don]

I don't think so. This is the biggest world stage, how can pointing out the truth about a small-town background back-fire? Presuming undecided voters aren't going to be swayed by publicity over the next few months (which of course they will be, bless them), then you'd think that pointing this out would be beneficial to the Democrats. I don't know what people in the US think, but here in the UK I do not want someone leading the world's biggest superpower who comes from some backwater town, no offence meant.

I can't agree.  In effect, you are taking out of consideration all those who grow up and live in small towns.  I think there are many virtues of small-town life that can be very attractive to millions of voters.  Also, there are some "exceptional" people from that type of environment.

To me, the residential background of a candidate matters little.

[DavidRoss]

I do not want someone leading the world's biggest superpower who comes from some backwater town, no offence meant.

You mean someone like Eisenhower, Truman, Clinton, Carter, Reagan, or Abraham Lincoln?  The prejudice you voice here seems every bit as bizarre as judging someone by ethnicity or gender.

[ezodisy]

I think there are many virtues of small-town life that can be very attractive to millions of voters.  Also, there are some "exceptional" people from that type of environment.

I agree with you completely. I just think some sophistication, and some culture, are needed for the job. If she has those things, then very well, like I said I don't know. I'm sure Mr. Ross will happily scream 'bigot' to correct me or anyone else who offers a divergent opinion. As things stand, judging solely by what I've read so far, it looks unlikely that her background will suit international politics on the off chance she has to become president.

You mean someone like Eisenhower, Truman, Clinton, Carter, Reagan, or Abraham Lincoln?  The prejudice you voice here seems every bit as bizarre as judging someone by ethnicity or gender.

What prejudice? If you know all of the above names so well, I'd like to hear from you how similar they are to Palin in terms of background. Just how close are you saying they are?

[scarpia]

I don't think that the fact that she is from a small town would in any way rule her out as a suitable candidate.  The question is whether she has transcended the small-town ethos.  You can say that Obama's background in national politics is not much more extensive than Palin, but Obama chose to go move in that direction, ran for the Senate, formulated a national campaign, etc.  Palin was plucked out of her environment and dropped on the national stage.

It is yet to be seen how her "conservative" values play in the US.  Now we know that Palin's daughter became pregnant and is now to be married at the age of 17.  (The father is presumably under 17, or he should be under arrest for statutory rape.)  McCain is lauding the child's decision to keep the child, will this really play well with the electorate?  Also, Palin has a child with Down's syndrome.  In the developed world ~95% of cases of Downs syndrome are detected in prenatal tests and aborted at an early stage of pregnancy.   Is this indicative of religious views which supercede the benefits of modern medical science?  Should women worry that Palin advocates criminalizing abortions based on medical necessity?  I'm note sure how mainstream this is either.  Most Americans say that abortions should be legal under such circumstances.

[DavidRoss]

I agree with you completely. I just think some sophistication, and some culture, are needed for the job. If she has those things, then very well, like I said I don't know. I'm sure Mr. Ross will happily scream 'bigot' to correct me or anyone else who offers a divergent opinion. As things stand, judging solely by what I've read so far, it looks unlikely that her background will suit international politics on the off chance she has to become president.

What prejudice? If you know all of the above names so well, I'd like to hear from you how similar they are to Palin in terms of background. Just how close are you saying they are?

Every one of the former Presidents I named came from a small town.  The facts are easy enough to look up if you have internet access, which you obviously do.

You stated that you don't want a US President who "comes from some backwater town."  I don't see how to interpret that as anything but prejudice against people from small towns, as if somehow the size of the town of a candidate's origin is somehow a determining qualification for the office. 

I only use the term "bigot" when a bald-faced bigoted remark is made.  I do not "scream," and I do not use the term to insult, but to call their attention to bigotry that they themselves are blind to.  I think the great majority of folks here who've made pretty blatantly bigoted statements would be appalled to realize that they are indeed every bit as bigoted as the right-wing or left-wing stereotypes they're so quick to self-righteously condemn.  Calling their attention to it is giving them credit for both the mental and the moral capacity to examine their own behavior and to correct it in keeping with their own values.  Bigotry has nothing to do with divergent opinions, but rather with holding opinions based on prejudices rather than rational analyses of facts, and with a person's close-minded intransigence in holding onto such opinions, such that they are unwilling to give fair and open-minded consideration to all of the relevant information.

You've expressed a clear prejudice in the matter of Ms Palin's "backwater" home town, but you've also acknowledged that you do not really know whether Ms Palin possesses the "sophistication and culture" you think the job requires.  Neither do I.  And with the benefit of some reflection after your initial post, you also expressed a willingness to postpone judgment until you do know ("if she has those things, then very well").  On neither count would I regard you as a bigot.  And like you, I, too, am awaiting more information about her before making a judgment regarding her qualifications to serve as vice-President.

[ezodisy]

Every one of the former Presidents I named came from a small town.  The facts are easy enough to look up if you have internet access, which you obviously do.

You stated that you don't want a US President who "comes from some backwater town."  I don't see how to interpret that as anything but prejudice against people from small towns, as if somehow the size of the town of a candidate's origin is somehow a determining qualification for the office. 

I only use the term "bigot" when a bald-faced bigoted remark is made.  I do not "scream," and I do not use the term to insult, but to call their attention to bigotry that they themselves are blind to.  I think the great majority of folks here who've made pretty blatantly bigoted statements would be appalled to realize that they are indeed every bit as bigoted as the right-wing or left-wing stereotypes they're so quick to self-righteously condemn.  Calling their attention to it is giving them credit for both the mental and the moral capacity to examine their own behavior and to correct it in keeping with their own values.  Bigotry has nothing to do with divergent opinions, but rather with holding opinions based on prejudices rather than rational analyses of facts, and with a person's close-minded intransigence in holding onto such opinions, such that they are unwilling to give fair and open-minded consideration to all of the relevant information.

You've expressed a clear prejudice in the matter of Ms Palin's "backwater" home town, but you've also acknowledged that you do not really know whether Ms Palin possesses the "sophistication and culture" you think the job requires.  Neither do I.  And with the benefit of some reflection after your initial post, you also expressed a willingness to postpone judgment until you do know ("if she has those things, then very well").  On neither count would I regard you as a bigot.  And like you, I, too, am awaiting more information about her before making a judgment regarding her qualifications to serve as vice-President.

Fair enough, that was a good post. It certainly will be interesting to see how these election progresses and what revelations occur (sure to be some). I only posted here to get a response about one thing, which was answered very clearly, so I will go back to observing and wish everyone in the states the very best in the coming election, because however it turns out will affect the whole world so in a way we all have an interest in this.

[DavidRoss]

...Palin advocates criminalizing abortions based on medical necessity....

This is a pretty extraordinary claim.  Can you please city the source where Palin made this statement?

[scarpia]

This is a pretty extraordinary claim.  Can you please city the source where Palin made this statement?

It is not a claim, it was a rhetorical question.  And it is not extraordinary, since the conservative christian wing of the republican party advocates just that, declaring that "life begins at conception" and making all abortion illegal.

[uffeviking]

Well, I've not gone through this entire thread, but have the Pregnancy Coverup Rumors been mentioned yet?  Seems to be spreading around the e-mail circuits according to my wife! True or not? 

Correction: It's Palin's teenage daughter who is in her 5th month of pregnancy. No husband of course, but Mom is making sure the culprit marries the girl.

Takes two to tango I seem to remember, and isn't there something in the fundamentalists preaching against having sex unless married? 

[Homo Aestheticus]

No husband of course, but Mom is making sure the culprit marries the girl.

Yes, Mother is making sure they marry. Very sad.

Takes two to tango I seem to remember, and isn't there something in the fundamentalists preaching against having sex unless married? 

Here is what the family pastor said:

"Being a Christian does not mean you're perfect. Nor does it mean your children are perfect. But it does mean there is forgiveness and restoration when we confess our imperfections to the Lord. We all make mistakes. Certainly, the ideal is not to get pregnant out of wedlock. But she made the right decision after her mistake"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7592636.stm

[Homo Aestheticus]

I think what makes me saddest about this is that Palin is almost certainly forcing her daughter into this marriage and I don't think the forced marriage of a 17-year-old can end up being anything but miserable. Obviously the daughter can't have an abortion at five months, but instead of marrying she could be planning to put the baby up for adoption.

[DavidRoss]

It is not a claim, it was a rhetorical question. 

Oh, really?  The full passage from which I excised that quote reads:

Should women worry that Palin advocates criminalizing abortions based on medical necessity?  I'm note sure how mainstream this is either.  Most Americans say that abortions should be legal under such circumstances.

Rather than rhetorical, the question appears very pointed and specific.  To be fair, I can see how you might have intended it otherwise than it reads.  Your denial above suggests that you might have intended it as "Should women worry that Palin might advocate criminalizing abortions based on medical necessity?"  Of course, even that is rather an alarmist and prejudicial "question" if Palin has never made a statement suggesting that she does.  So again, I ask on what basis you make this claim?  Has Palin made such a statement?  If so, then where?  Some of us prefer to base our judgments on facts rather than unsupported statements of opinion by those whose agenda is less than full disclosure of the truth.

And it is not extraordinary, since the conservative christian wing of the republican party advocates just that, declaring that "life begins at conception" and making all abortion illegal.

I'm well aware that many if not most people who might identify themselves as conservative Christians are more likely to identify themselves as Republican than Democrat (wonder what percentage would regard themselves as independents?), but to label them as a "wing of the republican party" seems as far-fetched and prejudicial as referring to the "gay and lesbian wing of the Democratic Party."

I don't doubt that some who call themselves conservative Christian Republicans might feel this way (consistent with belief that human life begins at conception--abortion then would be murder).  To extrapolate from opinions probably held by some to a unified position espoused by a questionable party "wing," and then to impugn Ms Palin by association, is the same kind of thinking practiced by Joe McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee.  If you have any respect for the truth, please support your claims with facts (not other unsupported opinions expressed by partisan demagogues).

Furthermore, even if yours were an accurate representation of Governor Palin's views, I'm still not sure whether that has anything to do with her fitness for the office of Vice-President.  Aside from the question of the VP's powers, Palin's record suggests that she--like most responsible adults--is fully capable of separating her personal views from her official responsibilities, as shown by her first legislative veto as Governor of Alaska.  See this brief article by Andrew Sullivan in The Atlantic on line.  I trust you recognize The Atlantic as a highly respected and responsible journal and not some slanderous crackpot's ax-grinding opinion blog?