Election Burn
I was thinking about writing an entry awhile ago about the horribly offensive remarks Sarah Palin made in her speech at the Republic National Convention. Of course, I’m referring to the moment when the Governor drew a direct comparison of an innocent demographic (hockey moms) to a vicious and often socially rejected animal (pit bulls). This was uncalled for, and I continue to join the millions of offended Americans who demand an apology from that fat pig, Sarah Palin.
But seeing as the media and the American people have the attention span of a fruit fly, that topic is already eons old. Besides, if I focus too much on stupid non-issues, I would miss the fact that John McCain recently let his granddaughter go on a date with the Charlie Gibson boy from school. But seriously, folks, it’s pretty sad when we’re excited that the Republican nominee for Vice President is simply doing an interview. The Republicans distrust of the media is reaching asinine levels, but that’s for another article.
I should say at this time that I support Barack Obama. I feel that my analysis shouldn’t be diminished by that fact, but in the interest of full disclosure, I felt that I should mention it. If you are someone who will write off my opinion on that basis alone, then I just wanted to save you the time of reading the rest of this article.
Now, I know it was only one interview, but Governor Palin has been in politics for a little while now, so it’s certainly not the first time she has sat in front of a camera and been asked questions. However, after watching the various segments of the interview (thanks, ABC, for breaking it up into parts – that really fucks up my Youtube viewing), I think a co-worker of mine put it best when he said, “Her answers reminded me of when I was in school and hadn’t done the reading, but the professor was calling on me. I would just try to run out the clock.”
Alright, for just one second, let’s forget about the potential that she could become President of the United States of America, and instead let’s just think about the basic role of the Vice President – can you seriously watch that interview and tell me that she will help President John McCain govern the country in any way? When Russia decides to invade another former member of the Soviet Union (keep your eyes peeled, Estonia), what sort of guidance does Sarah Palin give war hero and veteran politician John McCain? “John, I stood on the shores of Alaska and used the binoculars like you said, but I didn’t see anything.” I mean, shit, before the interview even began, it was well reported that she was receiving a crash course in foreign policy from people like Senator Joe Lieberman. Amazingly, this didn’t seem to faze anyone, even though receiving a crash course in foreign policy is proof positive that you need a crash course in foreign policy.
But one can make the argument that she doesn’t need to help John McCain in the realm of foreign policy, rather she will advise him on other issues. I reply with this question: like what? Forgetting foreign policy, arguably the bigger issue in this election is the economy. While it’s true that Governor Palin has had to deal with managing a state budget, John McCain has spent 25 years in Congress voting on the federal budget every year. Are her insights that much greater than his? Recently, Palin said in a speech that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had gotten “too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” I’m not trying to sound condescending, but Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were private companies that are just now being bailed out by the taxpayers. I ask again, what sort of guidance is she going to provide to President John McCain on these issues?
You might think that I’m talking about the E-word that has permeated every nook and cranny of this campaign. “Ebony”? No, but close. “Experience.” Over the past year and a half, the word has been tossed around more than I can even make a clever metaphor about it being tossed around a lot. And to all you cynics out there who say that Barack Obama doesn’t have the experience to be President, I have just one thing to say to you: You might be right. [Say whaaaaa? Didn’t he say he supports Obama? OH SHNAP!] But I would follow that up by saying that I’m not voting for him because of his experience; I’m voting for him because of his policy proposals and because of the poise and judgment I’ve seen him display throughout this seemingly never-ending campaign. The experience debate has become ingrained in the very fabric of this election so unfortunately it will be with us until election day, but I wish Obama supporters would stop trying to win this argument because (1) it’s unwinnable and (2) it’s a fruitless argument anyway.
You’re probably thinking, ‘Phil, you are very smart and very handsome [irrelevant, but thank you], so don’t you realize that you learn about someone’s judgment and poise through their experiences?’ Well, if that’s the case, then what do we really know about McCain’s experience? We know that he’s been in Congress for a long time, voted on a lot of items and sat on a lot of committees (and I don’t mean that flippantly, I’m just attempting to summarize). Unless you followed him around all those years, you don’t really know what his experience says about his judgment and poise. Experience is such a nebulous concept. When a true crisis hits, there’s never a precedent or a protocol for it – that’s what makes it a crisis. A president doesn’t go, “Hmm, when I was a Massachusetts Senator, what were the decisions I made the last time the Soviet Union put nuclear missiles on Cuba?” or “Hey, Karl, remember when I was Governor of Texas and we were throwing around proposals for what to do if terrorists started flying commercial jets into buildings?” And now, the idea of experience in this election has been blurred even more by Sarah Palin’s entrance and the notion that she has the right type of experience while Barack has the wrong type of experience. She’s been a governor, you say? Well, that’s a huge load off. On the presidential totem pole, that lands her somewhere between Thomas Jefferson and Rutherford B. Hayes. I wonder how she feels about the Desert Land Act of 1877…
But it doesn’t matter how Governor Palin appeared to me in her first (only?) vice presidential interview – the spin inevitably goes on. Charles Krauthammer, who has a face like a weasel’s vagina (ok, maybe that one showed a little bias), wrote an article for the Washington Post entitled “Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe,” in which he stated that Gibson didn’t stump Palin when she seemed unsure about the definition of “the Bush Doctrine.” Thank you, Charles Krauthammer, for finally getting to the heart of this presidential race: Charlie Gibson’s knowledge of foreign policy. Krauthammer reasoned that it was an unfair question because there are multiple definitions of the Bush Doctrine, and Governor Palin didn’t know which one to choose – they’re like Pokemon; you gotta catch ‘em all! Never mind, of course, that anticipatory self-defense was a hugely significant policy shift established by President Bush, or that Charlie Gibson actually clarified for Palin, “the Bush Doctrine, enunciated in September 2002 before the Iraq War.”
Similarly defensive was Martin Sieff (who? exactly), who wrote an article entitled “ABC’s Gibson Grilled Palin Hard, But It May Backfire,” which was apparently important enough to be linked on Drudge Report. Sieff described Gibson as “out for blood” and “out to embarrass Palin,” which sounds kind of like a… oh shit, what’s the phrase?... oh that’s right – kind of like a respectable journalist would question someone who has a good chance of becoming the second most important person in the country. Sieff also stated, “Gibson tried to embarrass Palin by referring to her Christian faith in asking people to pray for U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Palin countered by pointing out she was following the precedent set by Abraham Lincoln.” Now, if you watched the interview, regardless of your political leanings, I hope you can acknowledge that this statement is almost proudly ignorant of what actually happened. Gibson was questioning Palin about her quotation that the soldiers in Iraq were being sent “on a task from God.” At first, the Governor said that she wasn’t sure if those were her exact words (come on, Sarah, you know that Youtube exists, right?), and then she proceeded to say that she was paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln when he suggested that we never truly know God’s plan. This was a curious answer because, first of all, it is the exact opposite of her quotation, which says definitively that the mission of our soldiers comes from God. Secondly, while I’m not a historian, I was curious to figure out which Lincoln speech she was recalling. A quick Google search suggests that it might have been Lincoln’s second inaugural address, in which he does talk about God having his own plan that is unknown to mortal man. However, it’s ironic, when compared to the context of Sarah Palin’s invocation of God, that Lincoln also states that in war both sides seek the assistance of God, but “[t]hat the prayers of both could not be answered” and “[t]hat neither has been answered fully.” But I digress.
My point is that Barack Obama’s vice presidential pick demonstrated to me that he has the judgment of a conservative pragmatist whose decision, while certainly not without fault, was a compromise between candidates who might help him win and candidates who might help him lead. John McCain’s vice presidential pick demonstrated to me that he has the judgment of a man who wants to be the president.
But seeing as the media and the American people have the attention span of a fruit fly, that topic is already eons old. Besides, if I focus too much on stupid non-issues, I would miss the fact that John McCain recently let his granddaughter go on a date with the Charlie Gibson boy from school. But seriously, folks, it’s pretty sad when we’re excited that the Republican nominee for Vice President is simply doing an interview. The Republicans distrust of the media is reaching asinine levels, but that’s for another article.
I should say at this time that I support Barack Obama. I feel that my analysis shouldn’t be diminished by that fact, but in the interest of full disclosure, I felt that I should mention it. If you are someone who will write off my opinion on that basis alone, then I just wanted to save you the time of reading the rest of this article.
Now, I know it was only one interview, but Governor Palin has been in politics for a little while now, so it’s certainly not the first time she has sat in front of a camera and been asked questions. However, after watching the various segments of the interview (thanks, ABC, for breaking it up into parts – that really fucks up my Youtube viewing), I think a co-worker of mine put it best when he said, “Her answers reminded me of when I was in school and hadn’t done the reading, but the professor was calling on me. I would just try to run out the clock.”
Alright, for just one second, let’s forget about the potential that she could become President of the United States of America, and instead let’s just think about the basic role of the Vice President – can you seriously watch that interview and tell me that she will help President John McCain govern the country in any way? When Russia decides to invade another former member of the Soviet Union (keep your eyes peeled, Estonia), what sort of guidance does Sarah Palin give war hero and veteran politician John McCain? “John, I stood on the shores of Alaska and used the binoculars like you said, but I didn’t see anything.” I mean, shit, before the interview even began, it was well reported that she was receiving a crash course in foreign policy from people like Senator Joe Lieberman. Amazingly, this didn’t seem to faze anyone, even though receiving a crash course in foreign policy is proof positive that you need a crash course in foreign policy.
But one can make the argument that she doesn’t need to help John McCain in the realm of foreign policy, rather she will advise him on other issues. I reply with this question: like what? Forgetting foreign policy, arguably the bigger issue in this election is the economy. While it’s true that Governor Palin has had to deal with managing a state budget, John McCain has spent 25 years in Congress voting on the federal budget every year. Are her insights that much greater than his? Recently, Palin said in a speech that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had gotten “too big and too expensive to the taxpayers.” I’m not trying to sound condescending, but Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were private companies that are just now being bailed out by the taxpayers. I ask again, what sort of guidance is she going to provide to President John McCain on these issues?
You might think that I’m talking about the E-word that has permeated every nook and cranny of this campaign. “Ebony”? No, but close. “Experience.” Over the past year and a half, the word has been tossed around more than I can even make a clever metaphor about it being tossed around a lot. And to all you cynics out there who say that Barack Obama doesn’t have the experience to be President, I have just one thing to say to you: You might be right. [Say whaaaaa? Didn’t he say he supports Obama? OH SHNAP!] But I would follow that up by saying that I’m not voting for him because of his experience; I’m voting for him because of his policy proposals and because of the poise and judgment I’ve seen him display throughout this seemingly never-ending campaign. The experience debate has become ingrained in the very fabric of this election so unfortunately it will be with us until election day, but I wish Obama supporters would stop trying to win this argument because (1) it’s unwinnable and (2) it’s a fruitless argument anyway.
You’re probably thinking, ‘Phil, you are very smart and very handsome [irrelevant, but thank you], so don’t you realize that you learn about someone’s judgment and poise through their experiences?’ Well, if that’s the case, then what do we really know about McCain’s experience? We know that he’s been in Congress for a long time, voted on a lot of items and sat on a lot of committees (and I don’t mean that flippantly, I’m just attempting to summarize). Unless you followed him around all those years, you don’t really know what his experience says about his judgment and poise. Experience is such a nebulous concept. When a true crisis hits, there’s never a precedent or a protocol for it – that’s what makes it a crisis. A president doesn’t go, “Hmm, when I was a Massachusetts Senator, what were the decisions I made the last time the Soviet Union put nuclear missiles on Cuba?” or “Hey, Karl, remember when I was Governor of Texas and we were throwing around proposals for what to do if terrorists started flying commercial jets into buildings?” And now, the idea of experience in this election has been blurred even more by Sarah Palin’s entrance and the notion that she has the right type of experience while Barack has the wrong type of experience. She’s been a governor, you say? Well, that’s a huge load off. On the presidential totem pole, that lands her somewhere between Thomas Jefferson and Rutherford B. Hayes. I wonder how she feels about the Desert Land Act of 1877…
But it doesn’t matter how Governor Palin appeared to me in her first (only?) vice presidential interview – the spin inevitably goes on. Charles Krauthammer, who has a face like a weasel’s vagina (ok, maybe that one showed a little bias), wrote an article for the Washington Post entitled “Charlie Gibson’s Gaffe,” in which he stated that Gibson didn’t stump Palin when she seemed unsure about the definition of “the Bush Doctrine.” Thank you, Charles Krauthammer, for finally getting to the heart of this presidential race: Charlie Gibson’s knowledge of foreign policy. Krauthammer reasoned that it was an unfair question because there are multiple definitions of the Bush Doctrine, and Governor Palin didn’t know which one to choose – they’re like Pokemon; you gotta catch ‘em all! Never mind, of course, that anticipatory self-defense was a hugely significant policy shift established by President Bush, or that Charlie Gibson actually clarified for Palin, “the Bush Doctrine, enunciated in September 2002 before the Iraq War.”
Similarly defensive was Martin Sieff (who? exactly), who wrote an article entitled “ABC’s Gibson Grilled Palin Hard, But It May Backfire,” which was apparently important enough to be linked on Drudge Report. Sieff described Gibson as “out for blood” and “out to embarrass Palin,” which sounds kind of like a… oh shit, what’s the phrase?... oh that’s right – kind of like a respectable journalist would question someone who has a good chance of becoming the second most important person in the country. Sieff also stated, “Gibson tried to embarrass Palin by referring to her Christian faith in asking people to pray for U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Palin countered by pointing out she was following the precedent set by Abraham Lincoln.” Now, if you watched the interview, regardless of your political leanings, I hope you can acknowledge that this statement is almost proudly ignorant of what actually happened. Gibson was questioning Palin about her quotation that the soldiers in Iraq were being sent “on a task from God.” At first, the Governor said that she wasn’t sure if those were her exact words (come on, Sarah, you know that Youtube exists, right?), and then she proceeded to say that she was paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln when he suggested that we never truly know God’s plan. This was a curious answer because, first of all, it is the exact opposite of her quotation, which says definitively that the mission of our soldiers comes from God. Secondly, while I’m not a historian, I was curious to figure out which Lincoln speech she was recalling. A quick Google search suggests that it might have been Lincoln’s second inaugural address, in which he does talk about God having his own plan that is unknown to mortal man. However, it’s ironic, when compared to the context of Sarah Palin’s invocation of God, that Lincoln also states that in war both sides seek the assistance of God, but “[t]hat the prayers of both could not be answered” and “[t]hat neither has been answered fully.” But I digress.
My point is that Barack Obama’s vice presidential pick demonstrated to me that he has the judgment of a conservative pragmatist whose decision, while certainly not without fault, was a compromise between candidates who might help him win and candidates who might help him lead. John McCain’s vice presidential pick demonstrated to me that he has the judgment of a man who wants to be the president.
posted by Phil at
7:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home