It's Wednesday night.
The Worb's coverage of the Republican National Convention has been a bit sparser than the DNC. My apologies - I was actually watching Home Alone tonight with my wife. In the few speeches I've taken in, however, I've noticed somewhat of a theme - national security. That's the watchword for the Republicans this year, and it's a good one. Most of America associates the Democratic Party with the phrase "soft on terror." Nearly every speaker has hit hard on the fact that if nothing else, President Bush has kept us safe, as evidenced by the fact that there have been no terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001. (Personally, I don't know that he can claim such to his credit any more than he could claim credit for the attacks themselves, but that's neither here nor there.) Security, security, security. A vote for Obama is a vote for defeat. Vote for Obama and the terrorists win. It's repetitive, sure, but it's also effective. This is the party's strongest weapon, and you'd better believe they'll keep using it.
However, what you won't hear about here is the economy. As much as the Republicans would like to place the blame for the souring economy on the shoulders of the Democrat-led Congress, most of America associates the economic slowdown with the Republican Party. You heard a lot about the economy during the DNC. That's their strong point. So essentially, the election in November looks like it will come down to one issue: which do Americans value more, national security or the economy? If I'm a betting man, I'm picking the economy. After all, that's more or less how it turned out in 1992. Bush was a war hero and had successfully managed the Gulf War. People thought he was a shoo-in in November, until the economy turned south. And that's when the old catch phrase showed up: it's the economy, stupid. (Actually, if you follow that link and look at the three tenets of Clinton's campaign, you'll find that it could be Obama's campaign this year.)
In other news, the speakers at the RNC have been, more or less, stand up comedians. Everyone wants to take a jab at Obama. (Can you blame them? The DNC speakers did the same thing with McCain.) Rudy Giuliani got some nice zingers in tonight, such as, "I'm sorry that Barack Obama feels that [Sarah Palin's] hometown isn't cosmopolitan enough. ... Maybe they cling to religion there." Even Laura Bush got in on the action last night, saying that her husband's accomplishments were "change you can really believe in." Ooh dang! Here's looking forward to more zingers from the main man himself tomorrow night.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Nome
More about - surprise - the Sarah Palin circus.
Ben, I hope I didn't come across as overtly criticizing Palin. I'm certainly not implying that the Obama camp should start criticizing her. In fact, she's about the one thing about the McCain campaign that they can't touch. The issue is that her inexperience and associated liabilities are very different than Obama's.
Having children in difficult life circumstances doesn't disqualify her from the vice presidency. Almost the opposite, actually - blue-collar Americans can identify with the situation she's in. I'm just worried that with all the emphasis she's put on her family lately, at some point she will choose family over duty, which is something I'd prefer not to see from our vice president. (The VP does do some important things, actually. Dick Cheney has made the position far more important and powerful than the "warm bucket of spit" the office used to be.) Obama has two young children as well, and so one could conceivably turn the tables, except that Obama hasn't made as big a deal of his family as Palin has. It's not quite the same thing.
The issue of inexperience is worth looking at, too. Both have had relatively little time in major political offices, but I'd have to give the experience edge to Obama. While he's only had four years on the national stage, his four years have come in the Senate. He knows the people he will have to work with in Congress should he become the president. He's had a chance to gain some foreign policy experience. While Palin has had experience actually governing in her two years over Alaska, one has to remember that it's Alaska. If Alaska were a metro area, it would be slightly larger than Knoxville, but slightly smaller than Akron. It's governing experience, yes, but on a far smaller stage than the national one. And while it's true that she'll only be the vice president, in McCain's case it's a real worry that she could have to take over for him, possibly even in the first term. (We all wish John McCain a long and healthy life, but you have to consider the possibilities.) Her inexperience is far more pronounced than Obama's.
Let's also apply the final smell test. Say each of these to yourself: "President Obama." "President Palin."
The real issue, though, is that this pick isn't so much about Palin's weaknesses and flaws as McCain's. This is the first big decision he's had to make as the Republican nominee, and there are some real worries about it. It's becoming increasingly clear that he made it very quickly, possibly in as little as two days. Sound a little like the Decider to anyone else? For a campaign that has been trying as hard as possible to convince people that a McCain term would not be a third term for Bush, the nominee has been more than a little off-message.
Ben, I hope I didn't come across as overtly criticizing Palin. I'm certainly not implying that the Obama camp should start criticizing her. In fact, she's about the one thing about the McCain campaign that they can't touch. The issue is that her inexperience and associated liabilities are very different than Obama's.
Having children in difficult life circumstances doesn't disqualify her from the vice presidency. Almost the opposite, actually - blue-collar Americans can identify with the situation she's in. I'm just worried that with all the emphasis she's put on her family lately, at some point she will choose family over duty, which is something I'd prefer not to see from our vice president. (The VP does do some important things, actually. Dick Cheney has made the position far more important and powerful than the "warm bucket of spit" the office used to be.) Obama has two young children as well, and so one could conceivably turn the tables, except that Obama hasn't made as big a deal of his family as Palin has. It's not quite the same thing.
The issue of inexperience is worth looking at, too. Both have had relatively little time in major political offices, but I'd have to give the experience edge to Obama. While he's only had four years on the national stage, his four years have come in the Senate. He knows the people he will have to work with in Congress should he become the president. He's had a chance to gain some foreign policy experience. While Palin has had experience actually governing in her two years over Alaska, one has to remember that it's Alaska. If Alaska were a metro area, it would be slightly larger than Knoxville, but slightly smaller than Akron. It's governing experience, yes, but on a far smaller stage than the national one. And while it's true that she'll only be the vice president, in McCain's case it's a real worry that she could have to take over for him, possibly even in the first term. (We all wish John McCain a long and healthy life, but you have to consider the possibilities.) Her inexperience is far more pronounced than Obama's.
Let's also apply the final smell test. Say each of these to yourself: "President Obama." "President Palin."
The real issue, though, is that this pick isn't so much about Palin's weaknesses and flaws as McCain's. This is the first big decision he's had to make as the Republican nominee, and there are some real worries about it. It's becoming increasingly clear that he made it very quickly, possibly in as little as two days. Sound a little like the Decider to anyone else? For a campaign that has been trying as hard as possible to convince people that a McCain term would not be a third term for Bush, the nominee has been more than a little off-message.
Day One of the RNC
Nothing in this world scares me more than Cindy McCain.
I mean, John's oldest son, Douglas, is only five years younger than her. She is also creepy-looking, like a cheerleader for First Lady. Just go watch the First Lady Nominee Presumptive and the First Lady banter. Say what you will about Dubya, but I still think Laura is a classy lady. She makes me feel like she's America's Mom, even when Dad is going through a steady mental decay. It's sad really.
Either way, day one was mostly a bunch of governors talking about Gustav, which thankfully did not destroy New Orleans for good. Other than that, to recap: Laura = nice, Cindy = frightening.
I mean, John's oldest son, Douglas, is only five years younger than her. She is also creepy-looking, like a cheerleader for First Lady. Just go watch the First Lady Nominee Presumptive and the First Lady banter. Say what you will about Dubya, but I still think Laura is a classy lady. She makes me feel like she's America's Mom, even when Dad is going through a steady mental decay. It's sad really.
Either way, day one was mostly a bunch of governors talking about Gustav, which thankfully did not destroy New Orleans for good. Other than that, to recap: Laura = nice, Cindy = frightening.
Anchorage
In defense of hockey mom vice presidents.
Note: Ben always has to start with "Now, I'm not really a Republican, but..."
I think my counterpart may have been a little too hard on Sarah Palin.
A couple of points: Sarah and Todd gave a great little speech about little Bristol's huge tiny mistake, which showed a) they're not afraid of this becoming public, and they were wise enough to bring the media to their backyard instead of getting invaded and b) they're nice folk whose daughters actually marry their baby daddies.
The joy of Palin for the GOP is that, like Optimistic said, they won't hit her hard over Bristolgate cause it alienates the single mother demographic. Also, if they want to avoid the "elitist" image O's trying so hard to shake, they won't say a thing. Or about her other kids, especially the one with Down's. Seriously, what are going to say? "Why did you birth a retard?" That's real nice.
Personally, I like Palin more than Biden, even though my conscience constrains me not to vote for Mac. Why? I like the hockey mom thing. I like that she's got kids at home. I like that she's like the rest of the flipping country, trying to make some sense out of their daughter getting pregnant at 17.
What does a Vice President do anyway? If Quayle can do it, anyone can.
Note: Ben always has to start with "Now, I'm not really a Republican, but..."
I think my counterpart may have been a little too hard on Sarah Palin.
A couple of points: Sarah and Todd gave a great little speech about little Bristol's huge tiny mistake, which showed a) they're not afraid of this becoming public, and they were wise enough to bring the media to their backyard instead of getting invaded and b) they're nice folk whose daughters actually marry their baby daddies.
The joy of Palin for the GOP is that, like Optimistic said, they won't hit her hard over Bristolgate cause it alienates the single mother demographic. Also, if they want to avoid the "elitist" image O's trying so hard to shake, they won't say a thing. Or about her other kids, especially the one with Down's. Seriously, what are going to say? "Why did you birth a retard?" That's real nice.
Personally, I like Palin more than Biden, even though my conscience constrains me not to vote for Mac. Why? I like the hockey mom thing. I like that she's got kids at home. I like that she's like the rest of the flipping country, trying to make some sense out of their daughter getting pregnant at 17.
What does a Vice President do anyway? If Quayle can do it, anyone can.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Juneau
Even more drama to the Sarah Palin pick.
As if the Sarah Palin pick wasn't already surprising enough, there's another fun little tidbit to think about now - Palin's 17-year old daughter Bristol was revealed today to be teen pregnant. (I really wish I could claim the title of this post as my own, but it's borrowed from Slate's XX Factor blog.) This is just the latest development in the Palin candidacy that is fast becoming a five-ring circus. Who is this woman? Is she even qualified to take office? What's the deal with the state trooper she fired who turned out to be her brother-in-law? What about her son she chose to deliver, even though he has Down syndrome?
This makes a sticky situation for the Democrats, who would love to tear this woman apart, yet are afraid to do so and risk alienating their already fragile base of women voters. Even still, this bears examination under a nonpartisan microscope. Is this someone we really want to be in the White House, even as a vice president? Consider the following things that could demand her attention in a meeting:
The whole saga is starting to remind me of Tom Eagleton in 1972, who accepted the VP spot under George McGovern only to retract it 18 days later after reports surfaced that he had undergone electroshock therapy for physical and nervous exhaustion. Eagleton ended up on a ticket because he was only cursorily vetted, something that campaigns go to great pains to avoid today. One wonders if McCain's campaign may have made the same mistake. Palin was probably chosen to draw new attention to the McCain campaign, but this may have been more than they bargained for.
As if the Sarah Palin pick wasn't already surprising enough, there's another fun little tidbit to think about now - Palin's 17-year old daughter Bristol was revealed today to be teen pregnant. (I really wish I could claim the title of this post as my own, but it's borrowed from Slate's XX Factor blog.) This is just the latest development in the Palin candidacy that is fast becoming a five-ring circus. Who is this woman? Is she even qualified to take office? What's the deal with the state trooper she fired who turned out to be her brother-in-law? What about her son she chose to deliver, even though he has Down syndrome?
This makes a sticky situation for the Democrats, who would love to tear this woman apart, yet are afraid to do so and risk alienating their already fragile base of women voters. Even still, this bears examination under a nonpartisan microscope. Is this someone we really want to be in the White House, even as a vice president? Consider the following things that could demand her attention in a meeting:
- A young baby with Down syndrome.
- News from her son in Iraq.
- A teenage daughter with a child of her own and a teenage husband.
- Her other two children, aged fourteen and seven.
The whole saga is starting to remind me of Tom Eagleton in 1972, who accepted the VP spot under George McGovern only to retract it 18 days later after reports surfaced that he had undergone electroshock therapy for physical and nervous exhaustion. Eagleton ended up on a ticket because he was only cursorily vetted, something that campaigns go to great pains to avoid today. One wonders if McCain's campaign may have made the same mistake. Palin was probably chosen to draw new attention to the McCain campaign, but this may have been more than they bargained for.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
The RNC's Boisterous Force 3 Speaker
Karma for McCain after breaking the Dead Week tradition of silence.
McCain announcing Palin right after the DNC is fair game, but his announcement mid-week that he'd made his veep selection was a little gauche. Apparently the Gulf of Mexico agrees. Gustav, the hurricane that may remove all hope of New Orleans' eventual recovery is making waves all the way in St. Paul. The GOP announced that Monday would be a reduced schedule for the convention--all business, no "rhetoric", according to reports that went in to CNN.
I personally think this is a very good move by the GOP, to try not to touch anything that involves Nawlins after the flap over the response to Katrina. The Worb will keep you updated as the RNC progresses.
McCain announcing Palin right after the DNC is fair game, but his announcement mid-week that he'd made his veep selection was a little gauche. Apparently the Gulf of Mexico agrees. Gustav, the hurricane that may remove all hope of New Orleans' eventual recovery is making waves all the way in St. Paul. The GOP announced that Monday would be a reduced schedule for the convention--all business, no "rhetoric", according to reports that went in to CNN.
I personally think this is a very good move by the GOP, to try not to touch anything that involves Nawlins after the flap over the response to Katrina. The Worb will keep you updated as the RNC progresses.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Prolonging the Maverick
Why McCain/Palin need to reinvent Republicanism, or put the heat on the donkey.
Here's a statement you don't want to make on the internet: I am a registered Republican. I'm registered in Colorado, where I haven't lived since 2006, but there you have it. I would have cared enough to do this in Utah, but registering Democrat would be hypocritical of me and Republican doesn't quite fit either. Now in Arizona ("McCainland"), I'm voting Obama. I see little hope for McCain getting into the White House much less doing a good job of it, especially given his recent bent toward bushleaguing and GOP kowtowing. He is a Republican and a conservative, but has always (whether deserved or not) had a reputation of a maverick in Washington, which given my lowly month of Arizonan-ness, makes tonnes of sense. The People of the Desert do things their own way, whether you like it or not. That edge was effectively circumsized from his platform, probably due to party pressures. He's been a funny-looking maverick since then, playing right into leftsiders' views of Republicans and not really offering anything interesting to anyone. He doesn't stand a chance as is. There are two options for him, it appears:
1.) Put the heat on the Democratic Party. Having been accused of fearmongering, the Mac Camp might do well to stop pandering to the ignorant ultra-right and play more to those who are painfully straddling the fence, unsure of Obama's Clinton-esque healthcare, or a little less hasty to pull the troops out of Iraq by tonight at dinnertime. This isn't done by impugning Obama's dignity--this is done by pointing out the difference between the parties. If Mac's going to pander to the party, he'd better do some better PR. The war hero card really only pulls soldiers and vets, who are already likely to go red in November. Obama's popular and cool, but the Democratic Party has pushed some fairly unpopular legislation in its day. Most people still oppose gay marriage and other moral/religious hot topics. Bringing out the godless side of the Left would do him well.
or
2.) With the youthful Palin at his side, he could stick it to the GOP again, and shed some of the more ignorant points of the party, and start rebranding. Issues like border control become less "They're criminals and have to go home" and more "We need to secure our borders, but the way we're doing it right now isn't helping. Let's sit down and talk about it." The more deliberate center-right that's up and coming might really appreciate some aisle-crossing even if you can't say that to Republicans outright.
We'll see in Minnesota whether either will take place. Personal opinion: McCain's groupies aren't smart enough to pull either off.
Here's a statement you don't want to make on the internet: I am a registered Republican. I'm registered in Colorado, where I haven't lived since 2006, but there you have it. I would have cared enough to do this in Utah, but registering Democrat would be hypocritical of me and Republican doesn't quite fit either. Now in Arizona ("McCainland"), I'm voting Obama. I see little hope for McCain getting into the White House much less doing a good job of it, especially given his recent bent toward bushleaguing and GOP kowtowing. He is a Republican and a conservative, but has always (whether deserved or not) had a reputation of a maverick in Washington, which given my lowly month of Arizonan-ness, makes tonnes of sense. The People of the Desert do things their own way, whether you like it or not. That edge was effectively circumsized from his platform, probably due to party pressures. He's been a funny-looking maverick since then, playing right into leftsiders' views of Republicans and not really offering anything interesting to anyone. He doesn't stand a chance as is. There are two options for him, it appears:
1.) Put the heat on the Democratic Party. Having been accused of fearmongering, the Mac Camp might do well to stop pandering to the ignorant ultra-right and play more to those who are painfully straddling the fence, unsure of Obama's Clinton-esque healthcare, or a little less hasty to pull the troops out of Iraq by tonight at dinnertime. This isn't done by impugning Obama's dignity--this is done by pointing out the difference between the parties. If Mac's going to pander to the party, he'd better do some better PR. The war hero card really only pulls soldiers and vets, who are already likely to go red in November. Obama's popular and cool, but the Democratic Party has pushed some fairly unpopular legislation in its day. Most people still oppose gay marriage and other moral/religious hot topics. Bringing out the godless side of the Left would do him well.
or
2.) With the youthful Palin at his side, he could stick it to the GOP again, and shed some of the more ignorant points of the party, and start rebranding. Issues like border control become less "They're criminals and have to go home" and more "We need to secure our borders, but the way we're doing it right now isn't helping. Let's sit down and talk about it." The more deliberate center-right that's up and coming might really appreciate some aisle-crossing even if you can't say that to Republicans outright.
We'll see in Minnesota whether either will take place. Personal opinion: McCain's groupies aren't smart enough to pull either off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)