Okay. Even if I were still considering McCain, his choice of the most unqualified, unvetted runningmate in the history of modern presidential politics would completely turn me off.
McCain meets her twice: at a governor's conference, and on the day he offers her the job. No one in Alaska had received any calls inquiring into Palin's background. The "vetting" process was almost certainly a quick Google job. I am not confident about a presidential candidate who doesn't do any real research before picking the second-in-command.
And McCain, who has a history of skin cancer and other ailments, had a father who died at 70 -- two years younger than McCain is now. There is a significant chance he could die in office, or become incapacitated. And then what? Palin named her kids Trig, Track, Willow, Bristol and Piper. I don't trust that woman's judgment at all. And she raised a daughter whose values apparently did not preclude having unprotected sex and getting pregnant in high school. Way to go, mom! So much for conservative values (other than her pastime of hunting caribou and encouraging the teaching of Creationism alongside Evolution in SCIENCE CLASS).
What does this pick say about McCain's judgment?
And do we really think Palin is qualified to stare down Putin?
Word has it McCain really wanted Lieberman but decided against him because he didn't poll well. Yeah, real maverick.
Sorry, I'm just pretty annoyed at the direction the Republicans are going. Can someone please tell me why Palin is a good pick? I smell another Harriet Miers
3 comments:
Now, I'm not a huge fan of the pick myself, but I think you have been watching too much punditry and giving the McCain team short shrift. The guy in charge of the vetting, A.B. Culvershouse, is a partner at O'Melveney and about as inside Washington as it gets. The fact that he was brought on -- and elected to take the job -- means that everyone was serious about the search. So, regardless what you think about the ultimate choice, I think it is safe to say she was fully vetted.
As for her foreign policy experience, that is a canard. Most governors, Bush and Clinton and Regan included, have little to no foreign experience. I'd hazard a guess that Nelson Rockefeller, Spiro Agnew, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Harry Truman (to name a few) had much foreign policy experience prior to taking office. Sarah Palin has been to the Middle East one less time than Barry (who has been twice, I think). I don't think that sitting in on a few committee meetings qualifies as voluminous foreign policy experience for the Senator. Just as Putin might be at an advantage against Palin, he would eat Barack's lunch, too. Granted she does not have the experience of Biden, but Joe has been wrong, I'd say, alot more than he's been right. Now, I'm just as nervous as you that she (and we) would be hip deep in it if she had to sit in THE SEAT on Jan. 22 and I all I can say is that I hope there are other very smart people around her. McCain, though, does not appear to be slowing down, has a clean bill of health by all accounts, and while his father dies at 70, his mom is still kicking at 96.
As for this crap about Pailin's daughter, I say, who cares. It happens and has been happing for the last, oh, 2500 years. at least. I'm sure the Palin's gave her "the talk" and that she knew what could happen if she knocked boots without taking precautions. It's not a reflection of what kind of leader Palin would be. Regan had annoying kids; Carter's brother was a drunk; Roger Clinton. Family is family and they do what they do. By all accounts Gov. Palin and her husband are doing the right thing and standing by and supporting their daughter who may have made a questionable choice. What else do you want? I'd rather know where she stands on Social Security and Medicare reform. Now, I have libertarian leanings, so my live and let live tendencies is probably coloring my point of view, but idiot kids, brothers, sisters, parents, etc. are not germane to the election conversation.
There are plenty of ways to spin Palin, in favor or against. What bothers me the most is that she is not who McCain wanted. He wanted pro-choice Ridge or pro-choice Lieberman. But his party wouldn't allow it. And his bowing to their pressure nullifies his "maverick" image.
I don't know where the whole Ridge thing came from, and he may have been a good pick, but I don't think that Lieberman was ever going to be a realistic choice. Their views only seem to coincide on foreign policy. Otherwise he is an standard issue Democrat. He's a good guy, but votes down the line with the left side of the aisle. If he were the pick and they were elected and McCain went down, then you'd have D's in all seats. I think the prospect of Joe as VP was a Dem wet dream and they were goading McCain about not being a Mavrick enough in order to dare him into it.
Above all though electoral realities are what they are. A pro-choice VP, when a significant sector of the base was in danger of not coming out, was never going to happen. If not Palin, then we'd be looking at Sanford, or Crist, or Pawlenty, or Romney, or Steele, or Hutchinson; all pro-life, conservatives. Daring McCain to pick Ridge or Lieberman would be like daring him to lose.
Post a Comment