Interesting choices, interesting differences this political year. Hillary is out, Governor Palin is in. An old man runs against a young guy with an older partner. The old man runs with a much younger woman as his partner. Already the word is that to cap the stellar Democratic finale, something had to happen to stir that up.
Only time will tell how the choices play out. But here's my take. McCain picked someone from a state with huge oil reserves not yet tapped into, someone who is pro gun and pro life and has a child with Down's Syndrome. So they are like-minded, and she's willing to drill within ANWR, even if he isn't. After all, if the governor says it's ok, then it's a good idea, right? I can empathize with anyone raising a special needs child, but that empathy is not a reason to vote for someone.
What I see here is a big gamble, that more folks will find her appealing from a political standpoint...another maverick (if you feel that McCain is such as well). But, knowing they could not top the amazing display by the Dems, was this their fireworks? Wow, fooled ya...picked a GIRL!! And in the end, are they using this as nothing more than an appeal to younger women? Maybe the older women who are still pissed about Hillary? I will not call this "window dressing", but I wonder if the old, white men of the Republican Party are making this choice only to bump election chances, and not to truly be an opportunity for a woman. She will appeal to McCain's base, but it's his base, so what was gained? Will a conservative woman add to McCain's appeal with more liberal Republicans or Independents? Isn't it a little shallow and small minded to think that people would vote for a woman on the ticket...even if she does NOT share their views??
And, at 72, should something happen to McCain, do we really want someone with so little national experience (less than Obama) to be Commander in Chief? True, I'm a Democrat...but as a woman I question the sincerity of the choice of Palin. No matter how willing she is to drill in Alaska, we have to remember that drilling is a band aid and that we MUST search for alternatives, and develop them quickly and effectively. The fact that she's willing to give up whatever oil can be found in Alaska does not help the country ANY for 10-15 years at a minimum. And the effect to the high price of gas is minimal.
And, if McCain's own staff says they can not be 100% sure of what he might do on any given day...is that the sort of "maverick" we want running the country? Especially one with anger management issues? And, while I recognize McCain's service to his country, the fact that he spent over 5 years in a POW camp is not a reason to be President of the United States of America. That view is shallow and denies the need to look deeper and seek more depth in the person we would elect.
Do we want to look back to the 20th century, or are we prepared to develop the technologies we need to survive in the 21st century? Technology and innovation are watchwords for this century, and we all need to embrace that, or we will continue to fall behind as the rest of the world passes us. Can we be happy being followers in most areas, instead of the leaders we have been? Are we ok owing the rest of the world money, and relying on their innovation and good will to get us by? When did we lose pride in who we are? When did complacency become a virtue?
I was not as familiar as I'd like to be with Joe Biden. But, having read information from many sources, I am glad that Obama chose him for VP. I like the idea of developing alternative sources of energy on a great scale, creating jobs for these new technologies. I agree that America is at it's best when it's being innovative and creative. And it's likely no surprise that I'm supporting and vocalizing my belief that we need more insight, more vision, more broad based input, more diversity, more care for all (NO VOODOO Economics!!)...because we are one America and the divisions of the past have only harmed more and more of us. We have to be Americans first, and give care and assistance to each other. For me, the choice is clear...Obama/Biden in 2008!
29 August 2008
02 August 2008
Political Commentary
And here we are, yet again, in an election year. And, yet again, it's not possible to wage a campaign as if we were adults. It's not enough to talk about who we are and what we would do if elected. It's more important to tell you what's wrong with the other guy...or give you the IMPRESSION that something is less than right about him.
Yes, I am old enough to remember LBJ's ad with the little girl with the flower and the bomb going off in the background. Sending a clear message...Goldwater is a warmonger. Recently, we made "swift boating" a part of the language, for calling into question the service of a decorated veteran...2 if you count what was done to John McCain in 2000. Yet, we elected this sap twice...in spite of his lack of service in the realm of battle.
Now, we have stooped to something lower than the lowest common denominator. Using "celebrity" and comparing a candidate to Ms. Spears and Paris Hilton. Defending the use of celebrity...Isn't he a celebrity? Aren't they both? And wouldn't we hope that there are other "celebrities" that would be a better comparison? The inference only too real, here's a guy without experience and without credentials, ah, and without a lot on the ball. He doesn't get it. I'd like to turn that around. Someone's campaign doesn't get it. The ad is at best sophomoric...something you'd see in high school by folks running for student council president. Yeah, that's an image, you bet I'd vote for that guy. NOT!! For a stunt like that you don't deserve my vote.
In spite of folks repeating and repeating that we are tired of mud slinging, it still happens. And some of us enjoy it...even though it distorts, lies, twists the truth. I want someone for president who is not a name caller, not childish in his arguments, not someone who is only trying to plant fear about the other guy.
After all...aren't we better than this? (and what sort of stellar image does this give the rest of the world?) THINK about it...
Yes, I am old enough to remember LBJ's ad with the little girl with the flower and the bomb going off in the background. Sending a clear message...Goldwater is a warmonger. Recently, we made "swift boating" a part of the language, for calling into question the service of a decorated veteran...2 if you count what was done to John McCain in 2000. Yet, we elected this sap twice...in spite of his lack of service in the realm of battle.
Now, we have stooped to something lower than the lowest common denominator. Using "celebrity" and comparing a candidate to Ms. Spears and Paris Hilton. Defending the use of celebrity...Isn't he a celebrity? Aren't they both? And wouldn't we hope that there are other "celebrities" that would be a better comparison? The inference only too real, here's a guy without experience and without credentials, ah, and without a lot on the ball. He doesn't get it. I'd like to turn that around. Someone's campaign doesn't get it. The ad is at best sophomoric...something you'd see in high school by folks running for student council president. Yeah, that's an image, you bet I'd vote for that guy. NOT!! For a stunt like that you don't deserve my vote.
In spite of folks repeating and repeating that we are tired of mud slinging, it still happens. And some of us enjoy it...even though it distorts, lies, twists the truth. I want someone for president who is not a name caller, not childish in his arguments, not someone who is only trying to plant fear about the other guy.
After all...aren't we better than this? (and what sort of stellar image does this give the rest of the world?) THINK about it...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
