Nothing about tonight's Presidential debates changed my mind or my vote. I have always had respect for John McCain's service to his country, as a soldier, a POW, and a Senator... I don't think he did badly in tonight's debate with Barack Obama. Other than the fact that he developed a weird, nervous giggle; dredged up tangential anecdotes from the distant past; and refused to make eye contact with Obama or even turn slightly to acknowledge his opponent, he didn't do too badly.
But if his choice of Sarah Palin as running mate isn't proof the man lacks the judgment necessary to lead this country at one of its most challenging times, I don't know what is:
She's even more inarticulate than President Bush. After watching her struggle to link words together in a coherent sentence, I was ready to forgive Bush his inability to pronounce "nuclear" after eight years of constant coaching. Palin truly is the "people's choice" among those who think Barack Obama is "elitist" for being well-educated and articulate. She makes them feel smart.
See the video below. Did anyone else immediately think, "Wow, this could be Palin's running mate in four years, should (God forbid!) anything happen to McCain"?
Will Sarah Palin debate Joe Biden? Will the McCain campaign let her speak in public after that disastrous interview?
I doubt even Henry Higgins could pull of a miracle of that magnitude.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 42 ( 2 removed by Holly Jahangiri )
Can anyone decode that run on sentence Palin babbled at Couric? Did she just do a metatag brain dump on national TV?
I understand nervousness but I couldn't even find the gist of an actual thought in her answers. The folksy slang was less than impressive and made her sound quite dull of mind.
She couldn't handle two softball interviews with Katie Couric and Charles Gibson. They could have done better. They've got some good strong guys out there. Hell, Joe Lieberman would have been much stronger, so would Mitt, who at least has a head for business. But they come up with this poseur, and call her a maverick. You can't put lipstick on that pig.
Palin is where she is today because she is a woman who represents the most extreme fundamentalist views of the neo-cons. Moderate Republicans I know are horrified. This woman doesn't represent them, either.
The Katie Couric interview highlights just what a good speechwriter, a little cram-coaching, and a big-print teleprompter can do for one's image. But the real test of someone's mettle is to see them wing it extemporaneously. Until I saw that interview, I though, "Okay - she stands for everything I'm against, but she's a sharp cookie and a woman not to be underestimated." Now? I am thoroughly disgusted. I don't know what possessed McCain to choose her, but I think it's about to backfire. As my son (age 12) observed last night after watching that clip:
"I'm starting to like Sarah Palin after watching that."
My jaw dropped. "WHAT?"
"She's making it much more likely that Obama will win."
Out of the mouths of babes.
By the way, I don't let my kids play "I'm for [fill in your candidate's name] because my mom [or dad] are voting for them," or "I hate [fill in your candidate's name] because my mom [or dad] says they stink." Oooh, no. I make my children think for themselves. I had my son watch the debates last night (which he gamely did, after I bribed him with pizza and root beer). He admitted, later, that he didn't understand any of what either candidate was talking about. I told him to keep watching the news, the debates, the papers - that eventually it would all click together in his mind. We discussed some of the issues and where both sides agreed and differed in their views and proposed solutions. Some of it, I don't understand either. ;) But no, my children will not be little automatons spouting the parental party line. It's much more important to me that they grow up thinking critically for themselves, that they be able to distinguish logic and fact from emotion and clever rhetoric.
A Democrat...raising Independents for the future. What a concept.
Debate the issues, but take the profanity and personal to your own posts.
I hate bullying, and I refuse to be bullied.
I think if you can't debate an issue without making sexist or racist comments, you shouldn't say anything: it just shows that you're intellectually invalid.
But I shouldn't let anyone else get caught up in out personal enmity, so again, my sincere and humble apologies.
I'm only going to say this: you're not a racist because you don't support Obama. I can respect that. Some of my best friends are not as enlightened as I am on this issue.
You're a racist because you consistently make heinous, racist remarks not only about Obama, but about his family.
If you can't make a legitimate point without making racist remarks, if your hatred is so naked that all you can see is skin color, you're a racist. And weak minded? If you had any game, you'd be able to make a point without defaming a man's family.
I think we should fear this day. No, she will not debate Biden and I can only imagine what they will do to prevent it from happening.
Holly, you summarized it very neatly. He's in danger of being the second coming of Adlai Stevenson who had all of the above qualities except skin color.
Palin has always been a non factor. She came from nowhere...she means nothing and when this is over she will go back to Alaska bruised and career ruined.
Holly, you summarized it very neatly. He's in danger of being the second coming of Adlai Stevenson who had all of the above qualities except skin color.
Since I respect Holly, I'll only use this latest example of attacking Obama's family: I could add many more.
You've got no game son, and you've apparently no memory either.
"ust a few more weeks until the arrogant, elitist, sociliast dickhead from Chicago with a wife that looks like Ru Paul is rejected by the American people."
And thank you for the respect; I'll allow that post to stand if you elaborate a bit. It's instructive.
This is just one example. There are many others.
If he wants to attack the candidate, it's one thing, but spouses and children should be off limits.
It's unfortunate, but in a public position like this, candidates' spouses and children have never really been "off limits." It would be nice if we could stick to raising legitimate, relevant questions (it would have been very telling IF Palin's daughter had not chosen to keep her illegitimate child, and had Palin supported that "choice"; it shows consistency, at least, in values that she has chosen to do have it).
Most candidates "use" their families to make them appear warmer, more real, more "family oriented." To some degree, they always suffer. To some degree, most do survive and even thrive, later in life. They learn some valuable lessons - like fame and public scrutiny aren't always a GOOD thing. They learn that what they do does affect others. They learn - one hopes - the value of discretion, and poise, and "stage presence."
WE need to be respectful and polite, even as we criticize the things that deserve scrutiny and criticism. WE need not be rude and crude about it, PARTICULARLY where children are concerned. I think minor children, particularly, deserve special protections. They don't have a say in whether mom or dad runs for public office, but it affects them deeply. We need to be kind, so long as they're not out driving drunk and killing people. It's a tough way to grow up.
Public figures are a little different. Be as critical as you like. ;) But why risk burying your point in profanity and outright rudeness? Cite facts, cite specific examples of their wrongdoing. Shout it from the rooftops!! Use biting humor and sarcasm. Just...who do you think you'd persuade if all you did was call them nasty names (tempting as I'll admit it is - you know, it's a wonder my TV set is still intact and functional, given the raw invective and solid objects I've been tempted to throw at it lately)?
Everyone is free to vehemently debate the issues and the merits of the candidates. Just keep it civil, "use your words," as we used to say to the kids when they'd turn six shades of red and purple and stomp their little feet in anger, and support opinions and arguments with some facts and logic - is that so much to ask? ;)
Thank you, Tony, for retracting "coward." (Not that it really bothered me. "Coward" isn't an obscenity, but an opinion.) You know, if I were the coward you evidently believe me to be, it would be so much easier NOT to selectively delete comments, but to turn them off altogether. I think Bill and Erik both will vouch for me - I didn't delete anything based on their political opinions. I strongly believe in the First Amendment, and I am also very much aware that it exists primarily and for the express purpose of criticizing our own government and exchanging ideas for the betterment of it. Not so much for putting each other down, personally...because that's actually a really fast and effective way to make your opposition tune out anything good and useful you might have to say later.
Ironically, had Hillary run a less rancorous campaign, I'd have faced a bit of a dilemma - two excellent Democratic candidates and a very hard choice. She has been a credit to the Democratic party since Obama won the nomination, gracefully throwing her full support behind him. I respect and admire that. The real problem was, I didn't know - right up until the moment she did it - if she would do that. Her "approval rating" shot up in my eyes, and I think there's no reason she couldn't run in eight years and win. (Granted, she'd be just slightly younger than McCain is now, but women - statistically - live longer, on average, than men. She'll be a young thing, still - with eight more years of experience to her credit.)
What really bothers me is the people who've said they want a candidate who is not so articulate, not so smart, "one of us," etc. I don't WANT "one of us." I want someone who understands most of us; who is smart enough to grasp the issues, problems, and root causes - and recognize solutions; and who speaks clearly and rationally and calmly before all the people of the world.
I want the U.S. to be respected and emulated again - not feared or reviled.