Vox Tells It Like It Is
It's hard to decide which is the more ridiculous idea: (a) That the governor of Alaska successfully faked a pregnancy and is passing off her grandson as her son, or (b) that Bristol Palin's pregnancy somehow demonstrates the inefficacy of abstinence-based education.
Both notions require brain damage, an IQ at least 35 points below the norm, or willful ideological blinders for anyone who spends more than five seconds thinking about the matter to adhere to them.
I'm always amazed when people like Pat Buchannan or Ron Paul are dismissed as fringe kooks for talking about things like dumping the Federal Reserve or the undue influence of Israel's lobby on Congress, yet when a supposed "mainstream" pundit like Andrew Sullivan floats some trumped-up BS rumor as fact, he's just informing the electorate.
I am also amused, in an ironic sort of way, when the media exhibits its double standard in such a stunningly obvious fashion. They are raising the roof over a 17-year-old pregnant girl who is keeping her baby and marrying the father, something that wouldn't even raise an eyebrow in most of heartland America. However, not so long ago, they buried a story about a major political figure who was doing the horizontal tango with a campaign worker while his wife faced terminal cancer and who then paid said play toy hush money to avoid any embarrassing evidence, like paternity tests.
This is all much about nothing. It's just a distraction tactic to remove attention from the fact that our next president will either be a radical black Marxist or an insane old Fascist.
posted by Anonymous | 7:53 PM
7 Comments:
Further, this all may be a distraction tactic to remove attention from Palin’s legitimately disturbing shortcomings, which will continue to reveal themselves (a la Dan Quayle and possibly Thomas Eagleton style) between now and November 4.
You crack me up, Strother... You're now saying this all may be a distraction tactic by Palin. Have you gone completely mad? Ha! You have been reading too much Andrew Sullivan, Daily Kos and the Huffington Post (the Thomas Eagleton mention in your comment gave it away.) And I see you're bringing up Dan Quayle, who served in the House for 4 years and the U.S. Senate for 8 years before he was elected Vice-President. So what was his shortcomings other than he was a Republican?
Didn't realize you were this threatened by Sarah Palin... I hope you're taking something to help you get through the day. :-)
Here is where Strother is getting his info with regard to "a la Dan Quayle and possibly Thomas Eagleton style".
That's kind of an odd response, Strother. I don't have any doubt that McCain picked Palin for completely superficial reasons. He apparently knows the electorate. He will score a metric buttload of votes just because she's a woman, and an attractive one to boot. He will score a smaller, but still significant number of votes because she is a "conservative" woman. The media hates that because she represents a tangible threat to their anointed candidate. They are in a feeding frenzy and your posts make it sound like you're in there with them, your weak protestations notwithstanding.
Before television and the Internet, neither of these men would have the faintest hope of being elected President. People paid attention to what the candidates said and their records. They also tended to be less inclined to vote based on which team the candidate was playing for. Now elections are little more than a combination of a beauty pageants and a sporting events. Face it, both men picked running mates on those terms.
Obama picked Biden because he is a white, establishment male with a lot of time in the shark-infested waters of Washington politics. McCain picked Palin because she is a nominally conservative-libertarian attractive female with executive credentials. McCain won that round. Move on.
Have you gone completely mad? Didn't realize you were this threatened by Sarah Palin... I hope you're taking something to help you get through the day ... Here is where Strother is getting his info with regard to "a la Dan Quayle and possibly Thomas Eagleton style".
More ad hominem? C'mon — you can do better than that!
Anyway, no. My mom mentioned Eagleton in a conversation we had on Monday; she remembered how he disappeared from the McGovern ticket once the heat got to be too much for him (obviously, he had more than just a few unwanted issues below the surface). Eagleton is about the best example of a worst-case scenario in bad VP vetting. That's my point w/ him.
So what was [Quayle's] shortcomings other than he was a Republican?
Don't tell me you don't remember. Wasn't he the kind of VP that, even if you couldn't stand Bush I, you would actively pray for the president's continued good health?
Andy, I guess that, when you personally examine the way things appear to be and discuss those things with folks who remember similar times in history, you'll sometime stumble upon the same conclusions as other people ... even (gasp) members of the press!
Obama picked Biden because he is a white, establishment male with a lot of time in the shark-infested waters of Washington politics. McCain picked Palin because she is a nominally conservative-libertarian attractive female with executive credentials. McCain won that round. Move on.
Your wishful thinking aside, Steve, I think you may be proven wrong. Look at it this way; two presidential candidates had an opportunity to pick a VP. Obama picked someone that broadened the ticket (Biden has lots of experience in Washington and foreign relations, and Obama does not). McCain picked someone that didn't broaden the ticket ... except that, oh, yes — she's a woman (an unproven and comparatively inexperienced candidate, but an attractive woman). Sure, the electorate is often shallow and/or dense, but it's a big gamble to simply run with — to quote Ray Charles — "I Got A Woman" as a thinly veiled explanation of your VP choice.
The more Palin-associated press that floats to the surface that the media can run with, the more of a gamble McCain's choice will become.
He may call himself a "maverick," etc., but like I said earlier, if McCain really was a maverick, he would've chosen someone else that broadens his ticket, highlighting his "ability to reach across party lines," which is something McCain likes to pride himself in. Joe Lieberman would've been the winning choice for him; I think it would've been over at that point. But we all know the Republicans ixnayed that idea; mixed tickets would be way too good for the voters, and not good enough for our big, bloated political parties.
Strother opines: "He may call himself a "maverick," etc., but like I said earlier, if McCain really was a maverick, he would've chosen someone else that broadens his ticket, highlighting his "ability to reach across party lines," which is something McCain likes to pride himself in.
Why didn't Obama reach across party lines for his VP selection? He could have asked Chuck Hagel. Why is it that it's always the Republicans who have to compromise to show "bipartisanship." One of the reasons conservatives have been lukewarm at best for McCain is that he's always reaching across party lines, even when he didn't have to. That's what drives conservatives crazy... It's like we compromise for compromise sake.
"Joe Lieberman would've been the winning choice for him; I think it would've been over at that point. But we all know the Republicans ixnayed that idea; mixed tickets would be way too good for the voters, and not good enough for our big, bloated political parties.
Of course we were against Lieberman being on the ticket... For the most part, Lieberman is a liberal. It's nothing against Joe, and I know McCain & Lieberman are close friends, but other than foreign policy, him & Lieberman don't agree on much with regard to domestic policy. What's wrong with the Republican Party wanting two Republicans on the ticket?
Actually, mixed tickets don't work. If you can talk to the dead, ask Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson about mixed tickets.
"Your wishful thinking aside..."
My only wishful thinking in this election has to do with hoping it will be over soon. As for broadening the ticket, talk about wishful thinking! The VP is a talking head for Administration policy, no more, no less. Either candidate might as well have picked a porn star with bodacious tatas for all the breadth it would add to the ticket. It is smoke and mirrors.
Post a Comment
<< Home