I was excited to hear the news this morning. Loved the pick for all the reasons Seven has laid out earlier today on the blog.
Then I watched her speech and I was hugely disappointed. Unlike Seven I found the speech to be remarkably bad. Atrocious, even, at the risk of sounding hysterical or knee-jerky. Her voice sounds nasal and shrill, which makes her unpleasant to listen to regardless of the substance of her comments. The substance, though, was an even bigger issue.
Palin’s comments were poor for all the reasons I’ve found most of Obama’s speeches to be vacuous. There was little (actually, nothing) of substance, and instead all we heard were platitudes about people like Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton. As a down-the-line conservative I have a major problem with a conservative Republican giving remarks in which the audience is intended to interrupt with applause for Ferraro and Clinton. Furthermore, all the talk about these two women served to highlight the tokenism involved in McCain’s choice. This is especially disappointing because there is so much to like about Palin beyond the fact that she is a woman. I know McCain is trying to pull in these allegedly disgruntled Hillary supporters, but even so, I was just rubbed the wrong way.
Anyway, it was just one speech. I’m still, like, “totally pumped” for Palin and I think she’s a great choice on the whole. Still, I was hoping to watch the speech and find myself even more excited; instead, I was disappointed and it put a bit of a damper on the whole thing for me.
I finally decided to write a comment on your blog. I just wanted to say good job. I really enjoy reading your posts.
Mooseburger -
I don’t think your view of politics as some sort of eliminationist or zero-sum game, where one side can’t even mention the other side as being human and deserving of praise lest people begin to think that they might be, serves you well. As you mention, the reason Palin chose to mention Ferraro and Clinton was the very same reason she was picked as McCain’s VP and why she works as a choice for him and as a model for female accomplishment (blotches on the record aside).
Now, I don’t think that PUMAs should vote for McCain, but I don’t think they think very deeply about the reasons why they vote anyway, and so probably will end up doing so. Insomuch as it helps McCain’s cause, this was both smart and good politicking.
You see, I can recognize that McCain and his running mate are deserving of respect without diminishing my own cause.
Thanks a lot Jamie, we really appreciate your readership. Good to know we’re not just talking to ourselves haha.
Keep coming and please feel free to put in your two cents. The more, the merrier.
As for Mooseburger’s post, it’s funny how much perspectives can differ across individuals, even ones that start off from a similar place. I found her really likeable and well-spoken and I’m looking forward to her stumping for McCain. If you don’t like that choke on a mooseburger.
I’m actually OK with mentioning the other side as being human. I thought McCain’s congratulatory message for Obama was classy and impressive. But when a conservative Republican starts talking about Ferraro and Clinton, the tone should be critical, not effusive.
I’d argue that your hyperbole doesn’t “serve you well.”
One can recognize that the other side is praiseworthy without losing one’s ability to criticize them. Sometimes praise works in conjunction with criticism to elevate the side making both.
I’m sorry if it came off as hyperbolic, but sometimes I think you don’t want there to be a dialog between the two parties so much as a war. If that’s not the case then I stand corrected.
If Obama lacks experience to be president then how can you argue that this is a good pick? As of a few years ago she was the mayor of a village of 5,000 people.
Well, I think there are two things working in her favor on the experience issue. First, she has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined. Second, she’s not running for president.
But she is a heartbeat away from the oval office, the requirement for experience should be the same. McCain does deserve to be called out on this, at the very least he needs to explain why Obama doesn’t meet the standard, but someone governing a town with less people than my apartment building does. Even Obama’s state senate district had 20 times the population of Wasilla.
1) What this seems to show is that McCain doesn’t actually believe in the “too inexperienced” argument he’s making against Obama. Or, if he is being genuine with that argument, it means he’s willing to risk the U.S. having a president with no record of opinion or knowledge on any foreign policy issue–just to win a news cycle.
2) It’s really bizarre that he hardly knows her–has no idea of how she would govern. It’s one thing if he could say “Her resume may seem thin, but I talked to this person, I know this person, and I believe in her.” He can’t say that. The American people have had a long time to observe Obama, and through the primaries and general, we get to decide with our votes whether he’s up to the job. But only McCain got to make this decision, and far from demonstrating due-diligence, he was rash and short-sighted.
I really don’t know how you call what just happened “putting country first.”
And I think it’s the best development for the Obama campaign since the first place finish in Iowa.