Unfortunately, I'm not a fan of Senator Joseph Biden, let alone Governor Sarah Palin. Biden is a smart, experienced, and savvy politician, but this is precisely his problem. He talks about change and I don't believe him. Compared to Governor Palin, Senator Biden looks slick and like an old guard congressman. Sarah looks young, alive, out of it (which is apparently cool now), and refreshing. Her gaffes, obsessive rhetoric, and even lies, hold up nicer than Joe's.
I'm still for Obama, which means I vote for Joe as well. Because even if the Senator is one of the Old Democrats trying to surround Obama to keep "change" within certain parameters, Governor Sarah Palin is downright dangerous. Yes, she is not fit to be vice-president--and certainly not a heartbeat from the presidency (I don't wish bad on anyone, including John McCain, but everyone knows he's perhaps too unhealthy for such an energized and demanding position as president).
Here's why I feel this way about Governor Palin. She's got presence. She's folksy. Compared to Biden (or, even worse, McCain) she looks like what she is--a hockey mom, former small town mayor, and mother of a pregnant teenager and a Down Syndrome baby. None of this, in my view, should disqualify her for high office. But she should thank Barack Obama for the historical limelight she's now enjoying. If he did not exist, she wouldn't be here.
Governor Palin as vice presidential candidate is the Republican Party's cynical response to having new and historical "correct" people on the ticket. Right now it's women and/or African Americans. They would never have done that if it wasn't for the fact that a woman, Hillary Clinton, and an African American were the Democrat's top candidates for the presidential nomination.
But I'm not for having women or African Americans be used for political ploys--in contrast to the women and people of color that the Greens and Nader have on their tickets (Cynthia McKinney, Rosa Clemente and Matt Gonzales) who are legitimately there for their activism and fresh ideas.
I can see right through Governor Palin's candidacy. She is being brought up to speed, I mean like real quick, cramming and memorizing (too many instances in the debate Palin came off with repetitive words and statements in lieu of real concrete answers). That's because she did fairly bad in the media interviews she's done so far. And, in my view, her folksy asides in the debate only served as subterfuge (she really doesn't know what she's talking about--it's her people making sure she has some coherent information to go by).
Biden had real answers (some of which I don't agree with) and concrete responses (even if a few were off the mark--although not like Palin's).
Governor Palin's pronouncement that she'd expand the vice presidential powers and her seeming agreement with Dick Cheney that the vice president is not part of the executive branch of government is appalling. Her strident stand against foreign powers and her inane statements about US freedoms and "a shining city on a hill" is sickening. We need real answers to real crises. While she extolled McCain's supposed "maverick" position in Congress, Biden was in his stride when he pointed out (the best part of the whole evening) that McCain was too much into Bush's pocket to be considered a "maverick." He's a maverick within a screwed up concept of goverment and governing.
Remember--during McCain's debate with Obama he said government should be more or less used for national defense and a few domestic concerns, but not much. The trend among the right-wing is to call for a strong overbearing able-to-pounce military in the world AND a virtual police state at home. McCain was almost there with his statements on this.
There's nothing to distinguish McCain from Bush so far except for McCain's temperament and even more outrageous war-mongering. He's more for war, not less. He claims he knows how to "win wars" but I don't know of any he has actually won (certainly not in Vietnam, the only war we're sure he's fought in).
Governor Palin's presence may be fine, but presence does not make a presidency (or in this case, the vice presidency).
We need substance in our candidates. Biden, for all his long-time issues and old-time politics, had this over Palin. She's folksy. But why is this now a criteria for high office? Any more pundits who gush over her "presence" and demeanor should be challenged immediately.
It's time to take the American people seriously, folks. Obama has problems. So does Biden. But they are more seriously able to address what is going on and to address real change than McCain, who's spent the last eight years mostly as a Bush apologist, and a right-wing happy-go-lucky governor of a state with a population half of LA's San Fernando Valley where I currently live.
We deserve better than this. The economic crisis and our terrible standing in the world must demand someone who can effectively lead, bring about a measure of real change, and be flexible and firm when needed. Obama is still the most qualified among the major parties in doing this.
c/s
I'm still for Obama, which means I vote for Joe as well. Because even if the Senator is one of the Old Democrats trying to surround Obama to keep "change" within certain parameters, Governor Sarah Palin is downright dangerous. Yes, she is not fit to be vice-president--and certainly not a heartbeat from the presidency (I don't wish bad on anyone, including John McCain, but everyone knows he's perhaps too unhealthy for such an energized and demanding position as president).
Here's why I feel this way about Governor Palin. She's got presence. She's folksy. Compared to Biden (or, even worse, McCain) she looks like what she is--a hockey mom, former small town mayor, and mother of a pregnant teenager and a Down Syndrome baby. None of this, in my view, should disqualify her for high office. But she should thank Barack Obama for the historical limelight she's now enjoying. If he did not exist, she wouldn't be here.
Governor Palin as vice presidential candidate is the Republican Party's cynical response to having new and historical "correct" people on the ticket. Right now it's women and/or African Americans. They would never have done that if it wasn't for the fact that a woman, Hillary Clinton, and an African American were the Democrat's top candidates for the presidential nomination.
But I'm not for having women or African Americans be used for political ploys--in contrast to the women and people of color that the Greens and Nader have on their tickets (Cynthia McKinney, Rosa Clemente and Matt Gonzales) who are legitimately there for their activism and fresh ideas.
I can see right through Governor Palin's candidacy. She is being brought up to speed, I mean like real quick, cramming and memorizing (too many instances in the debate Palin came off with repetitive words and statements in lieu of real concrete answers). That's because she did fairly bad in the media interviews she's done so far. And, in my view, her folksy asides in the debate only served as subterfuge (she really doesn't know what she's talking about--it's her people making sure she has some coherent information to go by).
Biden had real answers (some of which I don't agree with) and concrete responses (even if a few were off the mark--although not like Palin's).
Governor Palin's pronouncement that she'd expand the vice presidential powers and her seeming agreement with Dick Cheney that the vice president is not part of the executive branch of government is appalling. Her strident stand against foreign powers and her inane statements about US freedoms and "a shining city on a hill" is sickening. We need real answers to real crises. While she extolled McCain's supposed "maverick" position in Congress, Biden was in his stride when he pointed out (the best part of the whole evening) that McCain was too much into Bush's pocket to be considered a "maverick." He's a maverick within a screwed up concept of goverment and governing.
Remember--during McCain's debate with Obama he said government should be more or less used for national defense and a few domestic concerns, but not much. The trend among the right-wing is to call for a strong overbearing able-to-pounce military in the world AND a virtual police state at home. McCain was almost there with his statements on this.
There's nothing to distinguish McCain from Bush so far except for McCain's temperament and even more outrageous war-mongering. He's more for war, not less. He claims he knows how to "win wars" but I don't know of any he has actually won (certainly not in Vietnam, the only war we're sure he's fought in).
Governor Palin's presence may be fine, but presence does not make a presidency (or in this case, the vice presidency).
We need substance in our candidates. Biden, for all his long-time issues and old-time politics, had this over Palin. She's folksy. But why is this now a criteria for high office? Any more pundits who gush over her "presence" and demeanor should be challenged immediately.
It's time to take the American people seriously, folks. Obama has problems. So does Biden. But they are more seriously able to address what is going on and to address real change than McCain, who's spent the last eight years mostly as a Bush apologist, and a right-wing happy-go-lucky governor of a state with a population half of LA's San Fernando Valley where I currently live.
We deserve better than this. The economic crisis and our terrible standing in the world must demand someone who can effectively lead, bring about a measure of real change, and be flexible and firm when needed. Obama is still the most qualified among the major parties in doing this.
c/s
Do you like this post?
Be the first to comment
Sign in with
Facebook