The ‘Palin Defect’

October 27, 2008

 

There has been much speculation about the possibility of Barack Obama’s candidacy being derailed by the ‘Bradley Effect’, so-named because Tom Bradley, an African-American candidate for governor in California in 1982, lost despite being ahead in most polls leading up to the election. The speculation was that people may have told pollsters that they would vote for an African-American candidate in order to appear politically correct, but when they got into the privacy of the voting booth, they voted against him based on some measure of latent racism.

 

This got me wondering if there might be a similar result in this presidential election. 

 

Is it possible that a significant number of self-proclaimed conservatives and Republicans who are publicly voicing their support for Sarah Palin will, in the privacy of the voting booth, and based on some measure of latent conscience, cast their votes against the “spectacularly unqualified” vice-presidential candidate and the man who misguidedly chose her as his running mate?

 

.

Testing…1…2…3…

October 25, 2008

 

So, Joe the Senator Biden is guaranteeing there will be a foreign incident generated to test the mettle of the new President, Barack Obama. John McCain has jumped all over this decrying, “We don’t need a president who invites testing. I have been tested.”

 

Oh, really? Tell us Senator McCain, what foreign policy decision did you ever have to make? What major crisis, foreign or domestic, have you ever averted? Oh, right, you say you were in the cockpit of your plane on the deck of an aircraft carrier off Cuba in 1962 during the ‘Cuban Missile Crisis’. So, let me get this straight: you were sitting in a plane awaiting orders which, thankfully, never had to be issued, while President John F. Kennedy and his staff were negotiating a peaceful resolution. And this tested your presidential qualifications how?

 

Truth be told, you have been tested repeatedly during this presidential campaign and, sadly, you have failed every time. 

 

When faced with a financial shortfall during the primary, you circumvented your own campaign finance reform law in order to keep your campaign afloat. So much for ethics.

 

When Barack Obama declined to take you up on your offer of holding a series of town-hall meetings, you used this as justification for launching the very kind of fear and hate-mongering, race-baiting, negative campaign you and your wife promised you would never run. So much for integrity.

 

When the Russian army crossed into Georgia (provoked by Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili who was probably emboldened to do so because of his relationship with you), your response was basically to tell the Russians to get out or else. Or else what? You then criticized Senator Obama for showing the prudence and restraint that you should have had. So much for diplomatic skills.

 

When the financial crisis hit, you flailed around, stabbing in the dark, and in trying to be bold and decisive, you instead showed yourself not to be in control of the situation or the members of your own party. So much for leadership.

 

And when it came to the most important test of any presidential candidate, the choice of a Vice-President, you offered up a supremely under qualified, vastly unknowledgeable, first-term governor whom you and your staff failed to properly vet. So much for judgment.

 

You have constantly misrepresented or lied outright about not only your opponent’s record, but your own as well. “I have a record. You can look it up.” But when a military veteran dared to call your bluff and actually looked up your voting record and confronted you with the truth, you brushed him off saying you had no idea which votes he was talking about. So much for honesty.

 

You have forsaken every principal you once championed and have embraced the divisive elements of your party you once stood so defiantly against. You have taken your once valiant biography and nearly reduced it to a cliché. You have mismanaged your campaign to the brink of defeat and failed to demonstrate even one moment of clarity and presidential preparedness. 

 

Senator McCain, I invite you to look up your record and that of your running mate and show me any indication that you will differ from George W. Bush on economic and foreign policies and that you are the better choice in this election. Study hard, Senator. There will be a test.

 

.

SNL Crisis

October 23, 2008

 

To the surprise of no one, Governor Sarah Palin’s appearance on NBC’s Saturday Night Live was roundly cheered by the right and just as roundly, though not universally, panned by the left. Her supporters said it showcased her charm and poise and gave her a chance to show her lighter side. Some of her critics opined that it only served to further reinforce the caricature that has been painted of her due to her self-imposed media embargo.

 

I think it was much more than that and much more nefarious. I found it to be a cleverly concealed series of pointed jabs which, when taken in their entirety, add up to a savaging of Sarah Palin’s image. If you’ve read my previous posts (and judging by my blog stats, you haven’t), you’ve probably noticed I am occasionally possessed by the conspiracy theorist in us all. So, with that in mind, I offer my take on the Governor’s SNL gig.

 

The opening segment starts with a fictional press conference with Tina Fey playing the role of Governor Palin and continuing to poke fun at her and John McCain. It then cuts to the real Sarah Palin who explains to SNL’s Executive Producer, Lorne Michaels, why she demurred from doing the skit herself. “I just didn’t think it was a realistic depiction of the way my press conferences would have gone.” The key phrase there is “would have gone” which further emphasizes the fact that since she was picked by McCain as his running mate, Governor Palin has never held a press conference.

 

Next up is Mark Wahlberg, who is so intent on settling his feud with Andy Sandberg, he doesn’t even acknowledge Palin’s presence. More importantly, as Wahlberg exits, the Governor shares the screen with Abraham Lincoln (an Illinois legislator who became President), a Rockette (possibly alluding to Palin’s pageant background) and the rear end of a llama? Maybe they couldn’t get a horse on short notice. 

 

Enter Alec Baldwin, an especially vocal Palin critic, who mistakes Governor Palin for Tina Fey then proceeds to call her “that woman”, “Caribou Barbie” and “that horrible woman”. When Lorne Michaels introduces the Governor as ‘The Governor’, the only compliment Baldwin can muster is, “You are way hotter in person” reducing her to little more than a sex object. And the llama’s still there.

 

Baldwin then informs the fake Sarah Palin (Fey) that the real Sarah Palin is there and as Fey exits, she passes the Governor and as with Mark Wahlberg, scarcely acknowledges her. Governor Palin then takes the podium to announce she’s “not going to take any of your questions” and to deliver the ubiquitous “Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!”

 

We were then forced to sit through some seriously unfunny ‘comedy’ bits and more interestingly, two ads for Barack Obama–the first addressing women’s issues and the second tying John McCain to George Bush.

 

On to ‘Weekend Update’ where Governor Palin reappears ostensibly to “clear up some misconceptions about her campaign” but instead she declares she’s “not going to do the piece we rehearsed” because it “might be bad for the campaign” and “might be over the line” and leaves it to a very pregnant Amy Poehler to deliver a Palin-stereotype-laden rap song which managed to insult Native Alaskans, Todd Palin, and ultimately Governor Palin herself. Oh, and Poehler shoots a moose. All right, she shot him with her finger and it wasn’t a real moose. So, Poehler does the rap while Palin does some seat dancing in silence proving, once again, if you take away her script, Governor Palin has nothing to say.

 

Heckuva job, Palie. Joke’s on you.

 

 

This just in: Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead.

.

McAnarchy in the U.S.

October 20, 2008

 

an·ar·chism

Pronunciation: \ˈa-nər-ˌki-zəm, -ˌnär-\

Function: noun

Date: 1642

1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups

 

 

On MSNBC’s ‘Hardball with Chris Matthews’, Former Governor of Pennsylvania and former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge declared that Barack Obama’s economic plans, specifically the notion of “spreading the wealth”, were “moving down that path” to socialism.

 

My question: If a major candidate for president, in this case John McCain, were to claim that he is “always for less government”, that he is “fundamentally a deregulator”,  that he agrees with his “hero”, Ronald Reagan, who said “government is not the solution to the problem; government is the problem” and that “government should get out of your way” would Governor Ridge conclude that this candidate was moving down the path to anarchism?

 

If “less government” is “always” preferable, by extrapolation, no government is the ideal.

 

No government = anarchism. 

 

Therefore, John McCain is an ANARCHIST.

 

All right, John McCain is not an anarchist. But by cashing his monthly Social Security check, by cashing his military disability checks, by using his government sponsored health care plan, John McCain, at least in part, is a socialist—as are we all.

 

 

 

Today’s related random logic:

 

Was it socialism when Alaska Governor and John McCain’s running mate Sarah Palin enacted a windfall profits tax on oil companies and distributed the funds (wealth) to the citizens of Alaska?

 

Yes, it was.

 

Therefore, Sarah Palin is a SOCIALIST.

 

.

Say It Ain’t So, Joe

October 18, 2008

*PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT*

 

The media are not “beating up” on ‘Joe the Plumber”.

‘Joe the Plumber’ IS A FRAUD.

The media are exposing ‘Joe the Plumber’ as the FRAUD that he is.

 

John McCain’s campaign is exposing him as the fraud he is.

 

 

We now return to our irregularly, unscheduled blog.

 

.

The Final Frontier (Debate)

October 15, 2008

I’m watching the post-debate analysis on MSNBC and I have no idea what debate the commentators were watching. Even though I am an Obama supporter, I have tried to be objective about these debates and I thought John McCain LOST HUGE.

I will write more once I give it all a chance to coalesce save this:

The “line” of the debate, the one that is likely to be replayed ad nauseam, was when McCain said, “I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago.”

What they may not include is the line which follows immediately where McCain said, “I’m going to give a new direction to this economy in this country.” He then spent the next couple of minutes not enunciating what that direction might be.

 

“It’s the economy, stupid.”

 

This is given as the reason for Barack Obama’s surge in the polls.

 

It’s not the economy, stupid.

 

It’s John McCain’s stupid reaction to the economy, stupid.

 

Stupid.

 

.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.