Archive for August, 2008
Referral to a tough post on Palin
A friend of mine runs a blog called “Why We Need Obama.” He just put up a strong anti-Palin post that I wanted to refer our readers to. Click here to check it out.
I’m still sorting my personal views out on this pick. At the moment I think it was a smart political move. McCain needed a game changer. Picking Palin gave his maverick narrative a breath of life, it changed the story following a powerful Democratic convention. Despite her inexperience, many will find Palin a bold and compelling figure, including some former Hillary Clinton supporters.
That said, in terms of governance, this pick seems terribly irresponsible due to her complete lack of foreign policy experience and her weakness on economic issues. Also, as the post referenced above points out, it seems to have been hastily made without proper vetting. Before any of you McCainiacs come after me and say Obama = Palin on foreign policy, I’d remind you that Obama sat on the foreign relations committee for 4 years, which includes heavy briefing and study of the most pressing international issues that will face the administration.
I recently heard a former GOP congressional leader comment on the absurdity of letting one man (or woman) decide who the Vice President will be. I think there is very little doubt Palin would not have been the selection of the majority of Republican voters because of her inexperience on economic and international issues, and because of her far-right views on social policy. VP candidates should also have to run in a primary. The people deserve a say in who each parties VP will be, particularly when the candidate at the top of the ticket is a 72 year old former P.O.W. who is also a cancer survivor.
Gustav
I talk a lot of shit about the media, but I have to say, CNN knows how to cover hurricanes. We all remember Anderson Cooper’s reporting on Katrina, and it looks like CNN has rallied around his example now that Gustav is coming, because they are just tossing down their hurricane knowledge like it’s nothing.
Anyway, if anybody has anything interesting to say about Gustav, feel free to discuss it here. From what I’ve been watching, it looks like it’s going to be awfully bad, but also like we’ve got our act together better than last time. Here’s hoping for the best.
Palin fails crucial GOP test, sucks at naming things
Editors note: This post was playfully written and intended in jest. That seems to be lost on some of you posting comments.
The modern Republican Party is only good at two things: (1) winning campaigns, and (2) naming things. Forget about governing or following through on promises to cut spending. Despite her one loss for Lieutenant Governor, Sarah Palin is a proven winner. However, she has proven herself a catastrophic failure in the modern GOP’s great strength, naming things.
Since Sarah Palin claims her experience as a mother is a factor qualifying her to be leader of the free world should the actuarial tables on McCain’s life expectancy hold up, lets look at the five most important naming decisions she’s made so far as a mother. She has five children, and she gave all five of them absurdly stupid names. From Wiki: “Palin has two sons (Track, 19; and Trig, four months) and three daughters (Bristol, 17; Willow, 14; and Piper, 7).” Does this bother anyone else?
What questions for Palin are sexist?
Sarah Palin has chosen to have a large family, which poses demands on her time. Is it fair to ask her how she would balance her young family’s need for a mother against the impossible rigors of the Presidency? Brain accuses Johnathan Atler of sexism for raising an issue particularly likely to be weighted by conservative republican “family values” voters. Is it sexist to ask a political question about whether this view of family values held by a portion of her base will impact voter turnout?
It is probably true that most commentators would hesitate longer in raising this issue if Todd Palin were the candidate, I wonder if that alone makes it fair to call the question sexist. Is this mitigated in any way by the political truth that a significant portion of her base includes “family values” voters who tend to think a child’s mother should play a significant role in child rearing, particularly in the child’s younger years?
How about a different, but related question: “Governor Palin, do you intend to have more children in the next eight years?“
Something just feels wrong about asking that, and the follow up of “do you use birth control” seems pretty squarely out of bounds. Still, having a child at her age carries with it attendant health risks. How would the American people feel about a woman in the third trimester of pregnancy trying to meet all the duties that come with that office? At what point would she invoke the 25th Amendment? Is it reasonable to ask if she practices safe sex. Probably not, but we did get to learn that Bob Dole uses Viagra! If there is much of a possibility she will have another baby, and she would invoke the 25th Amendment, should we be troubled by not knowing who she would nominate to be her VP if she were elevated (not knowing who would be running things if Am25 were invoked).
There are obvious birthing issues that apply to women and not men. We’ve never had to address these before as the only other female VP nominee would have been 50 when in office, and less likely to have another child. I’m interested in where the line between a fair question and a sexist question should be drawn.
A Note on Liberals and Sexism
A few accusations of sexism, some implicit and some explicit, were leveled against me/liberals in the previous two threads on Sarah Palin’s VP nomination. That’s an interesting conversation to have, but for now I want to focus in on this related statement in the previous post by Prescott (emphasis added):
So don’t all the accusations that she is unqualified or not suitable smack of small mindedness? Is she unqualified because she is a woman? Because she didn’t go to the right school? Because she isn’t a Washington insider? Pick your poison. I mean answer. … Now I know what you are thinking. We are liberals! We don’t do that stuff.
At least in part (and I suspect primarily), the “stuff” referred to that liberals think we don’t do is sexism. Prescott has a bit of a habit of framing things this way: “I know what you’re thinking,” followed by a statement so absurd only an imbecile would ever think it. So let me just say, I don’t think I know a single liberal, and I certainly don’t know any liberals whose opinions I respect, who think liberals can’t be sexist. More than that, we don’t believe it’s particularly unlikely for liberals to be sexist, because everybody is. Stereotypes based on gender, race, class, etc., are pervasive in our society. We are all victims of those stereotypes, and therefore we are all likely to engage in prejudiced thought or behavior. That’s why we believe that each of us has a personal responsibility to be vigilant about that liability and put forth conscious effort into filtering our beliefs through the prism of our life experiences and adjusting accordingly as best we can. It’s why each of us has a personal responsibility to be open to the possibility failing in that effort from time to time, and to be sensitive and open-minded about disagreement.
To be clear: I take absolutely no offense at accusations of sexism leveled against me, as long as those accusations are sincerely felt and are paired with some sort of meaningful explanation of why those feelings exist. I do, however, find it incredibly condescending when people assume I have idiotic opinions like “liberals can’t be sexist.”
To underline the point, here is an example of what I would consider sexism coming from a liberal in a column today by Jonathan Alter:
The balance between work and family, always a ticklish issue, will be brought into bold relief by the fact that the Palins’ fifth child, Trig, was born with Down syndrome in April. Todd Palin, a commercial fisherman, may shoulder the bulk of the child-rearing duties in their family. But many voters will nonetheless wonder whether Palin should undertake the rigors of the vice presidency (and perhaps the presidency) while caring for a disabled infant. The subject will no doubt arise on “Oprah” and in other venues.
I find it incredibly difficult to believe that if it were Todd Palin who had been selected instead of Sarah that Alter would be raising this issue, and I also find it cowardly that Alter phrases it as a cheap insinuation rather than a clear judgment, thereby protecting himself from criticism while still being able to throw out the accusation that Palin is a bad mother. Andrew Sullivan, by the way, has posted e-mails from readers making the same accusation. It’s stupid, it’s unfounded, and it’s sexist. But because all of us are at the very least subconsciously affected by the image of women as caregivers, it sounds plausible when leveled against a woman, whereas it would sound wrong and absurd if leveled against a man.
That’s not to say Alter is A Sexist. It’s to say that in this particular instance I think he fell prey to a pervasive but prejudicial way of thinking about women in our society. If somebody thinks I’ve done the same thing, they should feel free to say so and explain why. Just don’t assume I’m a moron.
McCain/Palin 08
First and foremost, if in 2004 I said “one veep candidate is going to be a white guy who makes racially suspect comments, and the other is going to be a woman” who would have guessed the first would be the Dem and the second would be the Republican.
Brian and the MSNBC commentators have made several solid points, at least on its face, against Sarah Palin as a legitimate vice presidential candidate. And the “on its face” is not a knock on Brian or MSNBC. This choice came as a surprise to almost everyone (*cough cough*), and there has not been a lot of public vetting. Palin was not a staple on the Sunday morning television shows, like Biden was, and is from the boondocks. But I would like to provide a response to a lot of the common arguments that I have seen.
I am not going to say that this choice was not meant to target women as a primary consideration – it was. However, I think what a lot of people are overlooking is that Palin appeals to that other Clinton demographic that the Democratic Convention did not reach; the blue collar, union democrats. The group of individuals which Barack Obama supposedly called “bitter.”
Sarah Palin’s husband is a lifelong union guy. She is a member of the NRA who enjoys the outdoors. She has worked hard and is not upper class. She is a hockey mom, and thus can appeal and relate to that constituency in a way Obama, Biden, and McCain cannot. (Although, I still don’t know how Clinton related, but that is my own deficiency). Barack Obama accused John McCain not understanding what the average American was going through. Well Sarah Palin knows, and better than Barack Obama because she is decidedly not a millionaire.
Now, I mentioned that there was an appeal to women. Let us get back to that. Brian and others have mentioned that she won’t whittle away the democrat’s base among women since she doesn’t represent women’s issues.
Lets cut the bullshit right here and now. The above paragraph is misleading. It is not women’s ISSUES, its women’s ISSUE; specifically abortion. While I admit that I am not familiar with her position on wage and other issues of discrimination, I am pretty sure she is against those things, but pursues ending those issues using conservative means. Call it a hunch. So if Senator Biden, the old white guy, wants to challenge her on any women’s issue outside of abortion, I am pretty sure she has a zinger in her back pocket that will make him look silly.
Now for abortion, I will be equally intrigued to see how Senator Biden will go after her prolife stance, especially given her background story. Her youngest child was born with Down’s syndrome, and I do not have to tell anyone the difficulties that are involved with raising a child with that particular disease. These complications are reason enough for a lot of people to abort a child when they find out it has this disease. She walked the walk and had the child. As a result, I would find it difficult to see how Biden could attack her on her position.
And now to the best part of the nomination, and the aspect that makes me downright giddy, because now, I get to educate the liberals on something. Specifically, “the downside of attacking a female candidate.” As a conservative, I know a little bit about this.
A lot of people are saying she is unqualified, but don’t know anything about her; not really. They know of her positions, but she is a dark horse. So don’t all the accusations that she is unqualified or not suitable smack of small mindedness? Is she unqualified because she is a woman? Because she didn’t go to the right school? Because she isn’t a Washington insider? Pick your poison. I mean answer.
See, wasn’t that fun? The problem is you do not know her that well, especially her background, so you really don’t have a solid basis to judge her. Not your fault, no one knows much about her. But any judgment on her preparation, especially at this point, leads to those type questions.
Now I know what you are thinking. We are liberals! We don’t do that stuff. But here is the thing. You are running against a woman now from outside the beltway. This is the type of crap you have to look forward to!
(Note to Josh: Don’t start in on the foreign policy stuff. Seriously, it’s a loser. Why do you ask? Because in 2007 Palin went on an international tour to Kuwait and Germany, much like Obama. Unlike Obama, she didn’t have a presidential following, didn’t go to a lot of fancy dinners, and DID go to the military hospitals. How do you think that would play in Pennsylvania?)
This leads me to the whole experience issue. “How can McCain pick someone who is only a heartbeat away from the presidency with so little experience? She has only run the smallest state in the union, and a town?” Obvious response. “The guy at the top of your ticket has comparable experience. And he has never run anything! Forget a heart beat away…he is already there!”
Fundamentally this is still a risk for the McCain campaign. She gave one speech, which was fine. She introduced herself and painted a fine narrative for herself which is how you start. She still has a long way to go, and a lot to do to prove that she is ready. She could have a ton of gaffes. I am not going to say she is going to win the election McCain, she won’t. She probably won’t lose it for him either. However, this does change the dynamic of the election and in a way that can not be dismissed by saying it is a cynical calculation? Was Joe Biden not a calculation to get more votes on the part Obama?
In my opinion, MSNBC and the other organs of the Obama campaign screwed up the announcement by going into hyper discredit mode. If they had played it cool and said “hey, we don’t know what she is about, but we sure are going to find out,” then it would have been ok and the impact would not have been as great. Later on, they could have made attacks on Palin based on better research, better understanding of the candidate, etc., and looked well reasoned.
Instead, they freaked out. They overreacted, threw out accusations about her being a non-entity, and opened themselves up to claims of being sexist/superior/out of touch and confined to knee jerk reactions. Mistake. Now every time Palin does something competent, she proves them wrong; every solid speech she give undercuts them.
Long story short, the ball is now in Palin’s court. And considering that she was a state champion point guard, that is probably a mistake.
Palin
Prescott must be happy, and I’ll give him credit: he called it. I will say, it’s not either of the candidates I was hoping for (Pawlenty or Romney), which means McCain could have done worse for himself. Picking a woman is a smart move, but as a play for dividing the Democrats over Hillary, I think that’s gonna be a tough task following the Democratic Convention, which was nothing if not a unifying event for Democrats. It also seriously damages the experience argument against Obama. And without having seen her speak except for the speech she’s giving as I type these words, I seriously doubt she can go toe-to-toe with Joe Biden in a debate. She seems like a charming figure, and she’s gonna help when the Republicans try to present themselves next week as the party of reform. Certainly not the worst McCain could have done, but I am not particularly impressed.
By the way, my brother just sent me an e-mail delivering what is likely to be the best line about her all election season:
Runner up in the 1984 Miss Alaska Pageant. She has experience being 1-heart-beat away.
UPDATE: One argument I had not considered:
Indeed. Sarah Palin will stare down Putin from across the Bering Strait. COUNTRY FIRST.
Preemptive Strike
This is my preemptive strike. In an effort to spare everyone from necessarily being subjected to extreme pro- or anti-Obama drivel which I imagine will be spewing forth later tonight, consider this a forum to expound on your own particular response to Obama’s speech, by doing so in the comments. Thanks.
The "right" to give birth?
One of my friends here in
One of the theater productions the residents were working on dealt with the theme of “birth.” The residents had the opportunity to speak with a mid-wife and ask questions about the birth of babies and the group later went to a local hospital to see new-borns up close. After the Q & A with the mid-wife and field trip, the residents were ready to perform their rendition of a birth while rehersing for a play. Both men and women actors stuffed their bellies with pillows, practiced lamaze, and stood by their “significant other” while he or she enacted childbirth. When one of the babies was “born,” one of the residents who swaddled a bundle of towels remarked, “Oh, what beautiful blond eyes!” It was really sweet to watch this.
After play practice, many of the residents began to discuss what it would actually be like to bear children. Most of the residents—who ranged in age from about 20 to 50—said they wanted to be parents and yearned to have babies. What was really interesting to hear was nearly all of the people who wanted babies wished that it would be “normal.”
During a discussion with the producer, he noted that the farm residents should have children if they wanted to—because giving birth was a human right.
I had to sincerely question whether there is a “human right” which includes the right to reproduce. In my view, a rational human who has little or no capacity to take care of him or herself would not choose to bring a child into the world—to me, this seems more like a “human” response to this conundrum.
Since many of the people at the farm lack the capacity to ration, should other rational people make the choice for them (as in, for the disabled residents not to bear children), or is there some higher order of a “human right” lurking out there that supersedes this notion? Rational people make this choice all the time when we choose to spay or neuter our “irrational” house-pets. Spaying and neutering is even considered a humane and ethical element of caring for pets—as it reduces many health risks and ensures that the pet will not contribute to pet-animal overpopulation. Is it wrong to extrapolate this idea to irrational humans?
The question that comes next is, “How does one decide who is and who is not irrational by mental disability?” That is a good question that has really thrown me off a lot. Many societies over time have found a definition for this and made the decision to sterilize people. History tells us that many people dubbed mentally disabled and who were later sterilized were in fact, wrongly labeled as such.
But in terms of the people living at this particular farm near
The people who manage the farm already have chosen for their residents—the women living at the farm are all given birth control pills—which to me is just a nicer, *seemingly*-less-concrete form of sterilization anyway.
House of the Rising Sun Under a Canopy of Fog
I was driving home around midnight tonight. It was cool outside, probably around 60 degrees. It is dark on the country roads that lead to my new, modern condo. I came upon Curtis Road while driving my usual route south on First Street. I am supposed to continue heading south on First to get to my place. Just before I got to the intersection, House of the Rising Sun warmed the radio. It was the good version, too. The one by the Animals. Often, or maybe always, I prefer the radio to iTunes or a CD. The radio is wild and spontaneous. The radio is opening a present on Christmas morning, while iTunes is buying your own presents year after dreadful year. With radio you will more often be forced to listen to unwanted notes and songs, but when the perfect song crackles on the imperfect airwaves there is not a better moment in my life. I sing and shout along with these perfect songs when they come along.
On this night, about two hours ago now, I turned left onto Curtis Road, instead of proceeding straight to my home. Country roads are often grids with cross streets spaced apart by about one mile or more. Savoy country roads conform to these traditions. I had noticed a slight fog before, but a half mile into my journey down the mysterious and dark road the fog grew more dense. The canopy of fog hovered over my car. It skimmed the turquoise roof of my 1993 Beretta. I reached out the window a couple of times to touch it, but it felt no different from regular air. House of the Rising Sun was only about halfway through its 4 minute and 32 second duration when the fog became very dense such that I had to slow down for caution, though this adventure was intended to lack caution. My chest felt with anxious certainty that something awful, something bloody and gory would soon happen. Perhaps a person would appear in the road and I would not have enough time to avoid winning in an unfair joust to the death. Perhaps one of the farmers would shoot at me for shouting the lyrics so madly and loudly out of my lowered, hand cranked windows. Perhaps a lonely Midwestern ghost would say hello to me. The Animals’ version is eerie and mysterious and ambiguous and beautiful and burning with orange Louisiana chords. The fog and the music and the madness and the darkness and the fate all crashed into one moment. They all crashed into one moment of calm and soothe and freedom and youthful wonder and wander. I floated as still as the fog.
In all, my journey was about 4.12 miles, according to Google Maps. Nothing eventful happened, unless you consider the above events to be eventful. Maybe this is a pointless story not worth sharing. Maybe the point is buried or subtle. Maybe I’m just full of shit and thought it funny to waste your time.