Sarah Palin has correctly been faulted for lacking presidential gravitas, and for being a stupid, ignorant VP candidate without substantive credentials to step into the role of President. There is no doubt whatsoever that she was a disaster to the candidacy of John McCain, or that she was not adequately vetted. In short, the woman was - and is - an airhead and a popsie. This is especially a shame when there were better choices on the right for a female vice presidential selection. I believe this point by Jay Carney is spot on although I have to admit, Hillary Clinton would make an excellent VP. However she seems to be doing a very credible job as Sec State. I'm not sure there is anyone as qualified available to the Obama administration to replace her.
McStain, like Romney, had only one objective in mind when he ran in 2008 (and every other race he's ever been in) and that objective was to be elected. The means to his desired end were of little concern to him. If he thought a multiple axe-murderer would have been a net positive on his ticket he would have found one for his VP. Come to think of it, a multiple axe-murderer might have been less damaging to that ticket.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Hillary should take the Veep slot. I think she should hold out for Number One. The fact the most senior party members are even thinking about changing up the candidates this close to the election means they're terrified. Biden has been called the Crazy Uncle in the Attic before and nobody cared. He's not the guy dragging down the ticket. Hillary was the 2008 presumed candidate until months before the convention - women across America would be thrilled to have her back at the top. First Woman President. It's time.
ReplyDeleteI don't think she'll run, but that her decision might well be based on non-political reasons - like wanting to enjoy grandchildren if she has them. She's doing a more grueling travel schedule than many other Sec States have done, as the reason. I think she means it about wanting time to recover from it, possibly not even serving a second term as Sec State. On the other hand, Chelsea is saying no kids right now....so, who can predict?
ReplyDeleteBlack men in elected government have always succeeded ahead of women - first black senator was Hiram Revels in 1870, first black member of Congress was in 1871. The first woman to either house of Congress was Janet Rankin in 1916, almost 50 years after, along with voting rights with the 19th amendment, and women didn't get the vote nationally until after that, while black men got it with the 15th Amendment in 1870.
I hope more women will go into public life, but I would not be entirely surprised if it takes longer than it should. We're going backwards in women governors this election, based just on women candidates running for governor, but more women running for Congress, although I haven't kept up with how many of those primaried out of their races. We do have typically fewer women in all levels of office, from local, to state, federal, and in some cases regional (agency positions, mostly) compared to other countries, even some of those we think of as more repressive towards women or more traditionally masculine dominated. It is definitely not equal, and it is only becoming more equal slowly. Olympia Snowe leaving because she's fed up is a huge loss for everyone, men women or whatever political stripe, for example, but especially as a model for other women and girls.
So, from your lips to god's ears.....but I realistically am less optimistic for either this or the 2016 election to have a woman candidate for either party.
I sincerely believe that Sarah Palin set women back in presidential level politics, and that Michele Bachmann hasn't done any better. If there had been a woman who deserved to be tapped by the right, I have the deepest respect for the Marilyn Quayle, wife / 'second lady' of male airhead VP, Dan Quayle. She is a Republican treasure that has been overlooked by the party. she has the grace, the knowledge and education, and the poise and media savvy that would preclude the horrible examples we have seen from both Palin and Bachmann.
Dog- I disagree with your Palin comment.
ReplyDelete"I sincerely believe that Sarah Palin set women back in presidential level politics, and that Michele Bachmann hasn't done any better."
What Palin did, was prove that no amount of oil production can equate to what the rest of "The Lower 49" needs. What Bachmann proved, is that if you are going to be a Tea Party member, and cry about Government handouts, better make sure you and your family do not receive subsidies.
For the record, if Clinton was the nominee in '08, I would have voted for her. If she were the nominee now, I'd vote for her.
I don't believe Palin knows anything of significance about oil, or petrol-economics either. Her ignorance on an array of subjects is stunning, in the sense of numbing. She lacks both breadth and depth of education and information.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much more wrong, and frighteningly deficient, about Bachmann, both in terms of education (despite her degrees) and of character, that her family handouts from the government are the least of HER objectionable qualities. Where Bachmann shows her failures is that she shows the same kinds of profound ignorance. This is the woman who on the floor of Congress claimed, early in her career, made the statement that we can't be having a problem with carbon dioxide emissions and global warming, because carbon dioxide couldn't be harmful since it occurs in nature.
The essence of this is the failure to recognize that lots of elements that occur in nature are incredibly dangerous in the wrong balance or proportions. A small amount of arsenic won't hurt you; it occurs in things like apple juice. But the amount of arsenic that can hurt you, even kill you, is also very small, and occurs in nature. The kind of stupid thinking, combined with such a deficient grasp of information about objective reality, which she replace (or goes into denial over) by retreating into ideology and religion (or more superstition / pseudo-religion as she practices it) is apalling.
This is another woman who shows herself ill-equipped to do anything but preach her own ignorance to others who want to be told the same ideological things --- and reason, factual informtion or reality be damned. These are the women who joing the male ignormi in putting the dumb in talking about freedom.
The crowd to whom both women appeal sincerely believe things like Haiti had an earthquake because back in the 19th century, black men during a slave rebellion made a pact with the devil rather than as a result of geologic/tectonic forces. These women appeal to the superstition masquerading as religion of witches cursing Halloween candy:
http://penigma.blogspot.com/2009/10/creepy-trick-no-treats-for-halloween.html or that muslims are secretly turning our Thanksgiving turkeys Halal so as to secretly convert us to Islam against our will:
http://en.paperblog.com/right-wing-nuts-still-wrong-still-extreme-still-harping-on-the-turkey-thing-97823/
No one in their right mind (pun intended) could trust people with this level of not-thinking to be in charge of a lemonade stand on a sidewalk in summer, much less believe they are intellectually equipped for complex and nuanced, detailed, highly fact /data challenging policy decisions.
Their attitudes are that they don't need to think, they don't really need to know ANYTHING about anything when they really need to know a lot about EVERYTHING. They believe all they have to do is pray, or conform more to what they perceive (not particularly accurately) as past idealized directives.
That these women ALSO believe women should be submissive to men. One of the shocking statements that is recorded in Ayn Rand interviews is where she states that women are fundamentally not equipped or capable of being president, or commander in chief. Apparently not only could Ayn Rand not comprehend how the world could have a Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meier, or Indira Ghandi, she could not wrap her head around historic women like Queen Elizabeth I either. People who embrace ideology so uncritically accept things they shouldn't, just because someone they think was significant said them. Bachmann was told, apparently in Iowa, that she sould step aside for the male Republican candidates, because the right could not and would not support a woman in the White House in the top spot giving men orders -- and THAT is the same base that supports Bachmann in congress in the Tea Party. These are people who are profoundly against thinking, and all about salvation through conformity, and fear of everything that doesn't conform to the things they think will save them, even when those are the wrong things to believe.
ReplyDeleteTHAT is the problem with Palin, and Bachmann. It goes far beyond what you noted.
Palin bleeves that OTHER women should be submissive, not her own sweet, hot self.
ReplyDeleteHypocrisy is a three letter word, spelled G-O-P.
Both Palin and Bachmann have stted at different times - Bachmann more noticeably and more often - that women should be submissive to their husbands.
ReplyDeleteI don't want a woman president who takes their orders or who defers to their husband; the female president's husband is not who would have been the person elected to make the decisions, in that situation.
Nobody should respect the intellect of either of those husbands, btw. I don't think Todd Palin has any significant education, much less any experience that requires more than one brain cell. And Marcus Bachmann claims a PhD, in psychology, from a very dodgy and marginal academic institution that had its credentials yanked, for a period of years - and more than once, if I recall correctly --- and which DID NOT, during the time he claims to have earned that degree offer any such program, nor was it credentialed to offer that degree. (It was a correspondence course program btw, before online education existed, literally, a course on a par with back-of-matchbook classes.)
Bachmann went to a mostly unaccredited too-poor-academically to rank law school for her JD. She represented herself during various campaigns as a 'litigating attorney', which is a stretch, as she went into court twice, briefly, on what were pretty much routine hearing matters - and one of those was a case against a man so poor he was acting as his own attorney. Laci the dog - the real, four legged dog - has logged more court time than Michele Bachmann, and deserves as much to be called a litigating attorney. Her BA was from a very small, mid-range academically MN university.
Hillary Clinton, in contrast, graduated with honors from Wellseley in political science, then went on to Yale law, served as a one of the editors of the Yale law review. Yale Law has been ranked number 1 in some ranking systems, like that of U.S. News and World Report, since U.S. News and World Report began publishing rankings. Bachmann can't touch Hillary Clinton's legal background. HER law career includes serving as a Congressional legal counsel, and then went on to be a senior partner in a major law firm, AND was listed - TWICE - as one of the most influential lawyers in America. Not one of the most influential FEMALE lawyers, one of the most influential 100 lawyers, men or women.
Unlike Bachmann, I don't see Hillary Clinton trying to justify a failed middle east policy - and any policy either she or Palin has proposed would be a disaster, and possibly Mittens as well --- because Armageddon fulfills biblical prophesy, so it would be a good thing...or because dumb ass hubby told her to do it, and since being submissive to hubby is a biblical directive, God wouldn't let anything bad happen.
Because THAT is the level on which Palin and Bachmann operate. It is not the level on which ALL conservative women operate; but it is the level Bachmann and Palin bring to women in conservative presidential politics.
Hello Dog Gone,
ReplyDelete"Bachmann notes that women should be submissive to their husbands?"......Even if they are Gay like her husband is suppose to be? :-)
I agree with J.O.B. on this one. I have always like McCain, maybe it is the Viet Nam thing, but Sarah Palin was the deal breaker for me.