John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running-mate truly baffles me. Many see it as a calculated political maneuver aimed at bringing in many of those who supported Hillary Clinton's historic presidential bid. McCain calls her a "reformer" and hopes that this emboldens his maverick image, offering a Republican version of how best to bring change to Washington. It is a risky gamble for McCain, who clearly, in my view, felt the need to throw the long ball in light of Obama's tremendous appeal to those hungry for change. Below is a summary of my five main issues with Sarah Palin.
1. The Gender Thing - In 1984, Mondale thought that picking a woman might energize women voters and give him a shot at defeating a popular incumbent in Ronald Reagan. Ferraro, it might be argued, had more experience than Sarah Palin, having served in Washington and knowing a bit more about foreign policy. However, when all was said and done, Reagan won re-election in a landslide. Mondale managed just his home state of Minnesota and D.C. Ferraro did not even carry her own home state. What is more, Reagan won among women by about a twelve point margin. Now the Republicans are crying foul, suggesting that the Democrats and the media are very sexist towards Palin. Though Obama and Biden came out in defense of Palin as a strong woman with unique qualifications and insisted that her family was off limits, that did not stop the Republicans from raising the issue and the media bought into it. For all the cries about sexism, it was funny to see Republican delegates brandishing buttons that read: "Hottest VP". They cannot have it both ways. Ironically, it was also Palin herself that was quoted as saying that Hillary was whining about the treatment she was getting during the Democratic primaries. Upon being introduced as John McCain's running-mate though, Palin was quick to point to Hillary's historic efforts against all odds. This leads us to a more specific comparison of Palin to Hillary.
2. The Hillary Factor - This could be part of the Gender Thing, but Hillary's is such a unique case that it deserves its own analysis. True, Hillary is a woman and many women were energized by her historic run. However, it is insulting to many women to suggest that simply because McCain put a woman on his ticket, that they would brainlessly flock to the Republicans. Indeed, a good many may vote for McCain, especially if they are still upset about Hillary's loss to Obama - but these same women were probably prepared to vote for him now anyway, regardless of whether McCain picked Palin, Romney, or Pawlenty. Plus, some of these would-be defectors may have since been won back by the Democrats after Hillary and Bill's call to unity at the convention. True blue Democratic women, even if they preferred Hillary, will not be duped by McCain's ploy because the issues that matter most to them - healthcare, education, reproductive rights, crimes against women, equal pay, and so forth are far more important. A champion of women like Joe Biden will be far more appealing to progressive women than an arch-conservative woman on the Republican side who has been nothing short of a traitor to her own best interests as a woman. Also, Sarah Palin is no Hillary Clinton. If you put the two side-by-side in a debate, Hillary would appear to be the more grown-up, experienced, and capable leader that she is, while Palin would come off as the lead cheerleader at the high school pep-rally, which was the perception I got when I saw her speak in Ohio upon being introduced by McCain. In other words, Palin did not come across so much as a tough political reformer; instead, with that high-pitched peppy voice, she stepped right into all the stereotypic traps that had for so long dogged female politicians before the emergence of Hillary Clinton.
3. Experience - Sarah Palin was the mayor of a small town and has served as Governor of Alaska, a thinly populated state in spite of its geographic area, for a mere twenty months. We have barely gotten to know Sarah Palin and she will have but 67 days to introduce herself to us. While she governed in relative obscurity, we have been getting to know Barack Obama over that same time period. Not only does McCain's pick undermine the Republican argument about Obama's experience, but it helps the Democrats clarify why Obama is ready to be president. Obama's time in the Senate may not have been all that long, but he has been serving since 2005, two years before Palin even took office as governor. Since she took office, Obama has had to answer hundreds of questions about himself, why he is running for president, his experience, his views on the economy, his foreign policy judgement, and his associations with various people and institutions in his life. He has worked to connect with millions of people and inspire them. These kinds of questions haven't even been asked of Palin as of yet, let alone the toughest ones. McCain undercuts his own assertions that he wanted a vice president who would be prepared to be president. McCain and Palin have suggested that she has some foreign policy experience, given that she is in command of the Alaskan National Guard, which is not true...and that she gets almost daily briefings on the activities of the Russian government (Alaska is of course just across the Bering Strait from the easternmost tip of Russia) - also a gross exaggeration of the truth. Sarah Palin only got a passport in recent years and has visited just three countries, one of which was just a stopover in Ireland. Foreign policy experience? Give me a break!
4. Rumors and Vetting: We have heard about how McCain did not properly vet Sarah Palin and that it ended up being a hurried, last minute decision influenced by a need to do what was politically expedient. McCain insists that he knew about Palin's pregnant daughter and the current investigation into her administration. However, the vetting process, good or bad, has very little bearing on Sarah Palin herself, so it is largely a non-issue for her, though perhaps it is for McCain.
5. Palin's Acceptance Speech: Sarah Palin's acceptance speech was eaten up by the base of the Republican Party and especially among the delegates in the convention hall. Much of her speech had the tone of one written by a Rove-ian, pro-Bush idealogue. Nonetheless, her delivery was very good. For anyone who thought that she would have a "deer-in-the-headlights" moment up there, they were proven wrong rather quickly. This is a woman who has given many a speech before - and one who boasts a former career as a sports broadcaster. However, her speech was filled with outright lies about her own record and about Obama. She did not mention that she was for the "Bridge to Nowhere" before she was against it. She did not mention that she had worked to earmark millions of dollars worth in federal projects for her town and state - the very pork barrel stuff that McCain has railed against. She asserted that Obama had not brought about one single reform, but failed to mention that he was front and center on ethics reform, both in the Illinois State Senate and in Washington. She failed to mention that Obama had reached across party lines in an effort to secure loose nuclear weapons to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. She failed to acknowledge that Obama is just as interested in developing a new energy policy - one that emphasizes cleaner and alternative fuels and not one that simply relies on "drill...drill...drill" and more giveaways to the big oil companies. She mocked Obama for having worked as a community organizer, when the work he did was very important to the struggling workers and families that needed that help in those tough times. While her speech was artful and some may even argue that she is a far better speaker than Hillary Clinton, at the end of the day it was just as political and divisive as many other convention speeches - filled with too much negativity, too many lies, too many embellishments, and perhaps too much flashiness. For all McCain has blasted Obama for being a "celebrity", Palin has attained her own "celebrity" status and so in the final analysis, that makes her and her speech, regardless of her gender, not much different than any other politician.
I have always been generally supportive of women running for public office and for women office-holders. I have longed to see a viable woman get a shot at the presidency or vice presidency. Not since Mondale chose Ferraro in 1984 has a presidential candidate dared to pick a female running-mate and it was not until this year that we finally saw the first seriously viable female presidential candidate in Hillary Clinton. As much as I am generally supportive of female candidates, at this critical moment in our nation's history, I am not about to turn away from the Democrats and reward the Republicans with four more years of their terrible reign simply because they have an articulate woman on the ticket with a serious chance at becoming the first female vice-president and possibly the first female president. In this election, we will get either our first African-American president or first woman vice-president. Perhaps some will base their vote on race versus gender. That is sad. I am basing mine on change and experience. Barack Obama offers the change that I seek and Joe Biden offers the experience to inform that change. On the other hand, John McCain offers more of the same while Sarah Palin offers no experience on the national and international stage.
Sarah Palin, even if I were a woman, does not represent me...and I don't think she represents most women in America. Hillary was my woman, but she is no longer in the race. Todd, Sarah Palin's husband, may still be her "guy" as she stated in her speech. That's all good and cute, but I am proud to say that after all is said and done, Barack Obama is still my guy.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Biden His Time
Most people probably don't really know who Joe Biden is. In fact, you might be hard-pressed to find those who even remember that he was himself, a candidate for the 2008 Democratic nomination, much less that he previously sought the same nomination twenty years ago. In the lead-up to Obama's VP selection, much of the talk of course cenetered on Hillary Clinton. Picking Clinton, some suggested, would create a Democratic Dream Team. It would give Obama the experience some people were concerned that he lacked, while also uniting the party by getting the 18 million Clinton voters to turn out for Obama, rather than staying home or opting instead for John McCain. They argued that an Obama/Clinton ticket would seal the deal in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, while also helping him make a stronger play out West. Clinton would suddenly help Obama win older white men, older women, working class voters, Hispanics, African Americans who preferred Hillary to Barack, Bill Clinton fans, Democrats turned Republican turned Independent turned Democratic again, Mike Huckabee Republicans, Asians, Jewish voters, and just about everyone named Bob. I voted for Hillary, but she lost. I get it. I'm over it. Frankly, I really didn't want her for Vice President, because putting her on the ticket would have overstated any supposed advantages she would add while ignoring the serious disadvantages that her selection would bring with it.
First, those who are iffy on Barack, but also hate the Clintons would have had twice as many reasons not to vote for that ticket. Fans of Barack Obama who never liked Clinton might have lost some faith in him if they felt he had backed down and picked her. Older white men and working class voters who voted for Clinton in the primaries and threatened to stay home or vote for McCain if she were not the nominee may have still stayed home or voted for McCain with or without her on the ticket. For all the concern about Biden being gaffe prone, who knows what sorts of things would come out of Bill's mouth during the course of the campaign, given his penchant for not being able to shut up during the primaries. Hillary too, some believe, cost herself the nomination by making some ill-advised comments. If Hillary were to help in some states, this might be offset in other states where she could hurt. Putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket may have made for a brilliant show of unity as we have never seen before in Denver, but the realities on the ground would have been very different once the fall campaign started. Some say Obama should have at least vetted her, claiming she was completely snubbed. Reports are however, that Hillary did not want to be vetted unless she were going to be offered the job. That's your deal breaker right there.
Why not Bayh - who supported Clinton and who might have brought in Indiana? Why not Chet Edwards, the moderate Democratic congressman from Texas? Why not Governor Tim Kaine who could have helped win Virginia and emphasized Obama's message of change? Bayh is plain vanilla. He's handsome and has that Kevin Kline "Dave" sort of look going for him, but beyond that, he doesn't offer much. Winning Indiana with him on the ticket would have been as likely as Obama winning Alabama with Dennis Kucinich as his running-mate. Edwards would not have won Texas for Obama and he is not well-known enough. It has taken the country a long time to get to know who Obama is and for voters to also try to assess whether Edwards had the right stuff in the seventy days or so before the election may have proven too much. The same goes for Tim Kaine, who if picked, would have had McCain licking his chops by totally dressing down the ticket of youth and inexperience. Virginia might be winnable and Tim Kaine might do more to help Obama win it if he is not on the ticket.
That brings us back to Joe Biden. Hands down, Joe Biden is the single best choice Obama could have made - if not the only choice. In a way, he has taken a page right out of the George W. Bush playbook. With Cheney on his ticket in 2000, people on the fence about Bush were put more at ease with the presence of a steady-hand and elder statesman alongside him. Ironically, this steady-hand and elder statesman has played a dominant role in ensuring that George W. Bush's administration is the most incompetent in the history of our republic. That won't be the case with Joe Biden. Biden is not only intelligent and extremely competent, but unlike Cheney, his heart is in the right place. Biden has not simply eaten and breathed foreign policy by sitting on and chairing the powerful foreign relations committee, but he is well-read on history and he has not only met with countless foreign leaders, but also negotiated with them, took them to task, and worked out pragmatic solutions to some tough international crises. Not the least among these is the work he did with respect to the former Yugoslavia, which serves as a very strong model for what could ultimately be a final solution to the situation in Iraq.
Joe Biden's expertise does not stop with foreign policy, however. Biden is just as passionate about economic issues, which is critical in this election. He is not a man of wealth and he is not wealthy today, at least not by Senate standards. He is one of the poorest Senators in Washington, relatively speaking. He claims working class Irish Catholic roots in his native Scranton, Pennsylvania, which will help him connect to many of those like-minded voters not only in Pennsylvania, but in other crucial swing-states like Ohio and Michigan.
There are plenty of other older white men Barack Obama could have selected if he wanted to pick a solid, safe VP. However, nobody else could possibly bring all the advantages that Joe offers. If Sam Nunn brought the foreign policy cred, he might lack on the economic or social issues, which was a concern. If Ted Strickland, the Ohio governor brought some Clinton backers and a chance at a major swing-state, his lack of foreign policy experience would have been the source of continued reservations about Obama's readiness. Had Obama picked Bayh, he may have been too "nice" and not quite aggressive enough in going after McCain and the Republicans. Though he concerns some people due to his penchant for running off his mouth and sometimes inserting his foot, few politicians these days are as unabashedly unafraid of speaking their mind and telling it like it really is as Joe Biden. If anyone has any doubt about Biden's "happy warrior" mentality in ripping the GOP a new one, just wait.
It is too bad that the historic nature and celebrity status of both Hillary and Barack drowned out some other tremendous candidates in this year's Democratic nominating contests. One of those candidates was Joe Biden, who in my estimation is not only the best possible choice to be Obama's running-mate, but should have been anyone's first choice for President.
First, those who are iffy on Barack, but also hate the Clintons would have had twice as many reasons not to vote for that ticket. Fans of Barack Obama who never liked Clinton might have lost some faith in him if they felt he had backed down and picked her. Older white men and working class voters who voted for Clinton in the primaries and threatened to stay home or vote for McCain if she were not the nominee may have still stayed home or voted for McCain with or without her on the ticket. For all the concern about Biden being gaffe prone, who knows what sorts of things would come out of Bill's mouth during the course of the campaign, given his penchant for not being able to shut up during the primaries. Hillary too, some believe, cost herself the nomination by making some ill-advised comments. If Hillary were to help in some states, this might be offset in other states where she could hurt. Putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket may have made for a brilliant show of unity as we have never seen before in Denver, but the realities on the ground would have been very different once the fall campaign started. Some say Obama should have at least vetted her, claiming she was completely snubbed. Reports are however, that Hillary did not want to be vetted unless she were going to be offered the job. That's your deal breaker right there.
Why not Bayh - who supported Clinton and who might have brought in Indiana? Why not Chet Edwards, the moderate Democratic congressman from Texas? Why not Governor Tim Kaine who could have helped win Virginia and emphasized Obama's message of change? Bayh is plain vanilla. He's handsome and has that Kevin Kline "Dave" sort of look going for him, but beyond that, he doesn't offer much. Winning Indiana with him on the ticket would have been as likely as Obama winning Alabama with Dennis Kucinich as his running-mate. Edwards would not have won Texas for Obama and he is not well-known enough. It has taken the country a long time to get to know who Obama is and for voters to also try to assess whether Edwards had the right stuff in the seventy days or so before the election may have proven too much. The same goes for Tim Kaine, who if picked, would have had McCain licking his chops by totally dressing down the ticket of youth and inexperience. Virginia might be winnable and Tim Kaine might do more to help Obama win it if he is not on the ticket.
That brings us back to Joe Biden. Hands down, Joe Biden is the single best choice Obama could have made - if not the only choice. In a way, he has taken a page right out of the George W. Bush playbook. With Cheney on his ticket in 2000, people on the fence about Bush were put more at ease with the presence of a steady-hand and elder statesman alongside him. Ironically, this steady-hand and elder statesman has played a dominant role in ensuring that George W. Bush's administration is the most incompetent in the history of our republic. That won't be the case with Joe Biden. Biden is not only intelligent and extremely competent, but unlike Cheney, his heart is in the right place. Biden has not simply eaten and breathed foreign policy by sitting on and chairing the powerful foreign relations committee, but he is well-read on history and he has not only met with countless foreign leaders, but also negotiated with them, took them to task, and worked out pragmatic solutions to some tough international crises. Not the least among these is the work he did with respect to the former Yugoslavia, which serves as a very strong model for what could ultimately be a final solution to the situation in Iraq.
Joe Biden's expertise does not stop with foreign policy, however. Biden is just as passionate about economic issues, which is critical in this election. He is not a man of wealth and he is not wealthy today, at least not by Senate standards. He is one of the poorest Senators in Washington, relatively speaking. He claims working class Irish Catholic roots in his native Scranton, Pennsylvania, which will help him connect to many of those like-minded voters not only in Pennsylvania, but in other crucial swing-states like Ohio and Michigan.
There are plenty of other older white men Barack Obama could have selected if he wanted to pick a solid, safe VP. However, nobody else could possibly bring all the advantages that Joe offers. If Sam Nunn brought the foreign policy cred, he might lack on the economic or social issues, which was a concern. If Ted Strickland, the Ohio governor brought some Clinton backers and a chance at a major swing-state, his lack of foreign policy experience would have been the source of continued reservations about Obama's readiness. Had Obama picked Bayh, he may have been too "nice" and not quite aggressive enough in going after McCain and the Republicans. Though he concerns some people due to his penchant for running off his mouth and sometimes inserting his foot, few politicians these days are as unabashedly unafraid of speaking their mind and telling it like it really is as Joe Biden. If anyone has any doubt about Biden's "happy warrior" mentality in ripping the GOP a new one, just wait.
It is too bad that the historic nature and celebrity status of both Hillary and Barack drowned out some other tremendous candidates in this year's Democratic nominating contests. One of those candidates was Joe Biden, who in my estimation is not only the best possible choice to be Obama's running-mate, but should have been anyone's first choice for President.
Monday, August 18, 2008
A New Job
I'm pleased to announce that I am employed again. Though after learning that my mother doesn't have anyone to go to Ireland with her in September, I'm regretting this a little bit. I would have liked to have gone back to Ireland. In any event, I suppose being gainfully employed again is a good thing. Why I work? I work to earn money in order to travel to interesting places. Without a job, all that travel would eventually catch up to me and I wouldn't be able to do that anymore. So in that sense, having a job is good I suppose.
I am not a science teacher and I've never played on on stage, but I am still working on that (on being a science teacher, not playing one). In the interim, I've signed on to a job with EBS Healthcare. It's a nationally recognized leader in education based and pediatric services in the areas of speech therapy, PT, OT, and other disciplines. This is contract work, meaning that I'm paid hourly and hired directly by the company to work within a certain public school system...in this case, the public school in question is Boston Public. Who knows, I might actually like contract work better than the direct-hire positions I've held over the past nine years. While I'm doing that, I will be trying to complete my program in science education. I recently decided to finish up my formal application to that program, now that I'm most of the way through it. In the meantime, I'm also awaiting my test scores on the MTEL. If I pass, I will basically meet the preliminary certification requirements to teach middle school science. If I don't pass...well, then, I won't meet those requirements and I've got to take the thing again.
The neat thing about taking the contract position is that it would afford me opportunities, should I choose, to work in the summer. That may not sound all that exciting, until you realize that they will subsidize your housing and pay to relocate you to almost anywhere in the country. Some companies like this also offer overseas opportunities. At this point, I am still calling Boston my permanent home. However, the ideal situation would be to work during the year as a science teacher in the Boston area...then during the summer (maybe not every summer), jet off somewhere - living and working in that city as a speech pathologist for part of the summer. Since I like to travel during the summer anyway, this would be a great opportunity to actually live in different places for a month or two - and from there perhaps explore areas outside of it.
When I closed the door on East Haven and Connecticut a couple of years ago, the opportunities I found after moving to Boston were tremendous and it remains one of the best decisions I've ever made. Similarly, when the doors in the Somerville schools were slammed in my face, they ended up opening brand new doors for me and a nation, if not a world of possibilities.
I am not a science teacher and I've never played on on stage, but I am still working on that (on being a science teacher, not playing one). In the interim, I've signed on to a job with EBS Healthcare. It's a nationally recognized leader in education based and pediatric services in the areas of speech therapy, PT, OT, and other disciplines. This is contract work, meaning that I'm paid hourly and hired directly by the company to work within a certain public school system...in this case, the public school in question is Boston Public. Who knows, I might actually like contract work better than the direct-hire positions I've held over the past nine years. While I'm doing that, I will be trying to complete my program in science education. I recently decided to finish up my formal application to that program, now that I'm most of the way through it. In the meantime, I'm also awaiting my test scores on the MTEL. If I pass, I will basically meet the preliminary certification requirements to teach middle school science. If I don't pass...well, then, I won't meet those requirements and I've got to take the thing again.
The neat thing about taking the contract position is that it would afford me opportunities, should I choose, to work in the summer. That may not sound all that exciting, until you realize that they will subsidize your housing and pay to relocate you to almost anywhere in the country. Some companies like this also offer overseas opportunities. At this point, I am still calling Boston my permanent home. However, the ideal situation would be to work during the year as a science teacher in the Boston area...then during the summer (maybe not every summer), jet off somewhere - living and working in that city as a speech pathologist for part of the summer. Since I like to travel during the summer anyway, this would be a great opportunity to actually live in different places for a month or two - and from there perhaps explore areas outside of it.
When I closed the door on East Haven and Connecticut a couple of years ago, the opportunities I found after moving to Boston were tremendous and it remains one of the best decisions I've ever made. Similarly, when the doors in the Somerville schools were slammed in my face, they ended up opening brand new doors for me and a nation, if not a world of possibilities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)