Palin: "Thanks, But No Thanks"

This one has been on the blogs for a while now, and now that the McCain campaign has this ad out, it's past time I officially called out Palin for her "Bridge-to-nowhere" claim:



Justin Gardner cites Palin's quote from just a year ago:

Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer. Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island. Much of the public's attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.

Hardly sounds like "Thanks, but no thanks" to me.

Polifact rates her claim as "barely true." I think they are being kind.

Palin: "Community Organizers Have No Responsibilities"

Governor Palin, from her acceptance speech last night:

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities."

Palin threw a lot of jabs at Obama last night, but this was the lowest. Whether he's qualified for president or not, I admire Obama's choice to help his community when he had the opportunity. There are a lot of people out there trying to make a difference in their communities, and rally the people to a common good cause, who have now been dismissed by Palin.

I'm guessing the Obama campaign will run with this, and paint McCain and Palin as anti-community. And perhaps they deserve it for that comment.

Media: "McCain Hugs Palin"

What's up with this?

McCain hugs Palin upon his arrival in Twin Cities

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — From the moment he stepped off his campaign plane, John McCain's arrival in the Twin Cities for the Republican National Convention was a family affair.

Greeting McCain on the tarmac at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport were his wife, Cindy, and other family members. Also on hand were family members of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who McCain chose last Friday to be his running mate.

Hugs and handshakes abounded, with two hugs between McCain and Palin's 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, and a handshake with her boyfriend, 18-year-old Levi Johnston. Palin and her husband, Todd, announced this week that Bristol is five months pregnant and that she will marry Johnston.

McCain also kissed Sarah Palin's 4-month-old son, Trig.

The politically paired families then boarded a campaign bus and headed into town.

One thing that was perhaps overlooked in the dynamics of picking a woman as VP (especially one much younger) was the inevitable media scrutiny of every celebratory hug. Or am I reading too much into this? Would this story have been different if McCain had picked a man? Should it be?

The Media Coverage Of Governor Palin's Daughter

I know life isn't fair. But our societal ideal is to make it as fair as possible for our children. That is the whole idea behind public education (although it is far from fair, but that's another story), and tax funded health care programs to cover poor children.

But apparently that societal ideal has been thrown out the window by our media.

Unfortunately, teenage pregnancy is a huge problem in our society. It seems to be happening all the time. It happens to families of all political persuasions. It happens to good families as well as broken ones. And when it happens, it is an extremely difficult situation with many difficult decisions to make which have life-long consequences. Of all things that we should say are a "personal matter," certainly this should be one of them.

So when I heard the news that Governor Palin's 17-year old daughter is pregnant, my heart went out to her and her family. I expected the news to be covered, of course. But watching CNN tonight I was appalled that they splashed her face on the screen several times in the midst of talking about the political implications of the situation. The story was second only to the hurricane.

She is 17 years old! Give her some privacy! Don't you think this is hard enough for her already. This is irresponsible journalism, in my opinion.

As far as the political implications, it makes no difference to me, and I don't think it will to most Americans. If a president can have an affair in the oval office itself, and still maintain his legacy and be considered by many to be an effective president, then certainly Palin's daughter's situation (which pales in comparison), shouldn't disqualify her from the VP position. To some it might however. And to those people I say, Jesus isn't running this year.

So with that, let's move on and give the girl a break.

Update: To Obama's credit, he said related to this matter: "Let me be as clear as possible... I think people's families are off-limits and people's children are especially off-limits." Of course that's what he had to say, and I believe he means it. I hope though that others (including the media) follow his lead.

The Media: "Clinton Supporters Will All Support Obama"

The media could learn something from theoretical physics.

There's a joke I've heard (in nerdy scientific circles) that goes something like this:

Questioner: "How much water is displaced when a cow is placed in a tank of water?"

Theoretical Physicist: "Well, first let's assume the cow is spherical..."

Mention the "spherical cow" to any scientists and they'll know what you are talking about. It references the attempt to over-simplify something real and complex into something that can be defined with nice well-known formulas.

I thought of this listening to several commentators on the Sunday morning talk shows, talking about how crazy it is to think that Clinton supporters will move to support McCain now that he's picked Palin as the VP. I won't bother to even link to any of them. Just listen to any of the shows and you'll hear something like this:

Moderator: "McCain clearly hopes to gain the support of some former Clinton supporters by this pick. Will that happen?"

Pundit: "Come on, that is insulting to women. Palin does not share Clinton's view on the issues. On abortion, she is pro-life."

In making this argument, the pundit is using a "spherical Clinton supporter". For one thing, he is assuming all Clinton supporters agreed with Clinton on all of the issues. This is obviously an over-simplification. People support candidates for all sorts of reasons (including experience, for example), and rarely does a citizen find a candidate which which she agrees 100%. So, while it's true that Palin disagrees with Hillary on most issues, she could still be appealing to some former Clinton supporters who were more moderate than Hillary. Hillary did well with Catholics in Pennsylvania, at least some of which I assume are pro-life, although maybe not passionately so. (Apparently questions on abortion aren't included in the democratic exit-polls, so it's impossible to know for sure, but I think it's safe to assume that not 100% of democrats are pro-choice).

Secondly, using the abortion is as the obligatory example is deceptive. Abortion, compared to other issues, is mostly black and white. Either you are pro-life or you are pro-choice. Sure, there's some gray area (late term abortion, for example), but in comparison to issues such as the economy or national security, there is not much nuance. But on issues other than abortion, there is more room for nuance. For example, Clinton wanted to tax the oil companies. Palin also supported that in her state. Sure, their overall positions on energy are very different, but it can't be characterized as completely opposing because the issue cannot be represented as a line. It is a mult-dimensional issue. Furthermore, abortion isn't really a hot issue this election cycle.

Lastly, some people supported Hillary because they felt she was the most experience candidate and strong on national security. For those people, McCain might be the second choice rather than Hillary. This point is made well here.

Of course no one is predicting that massive throngs of Hillary supporters will flock to McCain because of the Palin pick. That would indeed be insulting to women to suggest. But some minority will move to McCain, either because they like McCain (perhaps because of his experience) or else because of Palin. And in a close election, that could make the difference.

Palin: "Let's Shatter the Glass Ceiling"

Like most of America, I was shocked to hear that McCain had picked Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his vice presidential nominee. I had pretty much assumed it was going to be Romney. I wondered, as many probably did, if it was just because she was a woman. Then, as I listened to her speech she seemed to me like a good pick. She has a good story rising up in the ranks of politics, fighting curruption on the way. She has a good looking family, with hard-working roots it appears. I was beginning to think maybe she really was the best one for the job. And then she said this:

It was rightly noted in the Denver this week that Hillary left 18,000,000 cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But, it turns out that the women of America aren't finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.

So it is (at least somewhat) because she is a woman after all. If I were a woman, I'd find that offensive. I didn't like it when Hillary said in the same breath that her supporters were behind her for her policies and experience, but also wouldn't it be great to have a woman as president? And I don't like it now from Governor Palin.

Some people think having a black president once and for all will prove that America is no longer racist. Some people think having a woman president will prove we are not sexist. I disagree. I think that we will show we are not racist or sexist when a black man or a woman can lose without us blaming his race or gender. When we can have women in politics and not talk about the fact that they are women, then we will have shown that we have moved passed sexism.

While I disagree with the motive, politically I think this was a wise move for McCain. I'm a realist, and so I recognize that some portion (not a majority) of Clinton supporters were supporter her at least partially because she was a woman. Call me sexist for saying it, but that's what I think. And some of those women will feel inclined to switch now, because they never were in love with Hillary's policies anyway. It also refutes the argument Hillary made this week that the Democrats are decades ahead of the Republicans on acceptance of blacks and women in politics. But while politically wise, McCain and Palin are wrong to continue the "vote for me--I'm a woman" rhetoric.

Wrong Rating: 1 out of 4 (spin)