Jump to content
The Education Forum

Sarah Palin


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am very interested to hear what everyone now thinks of Sarah Palin after her speech and indeed John McCain’s decision to choose her.

My own opinion is still close to what I believed before, that he chose a candidate that would at least help to keep the polls close enough for him to hang in there and have a slim chance come election night.

However, I must confess that after watching her live this morning (my time), she came across as smart (but not condescending), attractive and likeable (a cross between ‘the girl next door’, ‘modern exec’ and a touch of ‘girl power’ thrown in for good measure). She had natural humour, spoke very fluently and was in fact interesting to listen too (unlike Hillary in my opinion). She had a very nice looking family and even though her daughter has not exactly been a perfect advertisement (which may turn out to be a blessing in disguise) her son (who is in (or entering) the military) certainly came across as a stand up, clean cut and modest young man.

Two weeks ago I could not give John McCain a chance of winning the election, despite the fact he always reminds me of Barney Rubble, he is too closely related to the Bush policies that most of our American friends seem to be tired of. Nearly all the so called VP candidates seemed to have a little of this tar on them and I could just not figure out how he was going to get far enough away from Mr. Bush to convince voters to elect him.

Well I can honestly say that now I know. Whatever chance he had of winning before he chose her (which was slim) it has just increased significantly. I still believe that the Presidency is only Barack Obama’s to lose, but his margin for error just diminished.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am very interested to hear what everyone now thinks of Sarah Palin after her speech and indeed John McCain’s decision to choose her.

My own opinion is still close to what I believed before, that he chose a candidate that would at least help to keep the polls close enough for him to hang in there and have a slim chance come election night.

However, I must confess that after watching her live this morning (my time), she came across as smart (but not condescending), attractive and likeable (a cross between ‘the girl next door’, ‘modern exec’ and a touch of ‘girl power’ thrown in for good measure). She had natural humour, spoke very fluently and was in fact interesting to listen too (unlike Hillary in my opinion). She had a very nice looking family and even though her daughter has not exactly been a perfect advertisement (which may turn out to be a blessing in disguise) her son (who is in (or entering) the military) certainly came across as a stand up, clean cut and modest young man.

Yes, she looks and sounds impressive, but surely the American public are looking for something more than that. She should be judged by her policies, past and present and those being promoted by McCain. I know where my vote would go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I am now more confused about Sarah Palin than I was before her speech last nite. She comes across to me as a satirist or comedian from SNL, such as Tina Fey on the Weekend News Update segment. She can be snide and many of her comments were dripping with sarcasm.

While I do feel we know more about where she stands on some key issues (not the economy) I am not convinced of her passion for serving the common people with a humble heart. Her speech had a dual agenda -- to introduce herself, and shred Barak Obama. Neither of these things did much for adding definition to what really motivates her.

In addition, the Republicans, including Palin, are living in a twilight zone similar to Hitler and his colleagues in the bunker in Berlin, where the world of the US as we know it is falling around their heads and they still manage to whip themselves into a patriotic furor fueled by the belief that only the Republicans are real Americans.

I rarely agree with our ex-Governor Jesse Ventura, but I certainly do when he says that both major parties in the US need to be dissolved and we need to start from scratch.

Heaven help us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republican conventioneers' buttons that proclaimed "The hottest VP" pretty well said it all.

In terms of political accomplishments and responsibilities, it has to be said that Palin is more "qualified to be president" than Obama. But that's not saying very much. In fact, if this election will prove anything it's that "qualifications to be president," aside from being alive and arguably sane (McCain being the question mark), are basically meaningless.

Palin's main qualification? She is "governor of the great state of Alaska." Well, George W. Bush was formerly governor of the great state of Texas. Bush has really demonstrated how well a governorship qualified him to be president, hasn't he?

But wait, you may say. Unlike Bush, Palin is obviously not an idiot. But that is not necessarily so, for two reasons. One, even an idiot can have five children and read a speech. And two, during the time that Bush ran for president, it was not obvious that he was an idiot either. At least he seemed basically harmless. What a turnaround, eh?

I haven't voted since 1964, when I was duped into voting for Lyndon Johnson. (Fool me once, shame on you.) I have certainly seen nothing in this election to make me go out in November and operate a voting machine, which some Diebold operative may be controlling behind a curtain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very interested to hear what everyone now thinks of Sarah Palin after her speech and indeed John McCain’s decision to choose her.

My own opinion is still close to what I believed before, that he chose a candidate that would at least help to keep the polls close enough for him to hang in there and have a slim chance come election night.

However, I must confess that after watching her live this morning (my time), she came across as smart (but not condescending), attractive and likeable (a cross between ‘the girl next door’, ‘modern exec’ and a touch of ‘girl power’ thrown in for good measure). She had natural humour, spoke very fluently and was in fact interesting to listen too (unlike Hillary in my opinion). She had a very nice looking family and even though her daughter has not exactly been a perfect advertisement (which may turn out to be a blessing in disguise) her son (who is in (or entering) the military) certainly came across as a stand up, clean cut and modest young man.

Yes, she looks and sounds impressive, but surely the American public are looking for something more than that. She should be judged by her policies, past and present and those being promoted by McCain. I know where my vote would go.

"Yes, she looks and sounds impressive, but surely the American public are looking for something more than that."

Lets change she to he and you are now describing the Obamanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one question about Palin's speech. Can anyone tell me what a "hockey mom" is? (Is that someone who gives her husband slap shots?)

In case you really don't know, a hockey mom gets up before dawn every school day (at least) and takes her kids to hockey practice before school, sitting in a freezing cold rink. She is also responsible for making sure her kids get their rightful recognition and work as hard as possible to do well on the team. Hockey is an obsession in some of the colder areas, such as Alaska, Canada and, yes, Minnesota. Where else do you think the great hockey players come from? :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Palin now has the all-clear to participate in the US election. A swiftly convened session with AIPAC has her now declaring her 'deep, personal and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel'. Whew, that was close.....I thought for a minute there that one had slipped through the net.

http://www.counterpunch.org/glunts09052008.html

September 5, 2008

How the Republicans Solved Sarah Palin's Jewish Problem

A Lesson Before Lying

By IRA GLUNTS

Politically powerful American Jews tend to be uncomfortable with evangelical Christians, unless they are the kind that unconditionally support Israeli foreign policy and are members of organizations which send boatloads of money to the Jewish state. Reverend John Hagee and his Christians United For Israel (CUFI) come to mind in this regard. Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, unlike Hagee, is an evangelical for whom Israel does not play an important role. It did not, at least, until a few days ago when the colorful, gun-toting, Christian conservative Alaska governor stepped on to the national political stage. Suddenly Palin had a Jewish problem. According to critics, she is not sufficiently sensitive to Jewish interests and Israeli security, and may be an anti-Semite. According to the McCain campaign, the solution to this problem was to send Palin, escorted by Senator Joseph (Mr. Right-Wing Jewish American) Lieberman to seek absolution and approval at the throne of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

Palin had been accused by Jewish Democratic Obama supporters of backing Rep. Ron Paul and the 2000 presidential candidacy of Pat Buchanan. Both men have expressed their opposition to the U.S./Israel “special relationship.” The Alaska governor was also rebuked for her recent attendance at a sermon given by Jews for Jesus founder, David Brickner, at which he stated that the reason for violence against Israelis is that Jews do not embrace the Christian god.

These accusations against Palin mirror those that have been leveled against Barack Obama and have about as much credibility. The Democratic Presidential candidate has been called a pro-Palestinian Hamas devotee, a Muslim hater of Jews, and a closet terrorist who is an al Qaeda mole. These ludicrous charges have been made mostly by Jewish McCain supporters and are as about as believable as the anti-Jewish, anti-Israel criticisms lodged against Palin.

Both smear campaigns are promoted through extensive e-mailings. The criticisms of both candidates rely heavily on guilt by exaggerating personal associations and distorting the views of those with which the candidates are excused of being associated. Just as Obama is charged with attendance at certain sermons given by Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Palin is accused of sitting through a Brickner sermon. It is not clear to what extent either candidate agreed with what he or she heard. Obama has rejected many of Wright’s remarks. I do not believe that Palin has had the opportunity to comment on the Brickner sermon. My opinion is that the actual perniciousness and inappropriateness of the Wright and Brickner positions are greatly overstated.

Even though the anti-Jewish accusations against their bible- praising, hockey mom candidate were scurrilous and spurious, the McCain campaign thought that the best antidote against Palin’s burgeoning Jewish problem was immunization from a group of hastily assembled AIPAC directors, who, I assume, were in town for the Republican convention. The group met with Palin at her hotel. Ironically, she was chaperoned by the man she had replaced as John McCain’s choice for a running mate, Senator Lieberman (Ind., CT, Israel, CUFI). Apparently, it was decided that Lieberman was too liberal on social issues for the Republican base. Predictably, Palin’s appeal to the quickly assembled pro-Israel lobbyists was successful. After the meeting, Josh Block, a spokesman for AIPAC, announced, “We had a good productive discussion on the importance of the U.S./Israel relationship, and we were pleased that Gov. Palin expressed her deep, personal, and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel…. Like Sen. McCain, the vice presidential nominee understands and believes in the special friendship between the two democracies and would work to expand and deepen the strategic partnership in a McCain/Palin Administration." Palin, who is reported to be a quick learner, found out in a most public lesson that genuflecting to the directors of AIPAC is an important part of what passes for foreign policy experience and acumen these days.

The youthful Vice Presidential candidate, who has already acquired an impressive list of descriptive phrases which are associated with her name, can add one more. Lifelong supporter of Israel. Welcome to American politics, Sarah Palin.

Ira Glunts is a secular American Jew who opposes the Israeli occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people. He lives in Madison, NY where he and his wife own and operate a used and rare book business. Mr. Glunts will vote for neither John McCain nor Barack Obama.

Edited by Mark Stapleton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Palin now has the all-clear to participate in the US election. A swiftly convened session with AIPAC has her now declaring her 'deep, personal and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel'. Whew, that was close.....I thought for a minute there that one had slipped through the net.

Isn't that great Mark?

Irrational prejudices are so equally obvious and annoying aren't they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is a "hockey mom" the same as a "soccer mom"?

Yes, except that hockey moms are probably feistier; you know, pit bulls with lipstick. :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Palin now has the all-clear to participate in the US election. A swiftly convened session with AIPAC has her now declaring her 'deep, personal and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel'. Whew, that was close.....I thought for a minute there that one had slipped through the net.

That is probably a healthier mindset for her, and safer too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Palin now has the all-clear to participate in the US election. A swiftly convened session with AIPAC has her now declaring her 'deep, personal and lifelong commitment to the safety and well-being of Israel'. Whew, that was close.....I thought for a minute there that one had slipped through the net.

Isn't that great Mark?

Irrational prejudices are so equally obvious and annoying aren't they?

Slavish submission to Israel and its interests is compulsory for all mainstream US politicians it seems.

I don't know if you're hinting that my pointing this out makes me guilty of irrational prejudices, but given your past history, you probably are.

If you are suggesting that Israel should be free of criticism, given the nature and behavior of its Government, including the occupation of Palestinian lands and the cruelty of Israel towards others in the region, then you are one poor educator indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...