3 posts tagged “vice-president”

Just after I commented on another blog that Republicans were generally more civilized when arguing for their candidate, I hear that some have chanted death threats against Sen. Obama. Way to go. (I am being sarcastic.)
   And now, there’s news from The Times—from the same owner as Fox News—that indicates a philosophical split inside the campaign.
   Paikea, who is a Vox friend of mine here and who is a Democratic supporter, blogged a reference to an article that painted Gov. Palin as narcissistic. And that, I have to concur, summarizes some of the more disturbing elements about her that I could not identify.
   It appears, according to The Times, that John McCain is merely an inconvenience in the presidential run of Sarah Palin.
   Rallies now have gone from something resembling a tiny senatorial race for Sen. McCain to mass crowds after Gov. Palin’s arrival. And she knows that that’s her contribution, using it to her advantage. She knows that there were many holding back from supporting Sen. McCain because of his RINO image.
   Even when there are divisions among the Democrats, as there is today between Sens. Obama and the Clinton family, they aren’t stupid enough to air their dirty laundry in front of the world.
   I have expressed my doubts about Sen. Joe Biden, believing that he is a typical Beltway type who is not going to listen to a black senator. Sen. Obama might be labelled a visionary by his allies—so does that mean that Sen. Biden is going to be the details man, in which case it’s going to be more of the same politicking? His record indicates yes, and I think there’s going to be a power-play if the Democrats get in.
   But the Democrats successfully hid their rifts in 2004, with their whole party behind Sen. John Kerry, never mind what was there behind the scenes.
   I know the Governor’s words excite a group of Republicans, but for all the criticisms of militant Democrats, the parties are looking more and more similar in the behaviours these candidates are eliciting among their audiences.
   I am not sure if this could be called inspirational.
   While there is nothing technically wrong with a vice-presidential nominee overshadowing a presidential one, the presidency, if the Republicans took the White House, is John McCain’s, not Sarah Palin’s—and as a former navy captain I am sure he would not desire insubordination.
   In the Republicans’ defence, one could argue that Gov. Palin had to get tough in opposing the Democrats for the easy ride Sen. Obama has been getting in the media.
   While another Democratic friend of mine says the ACORN furore is a horrid smear campaign, I cannot imagine a Republican candidate getting off fairly scot free on issues like that of the Tony Retzko connection or Sen. Obama’s nationality whilst in Indonesia. (The media were, as I have once said, quick to endorse the Killian memoranda against President George W. Bush, even if it was remarkably easy for a professional like me to pinpoint the cut of the Times typeface and what laser printer they came off.)
   I don’t believe that Sen. Obama is not American, that his middle name is Mohammed, or that possible dual nationality prevents his run under Art. II, s. 1 of the US Constitution. However, the secrecy surrounding a possible Indonesian nationality (still not answered, from what I can tell) and his 1961 birth certificate (versus a certification) should concern the fourth estate as well as US voters.
   Since Sen. McCain was unwilling to conduct a dishonourable campaign, or so he claims (does he truly ‘approve this message’?), he might be unwilling to throw accusations that are not fully checked. Gov. Palin may well have taken the initiative with attacks, using less evidence than the Senator would find comfortable.
   And since the Republicans themselves have had their share of attacks without much of a defence in the media, the Governor may well think she needs to get headlines if she’s going to get the GOP POV in the news.
   Conclusion: both sides are split, one more openly than the other.
   As a foreign observer, the campaign has arrived at a new low, not because of any one side, but because no matter who Americans vote I am not certain there will be much real change. (I feel the same, incidentally, about Labour–National in New Zealand, hence my third-party run.)
   Attitudes on both sides do not set a presidential example for Americans internally, or inspire confidence in allies and observers externally.
   It’s hardly up to McCain and Obama. I think their number twos are calling the shots in a very unwarranted way—one after the election if the Democrats get in; the other before the election, acting as though it were her campaign and John McCain is her vice-presidential running-mate. Neither is ideal, and both are worrisome.

With any election campaign, and now being involved as a political candidate myself for the New Zealand Parliament, my observations stem from the point of view of ‘Would I do this?’
   For example, I wouldn’t have tried making fun of Sen. Barack Obama for wearing traditional African costume, as Sen. Clinton’s campaign did, using it as a tactic of painting him as an outsider. (And I said so at the time.)
   I did, meanwhile, have a field day over Sen. Clinton’s sniper-fire gag, or the time she called the still-governing Helen Clark as the ‘former prime minister of New Zealand’. I believe she opened herself up for those.
   At the end of the day, I want to see an even playing field, and I’ll do the little things that I know something about.
   And I thought today about Gov. Sarah Palin’s ‘bridge to nowhere’ remark.
   She said, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ to the construction of a bridge to a community of 50 in Alaska.
   Critics say that she was for the bridge before she was against it—something pointed out by Charlie Gibson in the ABC News interview.
   As far as I can gather, Gov. Palin and her Alaskan Congress would try to apply to Washington for a share of infrastructure projects, which, from what I can gather in western politics, is normal.
   I read about something similar in John Major’s autobiography, recalling his time as Chancellor of the Exchequer, with each government department trying to get a cut of the budget.
   So securing a share of the cake is business as usual in most democracies.
   When Congress (Washington, not Juneau) requested that Alaska itself pay for the bridge, Gov. Palin said, ‘No way.’
   Maybe I am being totally stupid but I can’t see what she has done wrong.
   Folks, I don’t support a lot of Sarah Palin’s ideas, not least her environmental stance, and as I have pointed out, her English seems to be below par for a woman holding a journalism degree and with broadcasting experience.
   I am for the Second Amendment, personally speaking. I like how she reduced her mayoral pay in Wassila and how she sold the gubernatorial jet which her predecessor had bought, against the will of his congress.
   She could be a populist. So is Sen. Obama.
   But on this “bridge to nowhere” issue, I thought about it this way.
   I get free samples of various products here that I give out to our team members. They are happy to take them. But if I were to ask them to pay for them, they’ll say, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on most. They defend their own patch, as Gov. Palin defended hers.
   Critics say that Gov. Palin maybe should have said, ‘I said, “Thanks,” then “No thanks,” on that bridge to nowhere.’ But I think it was a waste of time for Gibson to even go there.
   There’s plenty of other stuff to attack the Governor on, just as there’s plenty of other stuff to attack Sen. Joseph Biden on. Americans tire of the politicking in the news not because they are disinterested in who gets to the White House, but because the media are so happy to sway the issue to things everyday people could not care less about.

I first read about Sen. Joe Biden’s nomination to be Sen. Barack Obama’s running-mate through the MSM. It was probably on Google News, in the headlines. Then I saw it here on television, albeit briefly, since a VP nominee doesn’t really have much importance to New Zealanders.
   I first read about Gov. Sarah Palin’s nomination as Sen. John McCain’s running-mate on Timothy’s Vox blog. I have not heard mentions on radio or TV here. And I realize that this is not big news to Kiwis, and I admittedly was out during the six o’clock TV news broadcast yesterday. But as someone kind of interested in US politics, I would have expected to have run into the news somewhere.
   Maybe to us, as we have had female prime ministers twice (at one point, the PM, Chief Justice and Governor-General were all female), the ascension of a woman to the presidential ticket is not a biggie. Also, then-Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro had already trailblazed on that front as the Democratic vice-presidential nominee in 1984.
   It will be interesting to see if Gov. Palin will help the McCain campaign. She is largely unknown outside her home state but that might help charges that Sen. McCain (like Sen. Biden, I should point out) is the same-old Washington establishment. With Palin’s approval ratings at 80 per cent in her home state, and a pretty solid résumé, she has quite a few pluses in terms of her hard work for Alaska.
   She has been clear on her beliefs—she has a lifetime NRA membership, she opposes the legalization of marijuana and she is pro-life—so people can judge her on those quite easily. If the majority of Americans do not see eye-to-eye with Gov. Palin on these matters, then that is democracy in action.
   Alaska, though in fact modern with large cities, has a stereotype among Americans, and being the 47th state in terms of population, the Democrats will be able to accuse the Governor of inexperience in national politics. It’s a fine line, however: Palin has had 16 years of elected public service, versus Sen. Obama’s 11; though I note that this never stopped Sen. Clinton, with eight years, from attacking Sen. Obama in the primaries.
   Her biggest plus is her whistle-blowing about corruption and the lack of ethics among certain sectors of government in Alaska, meaning Sarah Palin is a no-nonsense, clean-government advocate. How successful this image will carry through into the quagmire of Washington politics is dependent on how Americans view things: can they believe that one person can make a change, or do they believe one person will be buried among establishment thinking?
   It depends on how strongly they believe in the power of the individual.
   Palin is probably an individualist—someone who doesn’t mind bucking the trend and surprising people, and that could play well to many Americans. To some extent McCain has these values but he has also changed his mind on some, which the Democrats have rightly pointed out at their Convention.
   It will be an interesting road ahead.