I know we’re all excited as heck about the announcement of Gov. Sarah Palin as Mc’s veep choice, but in the interest of fairness - and to help prepare everyone for the inevitable criticisms that will follow - I wanted to present some “pros and con” arguments about her from conservatives we can trust, and get your thoughts.
First up: The Weekly Standard has a 14 point piece up about some of the positives Palin brings to the GOP ticket and to the presidential campaign on the whole. I linked up earlier to Ed Morrissey’s pro argument.
NRO’s The Corner has had a lively discussion today about Palin, and some of the pro arguments can be found here, here, and here. Con arguments can be found here, here, and here (that last one is a pro and con). Mark Halperin has another pro/con piece.
Here are some additional thoughts I had on the positives she brings to the ticket, some of which may or may not have been mentioned in the above links:
On the reform end of things, the pick was a homerun for McCain. Obama was clinking glasses with Rezko and Daley and Ayers in Chicago while Palin was taking on corrupt politicians in her own party in Alaska.
Another plus for her candidacy is the fact that she’s the governor of the state where ANWR is, and drilling in ANWR is a hot issue right now, as we all know. She knows her state and understands the sensitivity of the issue and brings insight about it to the table on a national stage at a time when the issue of drilling is at a fever pitch.
Another thing is you can rest assured that the Dems are going to use the “Sen. Ted Stevens is a prime example of corrupt Republicans” argument, and Palin being from Alaska and taking on politicians of Stevens ilk kind of throws a little cold water on that argument.
There are some conservatives out there who have issues with Palin’s experience, saying it effectively negates the arguments McCain has made about Obama’s. I do think choosing her takes away a little bit from the effectiveness of that argument, but I don’t think it takes the issue off the table completely. I think if one were to measure Palin’s accomplishments versus Obama’s while serving in government, it’s pretty clear that in the battle of who did the most with their few years serving in government, Palin would win that one hands down. Think about it. What exactly has Obama accomplished? What state has he governed? How often has he bucked his own party? Has he ever been in command of a state’s National Guard? What political risk has he taken that would threaten his standing in his own party - like Palin did for suing the administration over the polar bear threatened status distinction? Has he appointed Republicans and Independents in his administration? Oh that’s right - he can’t. He doesn’t have one.
I should also add that there’s a reason, IMO, that the Obama campaign backtracked on its earlier criticism of her experience. Simply put, they don’t want to go there.
Regarding the possibility that something might happen to or with McCain during his first term, I have no doubt that McCain is going to surround himself with competent advisors and cabinet members, and Palin has shown the ability to listen and learn and not surround herself with just ”yes” people, so in the unfortunate event that something happens to or with McCain, she’d have that circle and apply what she’s learned as governor as well as what she could learn as a veep to her presidency. And assuming McCain would be a one termer (which I suspect will be the case), she would naturally run to take his place after having served four years in the capacity of veep.
I think the choice is risky for Mc, but one he had to make. Of the four people we kept hearing he was considering (not including Palin, who was the “dark horse”), Romney was out of the question because he and McCain have an obvious personal dislike for each other - not only that, but the ads the Dems would have run using Romney’s primary campaign words against McCain and vice versa would have been as embarassing as the ads McCain and the GOP are running against Obama using the words of other Democrats - including Biden - against him. Pawlenty would have been an ok pick but not exceptionally bold, and Lieberman and Ridge’s rigid stances on abortion disqualified them as the base made it clear in no uncertain terms what those picks would do to the party. Palin greatly excites conservatives and will help shore up the base, including most of the reluctants - even while McCain still gets to wear his “maverick” hat, and she just might bring in more of the womens vote on both sides of the aisle than McCain would have gotten otherwise, and not just because she is a woman, but because she is a damned smart woman - and wise, too.
Conservatives have been writing about Palin for over a year now - she is well-liked and has been talked about as a major rising star within the GOP. Now she has a chance to show us - and the country - how well that star can shine.
DailyKos suggests that Sarah Palin’s child born with Downs Syndrome is not actually hers - but the illegitimate baby of her daughter.
And:
And finally (from a hard leftist):
Unreal. But actually it is merely the prelude to the first act of the psychotic drama the Left plans to put on. Remember always, dear readers, that the Kossacks and the MSM pull the strings of the Democrat Party.
If you thought that the 2004 and 2006 elections and the Far Left’s antics at those times were vile, you ain’t seen nothing yet. For pure, unadulterated evil this election will have no rivals in American history. The Messiah is the Chosen One - and those who are not for Him are against Him.
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi @ 8/30/2008 - 12:10 am
What I don’t understand about the DailyKos stuff is this: if it were actually true, wouldn’t that be a good thing? She’s protecting both her child and her grandchild. I don’t believe it’s true, but I would think more, not less, of her if it were.
Comment by Trish @ 8/30/2008 - 12:53 am
Trish, the whole thing is a mystery. Having seriously POed a significant portion of the Democrat base, the Obama Nation now seems bent upon irritating the rest of the country with these sleazy rumors. None of the actions of the MSM and their Kossack brethren makes sense even from their own warped point of view.
The best that I can come up with is the trolls of the Left are greedy, arrogant and (above all) stupid. The merest whiff of power (or the prospect of power) has gone to their heads and is ruining their chances. Perhaps they really did believe that they were a shoo-in for a 57-state landslide, and that they could do as the pleased in the meantime without fear of being held accountable. Even the Nazis had the political acumen to conceal their ultimate aims until after gaining absolute power.
I have gone from pessimism to cautious optimism.
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi @ 8/30/2008 - 1:42 am
She may not have the kind of executive experience that Ronald Reagan had, but while she was Mayor of that little town of Wasilla, it grew! Amazing, huh? Cities with Democrat Mayors seems to inevitably shrink and crumble under the weight of their Socialist policies.
She has enough experience for this voter.
Comment by benning @ 8/30/2008 - 6:08 am
I’m voting Palin/RINO in Nov.
McCain didn’t pick her because he supports the values and principles she’s been loyal(antonym for maverick) to - but he needs his conservative base back. it wasn’t for Hillary’s feminists - a few females might wander over - liberal moms etc.
Finally - out of 300 million people in the USA, one of the four running is a true conservative!
As far as the world experience thing goes, remember
Obama’s great european vacation hardly qualifies. But there were others without it also - Reagan, Carter, Kerry, JFK, etc. Nixon probably had the most and the libs wanted to impeach him so Judgement, wisdom and character are my main criteria - plus she shoots her own carabou meat - and doesn’t have a history of doing hard drugs.
Comment by Don L @ 8/30/2008 - 8:02 am
I love it that McCain picked Palin. A political outsider who passed a state ethics law overhaul in her first legislative session. A woman who may pick up some of the angry Hillary voters. Its historic for the Republican Party also. The first woman on the ticket and most likely will be first woman in the white house. All I can say is awesome!!! The day after Obama’s speech, he wasn’t being talked about. Nope, McCain’s VP choice is what all the talking heads were discussing - just brilliant.
Comment by Debra B @ 8/30/2008 - 8:40 am
Sarah Palin is the best choice possible. We need to be energy self-sufficient, Alaska has it, and she’s the Governor. I saw an interview where she pointed out that 30 years ago Senator Biden voted against a natural gas pipeline that would have supplied the lower 48. As Vice President, she can advise members of Congress, and break a tie.
Comment by Tom TB @ 8/30/2008 - 9:40 am
I’m amused by the MSM’s assertion that Palin was a “surprise” choice even though her name has been mentioned in the blogosphere for some time. I shall be charitable and describe this to “inattentiveness.”
To the silly rumour that the damaged child is actually Governor Palin’s grandchild, I would remind all that children with Downs are usually offspring of older mothers. And even if the rumour were true, I think Trish’s comments are to the point.
And finally, ST reminds us:
[A]ssuming McCain would be a one termer (which I suspect will be the case), she would naturally run to take his place after having served four years in the capacity of veep.
Quite so. Those who decide to vote for McCain should be aware they may in effect be voting for the next two presidents.
Comment by Leslie @ 8/30/2008 - 9:54 am
I think it’s unwise to presume Palin would seek the WH in 2012. I know Alaskans - and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to hear her say something to the effect of “thanks - it’s been great. But my family and I are going home.”
To political junkies like most of us here, that’s unthinkable of course. But there really ARE people like this - who have real lives and to whom Washington political power isn’t the be all and end all.
In any case, I think McCain’s having picked her is a grand slam. Just when many of us were convinced the next two months were going to be a world-class bore.
Comment by Tango @ 8/30/2008 - 10:09 am
Like always, racism and misogyny are right there just below the surface with the Left. If you are a woman or minority who thinks and acts like they approve of, and tell you to, you’re fine. Dare to think for yourself and adopt a contrary position, and they turn ugly, racist, and misogynistic in a heartbeat. Vile people. Conservatives and Republicans are much better about such things, but we’re the ones they call racist and anti-womyn.
Regardless of your opinions on abortion, the fact that Palin was informed she was carrying a child with a serious birth defect and did not abort the baby is proof that Palin is no hypocrite (something else the Left is good at and will not forgive her for). As for Obama, again, regardless of your views on abortion, his actions and votes with respect to the treatment of babies who survived late term abortions are horrendous. There is no difference between letting a live, late term aborted baby die in a store room and the Spartan practice of throwing babies off of the cliffs, it’s infanticide.
As for the experience issue, let’s think up a little analogy. You are getting on an airliner for a trip, and look into the cockpit as you board. If the Republicans ran the airline, you’d see an older, experienced pilot with thousands of hours in the Captain’s chair, and a less experienced pilot in the co-pilots chair. If the Democrats were running the airline, you’d have an inexperienced, young, just out of flight school pilot in the Captain’s seat, and an older, but still not very experienced, pilot in the co-pilots seat. Which airline would you like to take a trip on?
The vile things being said by the Leftists about Palin are disgusting, and if given any air time will undoubtedly result in people moving towards her. The Leftists always fail to realize how disgusting they sound to the average American, who has a lot more sense of fairness than they do. The more we can publicize their vile comments the better off the McCain/Palin ticket will be.
Disgusting, vile people.
Comment by Severian @ 8/30/2008 - 10:10 am
And at the risk of sounding like a sexist pig, she’s damn good looking.
Comment by greg @ 8/30/2008 - 5:54 pm
Yes, greg, that’s another thing the left hates about her.
Comment by Trish @ 8/30/2008 - 6:53 pm
Dear Sister,
I see another dimension here that hasn’t been discussed. I think Sarah Palin is going to become America’s sweetheart - everybody’s kid sister - everybody’s daughter. This is something we haven’t seen since Reagan.
Regards,
Roy
Comment by Roy Lofquist @ 8/30/2008 - 8:51 pm
The more I see of Sarah Palin, the more I love this choice for a variety of reasons.
First of all, let me get one thing out of the way. I cannot argue that she is ready to be president from day one. She needs seasoning, and I pray McCain will be able to serve a full term. On the other hand, I don’t think Hillary Clinton was ready either. More importantly, either is Barack Obama.
Of course, the Obama campaign jumped quickly on her rather thin resume. The first thing we heard was this from Obama spokesman, Bill Burton:
“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same,” said Bill Burton, Obama Campaign Spokesman.”
What Mr Burton failed to remember was that his candidate, Barack Obama, is just as inexperienced as Palin if not more so. Apparently, some Obama staffers understood this because later comments throughout the day focused more on her conservative ideals rather than the lack of experience. Obama et al also have to remember that they alienated millions of women by their “dissing” of Hillary. Do they want to repeat that?
Of course, it could be argued back and forth who has the most political experience. Obama has 12 years in the Illinois State Senate and US Senate total, while Palin has 13 years in local municipal politics (small-town mayor and less than two years as Alaska’s governor.) It could be argued that a governor has daily managerial experience, while a US Senator gives speeches and casts votes. At any rate, take your pick.
The point is that Burton’s comment was a case of premature shooting from the hip. (Of course, it can be argued that McCain’s arguments against Obama’s inexperience have been weakened considerably by his choice of Palin.)
Not surprisingly, MSNBC broke the news in a thoroughly biased and unprofessional manner today. Under the headline “Breaking news”, MSNBC flashed the pick with the sub-title; “How many houses will Palin mean for McCain?” (I may have a word or two off here, but it was a clear shot at McCain’s bumbling of the number of homes he owns.) Is that what you call professional journalism? Whatever happened to the line between straight news reporting and editorializing?
Most conservatives seem to be very happy with the choice, and there are an abundance of reasons they should be. First of all, Palin is a solid conservative. She is pro-life, and just recently chose to have her fifth child last April even though she knew it would be born with Downs Syndrome. She is pro-gun (a member of NRA)and pro-drilling in ANWR. (Hopefully, she can influence McCain in that regard.) She is also, in virtually every respect, the un-Hillary. Did I mention that Palin (a former beauty queen) is also drop-dead gorgeous? That, of course, shouldn’t count for anything-but it does.
Notwithstanding Mr Burton’s statement, Palin’s selection cannot be considered “more of the same”. It was an exciting pick. Probably McCain and his advisers realized they were in a position where they had to steal the attention away from Obama. That they did.
I am certainly no advocate of picking people for jobs just because they fit into some gender or racial slot. Yet, America is fast approaching the day when we are not going to see many more all-male, all-white tickets. The country is ready for a minority president, just as it is ready for a female president. We should still insist on the right person, however.
It could very well be that McCain has played rope-a-dope with the Obama campaign, hoping they would jump up without thinking and scream, “inexperienced, not qualified”. If so, Mr Burton fell right into the trap.
Thus far, I am very pleased that McCain chose a young and attractive conservative. As for the inexperience factor, which do you prefer, an experienced president with an inexperienced vice president or an inexperienced president with an experienced vice president? Take your pick.
gary fouse
fousesquawk
Comment by gary fouse @ 8/30/2008 - 10:35 pm