More Active Posts
Front Page
McCain’s curveball?
 |
 22 Comments |
The American Spectator has a sweet suggestion for a McCain curveball that could leave Obama, Hillary, and everyone else looking for a new bat. That suggestion concerns whom he should pick as a running mate:
Sarah Palin, the beautiful conservative Republican governor of Alaska, would be an ideal choice to help McCain slay this unholy ObamaOprah beast which is set to rake in nearly $50 million a month in campaign donations alone, and has intense auxiliary support coming from the unions, George Soros’s billions-infused Democracy Alliance organization, and other rich Democratic networks.
Mrs. Palin is one of conservatism’s own, and would be the first female vice president. She’s young being only 44 (two years behind Senator Obama), she is wildly known to despise government corruption. She defeated a horribly entrenched and corrupt Republican political machine in Alaska. She has a son in the U.S. military. She’s strongly pro-life, belonging, in fact, to Feminists for Life.
McCain could at least steal some of the left’s historical thunder with such a pick.
HT: The Pearcey Report
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: politics |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Off-key
I’m encouraged to hear someone 44 described as “young.”
I agree with the idea.
SteveG: I remember when JFK was shot, my father who was 10 years older kept saying how sad it was because he was so young and with such small children. I was 11 and thought they were all ancient of days. Today at 55, 44 is rapidly becoming young. Maybe one has to get past an age to appreciate that it’s “young.” We had a minister in church who always referred to an elderly person on his/her birthday as let’s say “80 years young.” It’s a good attitude.
If this lady is everything we’ve read here, sounds like a great idea. It would knock the Dems’ socks off.
Heck, yeah, 44 is young. Brad Pitt and Tom cruise are like 45 and they’re just starting to learn how to act.
I don’t know if she’s well-known enough nationally to be seen as anything but an attempt to add some voom to McCain’s candidacy. Alaska is still considered a backwater by most people so it’s not likely to impress.
Eight years ago it was gravitas.
Now it’s voom.
No, I’ve never heard of her, but she would “indicate” that Republicans are not against women, she would bring young ideas in and balance out McCain’s age. It could work.
(A) Feminists for Life are NOT feminists.
(B) Association with the word “feminsist” (no matter how shallow) will hurt McCain with you people.
(C) Alska itself doesn’t offer any demographic advantage to the ticket. It’s just going to make it look like the only;y reason he picked her is because she’s a woman, and create an obvious election catch phrase. “How far will the GOP to go to find a woman candidate? Yeah, that far”!
Or better “how far do they HAVE to go”
i respectfully but strongly disagree palin would be an obvious/desperate move that constitutes picking a female running mate solely for her sex. that would be far more the case, i would argue, with a pick such as kay bailey hutchison. while hutchison is much more experienced re political service, i think one can point to reasons for choosing palin other than her sex much more than with the texas senator.
palin would be a risk or sorts because of her relative inexperience in ‘big-league’ politics. however, she would likely bring a combination of youth/female/conservatism-libertarianism/reformer crentials and excitement. would she be a better choice with a little more experience as governor under her belt? yes. i still think she is one of the best potential picks to run for v.p. this year.
unlike bobby jindal, who from a moral perspective could not leave louisiana given its current recovery status, palin on the ticket would probably be a source of pride to alaskans, who from what little i have seen and heard have a lot of enthusiasm for their state and would welcome the attention.
having said that, i would be surprised if someday both jindal and palin do not run for president.
another choice i think mccain should consider is former congressman j.c. watts. that would put someone on the ticket who has moved on from politics and achieved some things in other areas — and also point out the racism among some left-wing types that says all blacks should more or less think the same way.
She’s good. She’d likely be very good moving up to national office. Whether she is the right pick for McCain - I don’t know.
She does have a bright fuuture (like Jindal).
Of course the other reason McCain might pick her: HE does seem to like attractive women 30 years younger than him!
Luke, what’s a feminist? Really. Define it.
And if McCain “likes” attractive women 30 years his junior only proves he’s not dead. Unless unlike the NYT you plan to provide proof of any stronger allegations.
Luke, I repeat NJLawyer’s question.
Feminists for Life are feminists in the true sense of the word.
Still waiting, Luke. Cough it up.
There are plenty of great running mates for McCain and I am sure he will surprise quite a few with his choice. It’s his chance to be a Maverick Moderate and get the right all mad at him again for no sane reason - theirs or his
Sorry I wasn’t paying diligent attention, I”m at work.
Feminism is a movement to end sexism and sexist oppression. You cannot be pro-life and a feminist because opposing a woman’s right to make fundamental medical decisions concerning her body perpetuates a societal double standard of body identity rights that selectively disenfranchises female bodies by forcing them into positions of decreased autonomy and a subservient positions to male bodies.
End of story!
So Luke…
1) What about the “female bodies” whose lives are being ended - usually after their hearts have started beating and their brain waves have started?
2) Did you know that many times women have abortions because the fathers of their babies find it much more convenient than having to own up to their responsibilities as a father? And that the women usually bear much more of the grief and regret for those abortions than the man, who gets to just write the check and go merrily on his way?
Somehow, I think saying feminism requires being pro-abortion is actually a big boost to a bunch of male jerks out there (the ones who want to have sex with whoever without needing to be a man and support the children they have fathered).
What a crock Luke. NOT end of story. Try again.
Did you avail yourself of the opportunity to check out their website?
www.feministsforlife.org
Bethd
Very well stated!
BethD writes: “Somehow, I think saying feminism requires being pro-abortion is actually a big boost to a bunch of male jerks out there (the ones who want to have sex with whoever without needing to be a man and support the children they have fathered).”
There it is in a nutshell!
Luke, I’m glad you were working. Now do explain to us why we shouldn’t think of you as one of those guys described immediately above!
No one has taken advantage of feminism more than I have, for whatever reasons that I won’t go into here. No one wants equal pay for equal work or opportunity for girls more than I do. That’s what feminism is to me: fundamental fairness. But turning against one’s own child, that’s turning against oneself, and woe unto those who have taught women (and men) that children are expendable to a political movement. They have misled women in the most horrible way. Having one’s child does not make one subservient to anyone, unless you’re suggesting that every human being only exists because men forced themselves on women. Are we all here because of one big societal rape through the centuries? That’s horsepucky, donkeydust.
Feminism was started by a bunch of women who were unhappy, many of whom had bad relationships with their fathers. I’m sorry, but that’s pretty much it. Yes, I know there are attitudes men have. I certainly heard enough comments from the male judges about the first female judges. But those women went to law school long before feminism was popular and essentially just did what they wanted to do. That’s but one example. Feminism has turned women against the greatest thing about being a woman — being a mother. If feminism was about fundamental fairness, it would be a great thing, but feminism as it has been practiced in the past 40 years has all but destroyed this society. It has made women treat men in appalling ways, and in response, men have treated women in appalling ways. What is has done to children (including teenagers) is beyond appalling. There’s not one ounce of love in feminism as it has been practiced.
Society has required things of men, too. It makes men support those children. For centuries, men have had to support a child born of the marriage whether the child was theirs or not. (DNA is recent, and even with DNA, courts have often upheld this obligation.) I would beg to differ somewhat respecting some men and abortion. Some men have been deeply hurt by the loss of their child. We don’t hear about them any more than we hear about the regrets of women who have had abortions. It is unfair to dismiss those feelings or just assume that all men don’t care and go merrily on their way (and I don’t think that’s what was truly meant).
Feminism is not about love, nor is it truly about freedom. It preaches hate for men and hate for children. And that’s why it’s wrong.
Luke- Are you saying that Susan B. Anthony was not a feminist? I understand that she was pro-life.
As for Ms Palin- she might be a good choice. As for Alaska being a small state, so is Arizona, really. So are Arkansas and Georgia, two states that have recently provided us with presidents. And Cheney was from Wyoming, the smallest state in population (and one of the least diverse)!
Well, all we gotta do is ask Ms. Palin how close she is to her fellow Alaskan and Republican, Senator “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens. He’s widely known as one of the most corrupt politicians in Washington. Since she supposedly took on the corrupt politicians of Alaska, one is left wondering why she left the biggest fish untouched. What does Senator Stevens have on her?
She’s an elected governor. Tell us: how does an elected governor get rid of an elected Senator? Specifically, what she should do?