Pages

Friday, October 03, 2008

What The Veep Candidate Palin Needed To Make Last Night's Debate Perfect.

Gum. A big, snapping wad of gum. Juicy Fruit. Perfect for a "shout out" ta my friends back home, ya betcha, golly . . . thumbs up, wink, snap!

Actually, Ms. Palin did a good job. Stayed on the talking points, didn't offer any solid programs or policies that could be challenged, stuck to the campaign rhetoric, kept repeating the false claim of jes' bein' ah couple o' Mavericks gonna ride inta town ta clean up them vipers -- which "maverick" remark Biden called her on, but good.

But then who's listening? Facts? Programs? Policies? Who cares? Just keep repeating the same meaningless mantras, remain a moving target, avoid any hard questions, look good (it's about image, baby, image), scare people with terrorists and gay people getting married, and bank on the short attention span of the American people.

And she did a good job of all that because the expectations for her were so low that if she managed to just stand upright for 90 minutes, folks would be pleasantly surprised.

But people are still going to have to ask themselves the most serious question of all: President Palin? For me the answer is simple: Palin is just George Bush in drag . We've had 8 years of that sort of governance. Thanks, but no thanks. Don't need 8 more.

Did have to laugh that she resurrected Biden's statements about Obama when he was running against him in the primaries. Pundits at the time warned all the Democratic candidates to watch out for what they said about their opponents since it could come back to haunt whoever the candidate ended up being and harm party unity & etc. Sure enough.

4 comments:

*PG-13 said...

Like everybody else, I watched the VP debate - if that's what they choose to call it - last night. I dunno. The rest of the country must have been watching something else. I tend to watch my debates on PBS cuz I like their talking heads more than the talking heads on the other networks. But last night I was left wondering ... has everybody lost their friggin minds? OK, yeah, the PBS-heads had some insightful post-debate comments. But I couldn't help thinking they were being waaaaay tooo circumspect towards a C-grade 6th grade performance. Granted, Gov. Palin didn't do a cannon-ball belly-flop like she's been doing in other interviews over the last couple of weeks. She was comprehensible. Her lips moved, English came out, and she spoke directly to her talking points. Over and over and over again - regardless what the question was. According to my count she didn't answer a single question put to her. Whatever the question, whatever the topic, she dispensed with that in the first sentence or two of her response - typically consisting of "Let me say this about that instead ...." - and then immediately launched into one her talking points. And her talking points were seldom even related to the question put to her. It soon became obvious she had been coached not to say anything about anything she didn't already have canned for delivery. Definitely good strategy given her recent performances. And dang, it worked! She gave a great performance. Good theater. Tight script. Kinda like watching an actress giving a stand-up monologue. But for this she gets a Pass in Debate? Talk about grade inflation.

I dunno. I was hoping for so much more. I appreciate these 'debates' are seldom a real debate. And that they are played not-to-lose rather than to inform, or engage, or win. The dumbing-down of the process is getting to the point of ..... why bother?

I'm embarrassed to use a daytime talk show for political discourse but that's what its coming to. Right? So why not. This was on the Ellen Degeneres show last week - pre-interviews, pre-debate - but I still think it a fair assessment of the Sarah Palin nomination. Sharon Osbourne on Sarah Palin. Did I say I was embarrassed? Naw, I'm just joining the herd.

Churadogs said...

hahahahah. Osborne is dead on the mark. Disney movie, indeed. What's so interesting is that the poll numbers show McCain/Palin nearly neck and neck. That ticket shouldn't even be on the radar. Clearly, people haven't and aren't able to connect the dots or they've so given up on the idea of serious self-governance that they simply treat it all as a joke or TV game show. America's got talent! Yay! Let's vote fer the hockey mom! It's Amazing.

And, yes the debates have always been silly. There's a new movie out on Lee Atwater. If you want to see the start of the partisan political rot you're looking at, that'll 'splain it to you. Atwater begat the whole GOPAC/Rovian mind set that deliberately, consciously, as a tactic, corrupted language, corrupted meaning, corrupted "truth", corrupted the entire process and deliberately set into motion the demonization of your "enemy" (your fellow citizen) with the end game the Kool-Aid-drinking destruction you see before you. He repented before he died, but it was too late. The beast he created was loose and fed by his successors.

Another interesting note, both Palin and McCain attended New Gringrich's GOPAC seminar, which is where they learn ATwater's gospels. Yep, Gingrich's poison is still at work.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

I think the key issue here is integrity. I won't comment on Gingrich's integrity, but Rove's leaves something to be desired. I know of few right-wing Christian Republicans who view Rove as anything but someone who pushes the boundaries of the rules just to take an advantage. Perhaps those I know have more integrity than most, but Rove makes them feel very uncomfortable.

They tend to like Palin because she's "feisty" and "good in front of the camera" (did they even see her interviews with Gibson and Couric). They like that she's open about her faith (but don't seem to care that her pastors appear about as wacky as Obama's).

Oh well ... it all comes down to integrity.

When I bring up her willingness to charge the state of Alaka a per diem for staying in her own home when she travels from Juneau to Anchorage, they are quick to say that even if she has the legal right to do that, such actions are not ethical or like those of someone who is a real reformer.

Of course, they are quick to point out that both sides do the same sort of crap (so presumably it is okay for them to support one crap-pulling candidate who will lower taxes on the wealthy but has a pro-life running mate as opposed to another crap-pulling candidate who will focus tax cuts on the middle-class). It's a bit frustrating.

On the whole "Disney Movie" thing, have any of you seen the preview for "Head of Skate"?

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

A while back, Ann mentioned a Rolling Stone article about Palin by Matt Taibbi. It is online now. There is an article about John McCain by Tim Dickinson as well.