Is the Sarah Palin Pick About to Implode?


Blog For Free!


Archives
Home
2008 November
2008 October
2008 September
2008 July
2008 June
2008 May
2008 April
2008 March
2008 February
2008 January
2006 April
2006 February
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 September
2005 August
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 February
2005 January
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March

My Links
Google News
Salon.com
Washington Post
Trump Fires Bush Video
Bush You're Fired Tshirt.com

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Sponsored
Blog



Is the Sarah Palin Pick About to Implode?
09.02.08 (6:34 pm)   [edit]

Photobucket

As more information surfaces about vice-presidential choice Sarah Palin, it has become increasingly clear that Palin was a last-second choice on the part of John McCain, and underwent virtually no vetting prior to her selection. Multiple reports have indicated that McCain wanted Joe Lieberman for the position, but encountered such stiff opposition from party regulars that he was forced to drop that option. Another prospect, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, was was also unacceptable to the party base, due to his pro-choice position on abortion. That left Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, sorely lacking in both charisma and depth, and Mitt Romney, with whom McCain's relationship is strained at best. It is also clear that McCain was influenced by the tremendous success of the Democratic Convention, and was pessimistic about his chances were he to make a predictable, ho-hum choice for veep. That is why, at the 11th hour, he chose Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, hoping that she would lend a new vitality and pizzazz to the ticket. The problem for the McCain campaign is, the pick was made with such haste, the McCain campaign knew little about her.

Since then, information has emerged which suggests that Palin is a lot longer on drama, and shorter on gravitas than McCain would have hoped. Let's take a look at what we now know:

1) The New York Times reports that Palin has hired a private lawyer to deal with the investigation into whether she improperly used her office as governor to try to get her ex-brother-in-law fired, during his bitter custody battle with her sister.

2) It has come out that during the 90's, Palin was a member of the "Alaska Independence Party," one of whose goals was the secession of Alaska from the United States. Can you imagine if Barack Obama had belonged to a group which advocated the secession of Hawaii from the Union? We'd never hear the end of it!

3) Palin campaigned against her own mother-in-law, who was attempting to succeed Palin as the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska. Much of Sarah Palin's disenchantment stemmed from her mother-in-law's pro-choice views. Her mother-in-law, Faye Palin, who lost the mayoral race to the candidate that Sarah Palin backed, told the New York Daily news that she is considering voting for Obama.

4) While McCain praised Palin during his introduction of her, for rejecting the infamous "bridge to nowhere," it has since come to light that that before it became a national scandal, Palin was a staunch supporter of the infamous bridge. Further, in direct contradiction to what Palin said during her introduction, Alaska never gave the $400 million back to the federal government; rather, they simply transferred it to other projects. Simply put, during her debut in Dayton, Ohio, Palin fibbed when she said she had returned the money.

5) Depite the reformer label that Republicans have enthusiastically pinned on Palin, we now know that while Palin was the mayor of Wasilla, she brought in 27 million dollars of pork barrel spending, for a town with a population of 7,000. That may be a national record for pork barrel abuse per capita.

The McCain campaign has issued a series of statements purporting to show that they did a serious job of vetting Palin before choosing her. However, the statements raise more questions than they answer. Staffers first told the Washington Post that the FBI had fully investigated her; the FBI, however, denied this, saying that they perform no such function for the candidates. Further, the New York Times found that the McCain campaign never bothered to talk to Palin's associates in Alaska. Here is Lyda Green, the State Senate president, who lives in Wasilla, where Palin served as mayor:

They didn’t speak to anyone in the Legislature, they didn’t speak to anyone in the business community.

Representative Gail Phillips, a Republican and former speaker of the State House, questioned whether any serious vetting had been done on Palin, given the universal surprise in Alaska over the choice:

I started calling around and asking, and I have not been able to find one person that was called. I called 30 to 40 people, political leaders, business leaders, community leaders. Not one of them had heard. Alaska is a very small community, we know people all over, but I haven’t found anybody who was asked anything.

The fact that the McCainites knew so little about Palin diminishes her as a candidate, but it diminishes John McCain even more, making a mockery of his bromides about judgment, experience and leadership during a time of great national uncertainty. The selection of Sarah Palin was clearly an amateurish, slapdash process that resulted in a pick that may now blow up in McCain's face.

Of course the most lurid fact to emerge since the choice Sarah Palin is that of her daughter Bristol's pregnancy, a pregnancy putatively in its fifth month. This information was disclosed to the press in the wake of rampant internet speculation that Bristol, now 17, had been the real mother of Sarah Palin's fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin. While I am aware that the internet is rife with false and slanderous rumors, many of which have indeed targeted Barack Obama, the facts surrounding the birth of Trig Palin are so bizarre and unlikely, that they bear further discussion:

On March 5, 2008, Sarah Palin announced at a press conference that she was 7 months pregnant with her fifth child. The reaction to the news was universal; everyone was shocked because she didn't look remotely pregnant. A month later, while presumably 8 months pregnant with a child that she knew would have Down's Syndrome, she attended a conference in Dallas, requiring significant travel by air, itself a bit unusual for someone with such an advanced pregnancy. As Sarah Palin tells the story, she was in Dallas on April 17, when she began to leak amniotic fluid. Whether her water fully broke is, I suppose, a semantic issue. Despite this sign of impending childbirth, and accompanying labor pains, she decided to give her keynote speech at the energy conference she was attending. Then, rather than simply check herself into one of Dallas' fine hospitals, she went to DFW airport, bought a ticket, checked her bags, dealt with the hassle of security, and made a 9 hour trip back to Anchorage (with a stop in Seattle), while not disclosing anything to Air Alaska, and while apparently leaking amniotic fluid. So Palin's version in a nutshell is that she got pregnant at age 44, and at seven months, wasn't showing at all--itself highly unlikely. Then, at eight months, her water broke, and she chose not to go to a hospital in Dallas, all the while knowing that she would be delivering a "special needs" child that could come at any moment. Instead, she decided to return to Alaska, the rationale apparently being that she wanted to have her child in Alaska. To say that this scenario strains credulity is the understatement of the year.

It is also important to note that during this time, Bristol had been absent from school for eight months with "mononucleosis," and that some of her schoolmates had reported seeing her looking pregnant. We are now told that Bristol is 5 months pregnant, which would put Bristol's conception at almost the exact time of Trig Paxson Van Palin's birth, conveniently knocking down the notion that Bristol could have given birth at that time. If indeed Bristol is five months pregnant, she could not be the mother of Trig. However, we have to take this on faith; if this was all a deception, why would we get the truth now? If Sarah Palin's version of events is true, it is the coincidence of a remarkable series of unlikely events, whose collective probability is close to zero. A few more troubling revelations about Sarah Palin could doom her to the same fate as would-be attorney general, Harriet Miers, and would-be vice-president Thomas Eagleton.

Finally, in conjunction with the Palin selection, let me say a few words about Hillary Clinton. Regular readers of this blog know that over the course of the campaign, I have regarded Hillary Clinton as a cynical and somewhat destructive figure. It was for that reason that I was overjoyed at the level of unity reached during the Democratic Convention. I said to myself, "Great, now I won't have to talk about Hillary anymore!" Well, with the selection of Sarah Palin, it looks like I spoke too soon.

John McCain's attempt to attract and co-opt former Hillary supporters with Palin is a gamble, not so much because of Palin's experience deficit, but because the success of McCain's strategy depends on Hillary being an accomplice to his plan to drive a wedge between Hillary's past supporters. The fact is, Hillary could put the kibosh on McCain's use of Palin as a champion of women's interests, by simply standing up and saying firmly:

She is a woman, yes. But she stands against all the important things that animated my campaign: Universal health care, the protection of a woman's right to choose, the establishment of a living wage for working families, a progressive tax system that doesn't favor the rich, a major move toward green, renewable energy, and an immediate end to the war in Iraq, with an emphasis on regional diplomacy. Sarah Palin stands against all of these goals. She is no more a promoter of my agenda than Clarence Thomas has been a promoter of civil rights. I strongly urge any supporters of mine to see through this cynical ploy by Senator McCain, and support Barack Obama for president!

Barbara Boxer and others have already said words to this effect, but the person who really needs to speak out on Sarah Palin is Hillary Clinton. McCain apparently believes that if he can appeal to Hillary's narcissism and continuing sense of victimhood, that she may simply sit on her hands while he siphons off some of Obama's support. Who knows, McCain may be right. So far Hillary has issued only the most tepid, innocuous statement about Palin. Over the next 65 days, I'll be watching to see how Hillary handles the Sarah Palin issue, and you can bet that Barack Obama will be watching as well.

 


posted by: Stephen Kruiser (reply)
post date: 09.02.08 (6:19 pm)

Thought I'd help on a few things. First, your numbered items.
1-Half the conservative bloggers in America knew about this two months ago. Everyone in Alaska knew. Because it's new news to many doesn't make it a big secret that wasn't uncovered in the vetting. Just means it wasn't deemed a major problem.
2-Refuted hours ago. Registered GOP her whole voting life. Husband flirted with this group. Yawn.
3-So what?
4-Best thing you've got so far and it ain't much. Embarrassing,yes, but compared to the people under Obama's bus, not much.
5-Not all pork barrel. Detractors keep pointing out that she was only the mayor of a small town. Small town mayors tend not to have a lot of big money backers to keep happy. Per your source: some of it was spent on a youth shelter, sewer repairs, a transportation hub and a rail system. Sounds like stuff that would make any progressive happy.

As for the vile Trig/Bristol rumor, even Kos is off that one. He also made all of the diaries about it disappear to the Kos gulag.

But I agree with you about Hillary being destructive. See? We can all get along.




posted by: Albert (reply)
post date: 09.02.08 (6:41 pm)

Try as they might, there is no way to spin this positively for McCain.

John McCain picked a running mate who he didn't really know at all; who had relatively few qualifications to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency; and who holds extremist views on abortion, global warming, equal pay for equal work, gay rights, and teaching creationism in public schools.

It is obvious to all that this was a reckless decision by McCain, one that demonstrated a real lack of sound judgment or deliberation.





posted by: Jane Q Public (reply)
post date: 09.03.08 (5:01 pm)

Yawn.... Was Palin part of the Roswell incident too? You can do better then that. Come on.. we were out maneuvered by McBush. The only thing I would change about Palin is her party affiliation so we as democrats could vote for real change. Biden represents change in our party? Come on... what was Obama thinking. I would have thought Kathleen Sibelius would have been the correct choice.

Your Name:


Your Comment:


I'm a psychologist in Washington, DC, and have a progressive outlook on today's political scene.

jeffrowan111@aol.com Jeff Rowan, Ph.D.