Posts
I'm going to respond point-by-point to Bob Herbert's article, Palin's Alternate Universe . Bob Herbert is an Op-Ed columnist for the exalted New York Times. And he makes me mad!
Here we go!
1. Herbert: "Sarah Palin is the perfect exclamation point to the Bush years. We’ve lived through nearly two terms of an administration that believed it could create its own reality: 'Deficits don’t matter.' 'Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job.' 'Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere.' Now comes Ms. Palin, a smiling, bubbly vice-presidential candidate who travels in an alternate language universe. For Ms. Palin, such things as context, syntax and the proximity of answers to questions have no meaning."
Response: John McCain has worked to limit government spending. He obviously doesn't believe that deficits don't matter! Sarah Palin had nothing to do with how Bush handled Katrina. And a lot of people from both parties believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton both voted for the war resolution. And, although Barack Obama opposed the Iraq war from the outset, take a look at what he says in Audacity of Hope:
"Like most analysts, I assumed that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and coveted nuclear arms. I believed that he had repeatedly flouted UN resolutions and weapons inspectors and that such behavior had to have consequences" (294).
Herbert is the one who disregards context, not Sarah Palin. As far as syntax goes, I thought her sentences were just fine.
2. Herbert: "In her closing remarks at the vice-presidential debate Thursday night, Ms. Palin referred earnestly, if loosely, to a quote from Ronald Reagan. He had warned that if Americans weren’t vigilant in protecting their freedom, they would find themselves spending their 'sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was like in America when men were free.' What Ms. Palin didn’t say was that the menace to freedom that Reagan was talking about was Medicare. As the historian Robert Dallek has pointed out, Reagan 'saw Medicare as the advance wave of socialism, which would 'invade every area of freedom in this country.'' Does Ms. Palin agree with that Looney Tunes notion? Or was this just another case of the aw-shucks, darn-right, I’m-just-a-hockey-mom governor of Alaska mouthing something completely devoid of meaning?"
Response: Palin may or may not have known the context of Reagan's quote. Quotes can have meaning apart from their original contexts. But, as Reagan affirmed in his debate with Carter, he supported an alternative program to Medicare, so he wasn't for throwing the sick elderly out onto the streets. And why should we assume that Medicare was the best way to address the problem? Does Mr. Herbert know how much this entitlement costs? He's the one who lives in an alternate universe! And I resent him calling any deviation from liberal orthodoxy a "Looney Tunes notion."
3. Herbert: "This is such a serious moment in American history that it’s hard to believe that someone with Ms. Palin’s limited skills could possibly be playing a leadership role. On the day before the debate, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, made an urgent appeal for more troops, saying the additional 'boots on the ground,' as well as more helicopters and other vital equipment, were 'needed as quickly as possible.'"
Response: What? So David McKiernan supports some sort of surge? I thought Joe Biden said he didn't!
4. Herbert: "The morning after the debate, the Labor Department announced that the employment situation in the U.S. had deteriorated even more than experts had expected. The nation lost nearly 160,000 jobs in September, more than double the monthly losses in July and August.
"Conditions are probably worse than even those numbers indicate because the government’s statistics do not yet reflect the response of employers to the credit crisis that has taken such a hold in the last few weeks.
"Where is the evidence that Governor Palin even understands these complex and enormously challenging problems? During the debate she twice referred to General McKiernan as 'McClellan.' Neither Ms. Ifill nor Senator Biden corrected her.
"But after Senator Biden suggested that John McCain’s answer to the nation’s energy problems was to 'drill, drill, drill,' Ms. Palin promptly pointed out, as if scoring a point, that 'the chant is ‘Drill, baby, drill!’'
"How’s that for perspective? The credit markets are frozen. Our top general in Afghanistan is dialing 911. Americans are losing jobs by the scores of thousands. And Sarah Palin is making sure we know that the chant is 'drill, baby, drill!' not 'drill, drill, drill.'"
Response: First of all, so she mangled the guy's name! She was close enough. At least she knows how many states are in the U.S., unlike, say, Barack Obama. Reagan mangled a lot of leaders' names, and he ended the Cold War. Not that I expect the snobbish New York Times to acknowledge that fact, since it lives in its own little universe, apart from the real world.
Second, "drill, baby, drill" is an answer to our sagging economy, kind sir. We need more jobs. Having energy independence can create those. End of story. Maybe Sarah Palin is more sophisticated than the elitist media think!
5. Herbert: "John McCain has spent most of his adult life speaking of his love for his country. Maybe he sees something in Sarah Palin that most Americans do not. Maybe he is aware of qualities that lead him to believe she’d be as steady as Franklin Roosevelt in guiding the U.S. through a prolonged economic downturn. Maybe she’d be as wise and prudent in a national emergency as John Kennedy was during the Cuban missile crisis.
"Maybe Senator McCain has reason to believe that it would not be the most colossal of errors to put Ms. Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency."
Response: Roosevelt, who had farmers burn their crops when people were going hungry? What got us out of the Depression was the war, not the New Deal. Of course, Herbert would probably dismiss what I said as a "Looney Tune notion," since it doesn't accord with his liberal orthodoxy.
6. Herbert: "He’s got just four weeks to share that insight with the rest of us."
Response: Herbert assumes that "the rest of us" share his view of Governor Palin. The New York Times does not speak for me. Hopefully, we'll see in the coming election that it doesn't speak for a lot of people. We certainly saw that in 2004!
There's nothing like a smug, condescending New York Times opinion piece to put me solidly in the Republican camp!
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Friday, October 3, 2008
Paper on IV Maccabees: Philo on Sports
I read the following in Philo's Life of Moses II 211. The translation is from C.D. Yonge, The Works of Philo (United States: Hendrickson, 1993).
"For this reason the all-great Moses thought fit that all who were enrolled in his sacred polity should follow the laws of nature and meet in a solemn assembly, passing the time in cheerful joy and relaxation, abstaining from all work, and from all arts which have a tendency to the production of anything; and from all business which is connected with the seeking of the means of living, and that they should keep a complete truce, abstaining from all laborious and fatiguing thought and care, and devoting their leisure, not as some persons scoffingly assert, to sports, or exhibitions of actors and dancers, for the sake of which those who run madly after theatrical amusements suffer disasters and even encounter miserable deaths, and for the sake of these the most dominant and influential of the outward senses, sight and hearing, make the soul, which should be the heavenly nature, the slave of the senses" (509-510).
Philo criticizes sports, as if they go against the aim of the Mosaic politeia. Of course, he does so for Stoic reasons--sports make people a slave to the senses--but it's interesting that we have another person here who views them as contrary to the law. II and IV Maccabees seem to as well, as does Josephus. So maybe that's why Jason's gymnasium violated the Jews' politeia, according to II and IV Maccabees.
I'm close to actually writing this paper, I think. This coming Sunday, I'll want to check out that reference in which the Pharisees accuse the Hasmoneans of violating the politeia. Maybe I'll find it online. If not, I'll get it from my school's library.
"For this reason the all-great Moses thought fit that all who were enrolled in his sacred polity should follow the laws of nature and meet in a solemn assembly, passing the time in cheerful joy and relaxation, abstaining from all work, and from all arts which have a tendency to the production of anything; and from all business which is connected with the seeking of the means of living, and that they should keep a complete truce, abstaining from all laborious and fatiguing thought and care, and devoting their leisure, not as some persons scoffingly assert, to sports, or exhibitions of actors and dancers, for the sake of which those who run madly after theatrical amusements suffer disasters and even encounter miserable deaths, and for the sake of these the most dominant and influential of the outward senses, sight and hearing, make the soul, which should be the heavenly nature, the slave of the senses" (509-510).
Philo criticizes sports, as if they go against the aim of the Mosaic politeia. Of course, he does so for Stoic reasons--sports make people a slave to the senses--but it's interesting that we have another person here who views them as contrary to the law. II and IV Maccabees seem to as well, as does Josephus. So maybe that's why Jason's gymnasium violated the Jews' politeia, according to II and IV Maccabees.
I'm close to actually writing this paper, I think. This coming Sunday, I'll want to check out that reference in which the Pharisees accuse the Hasmoneans of violating the politeia. Maybe I'll find it online. If not, I'll get it from my school's library.
Solomon vs. Ruth, or Maybe Esther
Joe Biden reminds me of Solomon, whereas I associate Sarah Palin with Ruth, or maybe Esther. Let me explain.
I realize that comparing Joe Biden to Solomon is problematic, since Biden doesn't always think before he speaks, violating several Solomonic proverbs. But he's reflective, like the Solomon we encounter in Ecclesiastes. I can think of two examples: in last night's debate, he told how he learned not to judge others when he discovered that his political enemy, Jesse Helms, had adopted a boy with cerebral palsy. And, in the Katie Couric interview, he talked about his favorite movie, Chariots of Fire, which inspired him to stand by his convictions, whatever the consequences.
I identified with Biden there, since I'm somewhat of an introspective introvert. I saw a lot of depth as he discussed his own personal growth.
Palin, by contrast, strikes me more as a "just do it" sort of girl. What I'm learning from my weekly quiet time is that Ruth didn't spend a lot of time contemplating her navel. She saw that her family was hungry, so she went out to the fields to glean some barley. She took action. She was also big on relationships, since she stuck with Naomi no matter what. And that's what I get from Palin: she doesn't talk much about personal growth, but about relationships and getting the job done.
She also reminds me somewhat of Esther. Esther was rather passive at first, in that she basically did whatever Mordecai told her. But when she got her own voice, watch out! She wanted to kill everyone who sought to slaughter her people. That's why Martin Luther thought the book was so bloodthirsty!
Sarah Palin, similarly, strikes me as someone who cares about the well-being of the people. At times, she's rather passive and has to be coached on what to say. But when she gets her own voice, watch out! She can wow people. She'll even fire those she thinks she can't work with.
Of course, some may also say that Palin is like Ruth and Esther because she tries to manipulate people to get what she wants--through her folksy charm, her winks, her "gonna" and "gotcha," her beauty. Ruth used a strategy to get Boaz to marry her, and Esther came up with her plan to save the Jewish people. But whether people acknowledge this similarity will depend on if they like Sarah Palin.
I realize that comparing Joe Biden to Solomon is problematic, since Biden doesn't always think before he speaks, violating several Solomonic proverbs. But he's reflective, like the Solomon we encounter in Ecclesiastes. I can think of two examples: in last night's debate, he told how he learned not to judge others when he discovered that his political enemy, Jesse Helms, had adopted a boy with cerebral palsy. And, in the Katie Couric interview, he talked about his favorite movie, Chariots of Fire, which inspired him to stand by his convictions, whatever the consequences.
I identified with Biden there, since I'm somewhat of an introspective introvert. I saw a lot of depth as he discussed his own personal growth.
Palin, by contrast, strikes me more as a "just do it" sort of girl. What I'm learning from my weekly quiet time is that Ruth didn't spend a lot of time contemplating her navel. She saw that her family was hungry, so she went out to the fields to glean some barley. She took action. She was also big on relationships, since she stuck with Naomi no matter what. And that's what I get from Palin: she doesn't talk much about personal growth, but about relationships and getting the job done.
She also reminds me somewhat of Esther. Esther was rather passive at first, in that she basically did whatever Mordecai told her. But when she got her own voice, watch out! She wanted to kill everyone who sought to slaughter her people. That's why Martin Luther thought the book was so bloodthirsty!
Sarah Palin, similarly, strikes me as someone who cares about the well-being of the people. At times, she's rather passive and has to be coached on what to say. But when she gets her own voice, watch out! She can wow people. She'll even fire those she thinks she can't work with.
Of course, some may also say that Palin is like Ruth and Esther because she tries to manipulate people to get what she wants--through her folksy charm, her winks, her "gonna" and "gotcha," her beauty. Ruth used a strategy to get Boaz to marry her, and Esther came up with her plan to save the Jewish people. But whether people acknowledge this similarity will depend on if they like Sarah Palin.
W. Previews
I just watched some previews for Oliver Stone's coming movie, W (see here). I was a little disappointed. I'm hoping for a thoughtful drama, one that expresses concern about his policies while still being somewhat sympathetic. Nixon comes to mind as an example. But the previews look almost comical. They make it look like the Bush Administration sees war as a big joke, or as something Bush concocted for political gain (even though he's stuck by it despite its unpopularity). Even Colin Powell looks sinister! And I thought he was the hero of the Bush-haters.
James Cromwell will play George H.W. Bush. I guess that's not too much of a stretch, considering he played the President in who knows how many Jack Ryan flicks.
Richard Dreyfuss plays Dick Cheney. That's somewhat believable, since both have a gruff sort of quality. But what I saw of Dreyfuss' portrayal looks more like a caricature than a true-to-life representation.
What surprised me was that Laura Bush used to be a Democrat. In the scene in which George and Laura meet, Laura tells Bush she's a librarian. Bush then says that he's reading a book--Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative. Laura responds that she's a Democrat and worked on Eugene McCarthy's campaign. Say it ain't so, Laura!
In any case, I hope to see the movie eventually. Hopefully, it will be more thoughtful than the previews.
James Cromwell will play George H.W. Bush. I guess that's not too much of a stretch, considering he played the President in who knows how many Jack Ryan flicks.
Richard Dreyfuss plays Dick Cheney. That's somewhat believable, since both have a gruff sort of quality. But what I saw of Dreyfuss' portrayal looks more like a caricature than a true-to-life representation.
What surprised me was that Laura Bush used to be a Democrat. In the scene in which George and Laura meet, Laura tells Bush she's a librarian. Bush then says that he's reading a book--Barry Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative. Laura responds that she's a Democrat and worked on Eugene McCarthy's campaign. Say it ain't so, Laura!
In any case, I hope to see the movie eventually. Hopefully, it will be more thoughtful than the previews.
A Few More Points (On the VP Debate)
1. I liked it when Biden referred to advice the President of the Senate gave him way back. He informed Biden that conservative stalwart Jesse Helms had adopted a child in a wheelchair. I actually read that in a biography of Jesse Helms not long ago. Biden learned that he shouldn't judge other people's motivations, only their judgment. He stopped seeing the other side as evil, for he realized that it had good people too.
2. Does America cause good or evil in the world? Sarah Palin referred to a statement Barack Obama made about innocent people dying from our military actions in Afghanistan. She said that was not true, and that we're doing a lot of good there, such as building schools. I vaguely remember reading a while ago that innocent people were dying from our military activity. Our policies apparently accomplish both good and (unfortunately) evil. But will Obama make things better, since he supports us fighting in Afghanistan?
3. Here's a fact check about the debate tonight: Some facts adrift in vice presidential debate. Troop levels are not at the pre-surge level, contra Sarah Palin. But the article also made some interesting points about Biden and his claims. The article says Biden voted for the 1999 deregulation bill (though I've read elsewhere that he voted against it). It states McCain did not vote for the budget resolution that rescinded the Bush tax cuts. It states that McCain supports tax cuts for corporations in general, not just oil companies. It also includes a summary of Barack's health care plan:
"Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers — with one option being a government-run plan."
But wasn't that one of Bush's criticisms of S-CHIP expansion: that the government would be competing with private insurers, then more people would prefer the government policy? And that's fine...until the government runs the private companies out of business! It's like any business: you like it when it's competing, but watch out when it becomes a monopoly!
2. Does America cause good or evil in the world? Sarah Palin referred to a statement Barack Obama made about innocent people dying from our military actions in Afghanistan. She said that was not true, and that we're doing a lot of good there, such as building schools. I vaguely remember reading a while ago that innocent people were dying from our military activity. Our policies apparently accomplish both good and (unfortunately) evil. But will Obama make things better, since he supports us fighting in Afghanistan?
3. Here's a fact check about the debate tonight: Some facts adrift in vice presidential debate. Troop levels are not at the pre-surge level, contra Sarah Palin. But the article also made some interesting points about Biden and his claims. The article says Biden voted for the 1999 deregulation bill (though I've read elsewhere that he voted against it). It states McCain did not vote for the budget resolution that rescinded the Bush tax cuts. It states that McCain supports tax cuts for corporations in general, not just oil companies. It also includes a summary of Barack's health care plan:
"Obama's plan does not provide for universal coverage, only mandates insurance for children and doesn't turn the system over to the government. Most people would still get private insurance through their work. Obama proposes that the government subsidize the cost of health coverage for millions who have trouble affording it and he'd set up an exchange to negotiate prices and benefits with private insurers — with one option being a government-run plan."
But wasn't that one of Bush's criticisms of S-CHIP expansion: that the government would be competing with private insurers, then more people would prefer the government policy? And that's fine...until the government runs the private companies out of business! It's like any business: you like it when it's competing, but watch out when it becomes a monopoly!
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Reactions to VP Debate
People who read me religiously probably realize that I've had different thoughts about what Sarah Palin's strategy should be. I've wanted her to be a policy wonk like Dick Cheney (see Challenges for Sarah Palin), and I thought she could be that, since I'd seen her impressively cite facts and statistics about energy in various interviews. Recently, I thought her best course was to be herself--to speak from her heart about her own experiences (see Sarah Speaks from the Heart, Free Advice for Joe Biden). The latter approach was also recommended by Pat Buchanan, who said "Let Sarah be Sarah."
In writing this, let me first make clear that I don't have the entire debate memorized. I don't even think a transcript is on the Internet right now. And I don't really want to spend a lot of time fact-checking all of Joe Biden's statements about John McCain's voting record, or what General "McClellen" (actually, his name is something else) said about Afghanistan. What follows are just my immediate reactions to the debate, based on what I remember at the moment.
Here we go!
1. Who had the better presence and delivery? Obviously, Sarah Palin. This was the eloquent Sarah Palin of the convention, not the bumbling Sarah Palin of the interviews. Biden did better in referring to specifics, but Palin made more of an impression. I don't know what it was. Her winning smile? That she's hot? That she looked straight into the camera? Her eloquence? Her folksy references to her friends, her family, personal responsibility, her experiences as a middle-class mom, and everyday people's fears about the economy? Probably all of the above.
2. There were times when I wished that Sarah Palin would interject and respond to Joe Biden's criticisms. Biden did so a few times. Palin did not. She just let Gwen go on to the next question. It would have been nice for her to offer clarification about John McCain wanting to tax people's health care benefits (not that I understood any of Joe Biden's complex equation about how McCain's plan will ultimately hurt us). Or McCain voting against heating assistance for the poor. Or McCain voting against alternative energy twenty times. Or McCain opposing a nuclear treaty. Or McCain voting against more federal funds for education, something Joe Biden pointed out right after Palin gave an eloquent call for America to support teachers. But she didn't address those charges. I think she expected us to rest on her being a good, middle-class, salt-of-the-earth person. She's from a family of teachers, so of course she'll support education in a McCain Administration.
Should we expect Sarah Palin to memorize the Congressional Record before she enters a debate? Maybe. Maybe not. But I wish she addressed Joe Biden's charge that she supported a windfall profits tax as governor of Alaska, something John McCain opposes.
3. When she talked about Obama and Biden living in the past and playing the blame game, I thought that was being slightly disingenuous. Biden said that he opposed allowing the West Bank to have elections, since that would enable Hamas to get a greater foothold (which it did). He also wanted NATO troops in Lebanon so that Hezbollah wouldn't thrive there, which was unfortunately what happened.
On one hand, Palin did well to accuse Biden of playing the blame game, since John McCain is not the same as George W. Bush. McCain should not be blamed for all of Bush's failed policies. On the other hand, the Republicans live in the past and play the blame-game a lot. "Obama opposed the surge, which is now working." "John McCain warned about Fannie and Freddie." We heard such remarks from Governor Palin this evening! And they're things to point out. But there's nothing wrong with Biden likewise pointing out examples of his own good judgment. And I wonder what McCain's proposals on Israel actually are.
4. It seems like everyone supports a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But what if the Palestinians use their state as a base to attack Israel? Have people forgotten that little argument?
5. There was a lot of historical revisionism on the part of Joe Biden. I'm not sure if Biden supported the surge, which seemed to be what Sarah Palin was implying. But he did vote for the war resolution, notwithstanding his attempt in the debate to claim it wasn't really about war. He said Obama didn't promise to meet with the President of Iran. Look, I saw the debate in which Obama said he'd do it, and Hillary portrayed him as an inexperienced dunce because of that statement! Biden also never responded to Palin's claim that he criticized Obama for cutting off funding for our troops. Biden acted like he never said it!
6. There was one time when Palin answered the question, and Biden said she had not. It concerned an exit strategy for the war. Palin simply pointed out that the surge is working and that the number of troops in Iraq is now at pre-surge levels. In my humble opinion, that's an exit strategy: win the war, then our troops leave. Palin's stride became slightly broken when Biden criticized her answer. But she still managed to go on with eloquence.
7. I thought she gave good, folksy answers on the economic crisis. But I wish she had responded that it wasn't wrong for McCain to call himself a deregulator. Sure, deregulation may not be entirely appropriate for the financial industry, but that doesn't mean we should burden small businesses with a bunch of rules. There's a wise way to go about the regulation issue. She should have pointed out how unnecessary regulations have burdened her and her family. I think Republicans are conceding too much to the Democrats on all regulation being a good thing.
8. Pundits are pointing out that Palin changed the subject a few times. The topic was bankruptcy, and she talked about energy. She brought up taxes when the question wasn't about that. I liked it when she said that she wasn't going to answer as Biden or Gwen may want, for she was going to speak directly to the American people. She'd let Sarah be Sarah! But I still like candidates to address the questions that are asked.
9. Biden said a surge wouldn't work in Afghanistan, but he wants more troops there. Isn't that what a surge is?
10. On climate change, Palin said that, if Americans become more energy independent, that will help the environment, since Americans care more about climate change than the bad nations selling them oil. I wish she'd elaborate on that, since I don't understand what she's saying. I also wonder how she reconciles "drill, baby, drill" with reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Do we increase drilling, and let cap-and-trade reduce the emissions? Palin can point to natural gas as part of the solution, but there's debate about whether or not natural gas reduces the greenhouse effect. I know T. Boone says it's clean, but there are scientists who say otherwise.
11. Palin was friendly when she asked Biden if she could call him Joe. She did well to praise his son's service in the National Guard. She also commended his late wife for being a teacher. One MSNBC pundit criticized her, however, for not responding when Biden choked up about his family and the challenges of being a single parent. Maybe she should have, but I'm not sure what she would have said.
After the debate, I wished she and Biden make more small talk. Instead, she kept saying "thank you." And it also would have been nice if she had extended herself to the Biden family. Instead, it was Mrs. Biden who made the first move to the Palins. These were just areas where my expectations were disappointed. It makes me wonder if Palin's naturally outgoing, or if it's only part of an act, with a Machiavellian self existing underneath a warm exterior. But I may be reading too much into the situation!
It was a good debate, and I think Sarah will gain in the polls because of it. We'll see!
In writing this, let me first make clear that I don't have the entire debate memorized. I don't even think a transcript is on the Internet right now. And I don't really want to spend a lot of time fact-checking all of Joe Biden's statements about John McCain's voting record, or what General "McClellen" (actually, his name is something else) said about Afghanistan. What follows are just my immediate reactions to the debate, based on what I remember at the moment.
Here we go!
1. Who had the better presence and delivery? Obviously, Sarah Palin. This was the eloquent Sarah Palin of the convention, not the bumbling Sarah Palin of the interviews. Biden did better in referring to specifics, but Palin made more of an impression. I don't know what it was. Her winning smile? That she's hot? That she looked straight into the camera? Her eloquence? Her folksy references to her friends, her family, personal responsibility, her experiences as a middle-class mom, and everyday people's fears about the economy? Probably all of the above.
2. There were times when I wished that Sarah Palin would interject and respond to Joe Biden's criticisms. Biden did so a few times. Palin did not. She just let Gwen go on to the next question. It would have been nice for her to offer clarification about John McCain wanting to tax people's health care benefits (not that I understood any of Joe Biden's complex equation about how McCain's plan will ultimately hurt us). Or McCain voting against heating assistance for the poor. Or McCain voting against alternative energy twenty times. Or McCain opposing a nuclear treaty. Or McCain voting against more federal funds for education, something Joe Biden pointed out right after Palin gave an eloquent call for America to support teachers. But she didn't address those charges. I think she expected us to rest on her being a good, middle-class, salt-of-the-earth person. She's from a family of teachers, so of course she'll support education in a McCain Administration.
Should we expect Sarah Palin to memorize the Congressional Record before she enters a debate? Maybe. Maybe not. But I wish she addressed Joe Biden's charge that she supported a windfall profits tax as governor of Alaska, something John McCain opposes.
3. When she talked about Obama and Biden living in the past and playing the blame game, I thought that was being slightly disingenuous. Biden said that he opposed allowing the West Bank to have elections, since that would enable Hamas to get a greater foothold (which it did). He also wanted NATO troops in Lebanon so that Hezbollah wouldn't thrive there, which was unfortunately what happened.
On one hand, Palin did well to accuse Biden of playing the blame game, since John McCain is not the same as George W. Bush. McCain should not be blamed for all of Bush's failed policies. On the other hand, the Republicans live in the past and play the blame-game a lot. "Obama opposed the surge, which is now working." "John McCain warned about Fannie and Freddie." We heard such remarks from Governor Palin this evening! And they're things to point out. But there's nothing wrong with Biden likewise pointing out examples of his own good judgment. And I wonder what McCain's proposals on Israel actually are.
4. It seems like everyone supports a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But what if the Palestinians use their state as a base to attack Israel? Have people forgotten that little argument?
5. There was a lot of historical revisionism on the part of Joe Biden. I'm not sure if Biden supported the surge, which seemed to be what Sarah Palin was implying. But he did vote for the war resolution, notwithstanding his attempt in the debate to claim it wasn't really about war. He said Obama didn't promise to meet with the President of Iran. Look, I saw the debate in which Obama said he'd do it, and Hillary portrayed him as an inexperienced dunce because of that statement! Biden also never responded to Palin's claim that he criticized Obama for cutting off funding for our troops. Biden acted like he never said it!
6. There was one time when Palin answered the question, and Biden said she had not. It concerned an exit strategy for the war. Palin simply pointed out that the surge is working and that the number of troops in Iraq is now at pre-surge levels. In my humble opinion, that's an exit strategy: win the war, then our troops leave. Palin's stride became slightly broken when Biden criticized her answer. But she still managed to go on with eloquence.
7. I thought she gave good, folksy answers on the economic crisis. But I wish she had responded that it wasn't wrong for McCain to call himself a deregulator. Sure, deregulation may not be entirely appropriate for the financial industry, but that doesn't mean we should burden small businesses with a bunch of rules. There's a wise way to go about the regulation issue. She should have pointed out how unnecessary regulations have burdened her and her family. I think Republicans are conceding too much to the Democrats on all regulation being a good thing.
8. Pundits are pointing out that Palin changed the subject a few times. The topic was bankruptcy, and she talked about energy. She brought up taxes when the question wasn't about that. I liked it when she said that she wasn't going to answer as Biden or Gwen may want, for she was going to speak directly to the American people. She'd let Sarah be Sarah! But I still like candidates to address the questions that are asked.
9. Biden said a surge wouldn't work in Afghanistan, but he wants more troops there. Isn't that what a surge is?
10. On climate change, Palin said that, if Americans become more energy independent, that will help the environment, since Americans care more about climate change than the bad nations selling them oil. I wish she'd elaborate on that, since I don't understand what she's saying. I also wonder how she reconciles "drill, baby, drill" with reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Do we increase drilling, and let cap-and-trade reduce the emissions? Palin can point to natural gas as part of the solution, but there's debate about whether or not natural gas reduces the greenhouse effect. I know T. Boone says it's clean, but there are scientists who say otherwise.
11. Palin was friendly when she asked Biden if she could call him Joe. She did well to praise his son's service in the National Guard. She also commended his late wife for being a teacher. One MSNBC pundit criticized her, however, for not responding when Biden choked up about his family and the challenges of being a single parent. Maybe she should have, but I'm not sure what she would have said.
After the debate, I wished she and Biden make more small talk. Instead, she kept saying "thank you." And it also would have been nice if she had extended herself to the Biden family. Instead, it was Mrs. Biden who made the first move to the Palins. These were just areas where my expectations were disappointed. It makes me wonder if Palin's naturally outgoing, or if it's only part of an act, with a Machiavellian self existing underneath a warm exterior. But I may be reading too much into the situation!
It was a good debate, and I think Sarah will gain in the polls because of it. We'll see!
Palin Strategy: Attack Biden
The AP has an article about tonight's debate, Palin’s new plan: Go after Biden. According to some in the Palin camp, Palin will attack Biden's voting record and gaffes. Attacking the gaffes will be easy. But will she have enough of an understanding of Biden's votes to attack them? And will Biden keep his cool, or will he lash back and come across as mean and condescending? We'll see!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)