The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations
I haven’t had a chance to watch last night’s VP debate, but from what I’m hearing, it seems like Biden clearly demonstrated his deep knowledge of foreign and domestic policy while relentlessly hammering John McCain while Sarah Palin was able to stick to her talking points and form complete sentences, even if it meant ignoring the actual questions that were asked. Or in other words, a tie.
Maybe next time we face a major crisis, whether it be a misguided war-turned-quagmire or an economy that’s sunk under the weight of enormous irresponsibility, we should remind ourselves that the American people seem to have a hard time choosing between a competent, experienced Senator ready to step into the presidency and a folksy, relatable idiot who speaks in cliches. This is ridiculous.
3 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Sarah Palin is an alternative to illegal drug use. While watching her you get the feeling you’re in some altered reality but it’s a bad trip and there is no readily available antidote for the drug. She did avoid questions, stick to talking points and sound bites, and generally worked a debate format designed to keep her from getting into trouble. The Cutesy Sarah was nauseating. How many adults sprinkle their conversations with “you betcha”? You betcha what? You betcha precious liberties, religious freedoms, life savings, hope for your childrens’ futures, clean air and ability for independent thought? Cause that’s what this hockey mom is going to take from ya. You betcha.
Comment by kamachanda — October 3, 2008 @ 1:41 pm
Greg: You were right with, “They’ll look past her glaring unfitness for the Presidency and praise her for “connecting” with voters.”
I’m old enough to remember the question, “Do you trust them with their finger on the button?” In studies that I’ve read about simulations, the military commanders chose to use tactical nukes more often than not and one reason was that they ran out of resources. A nuke was seen as just one more tool in the tool box one more weapon in the arsenal rather than a line that can’t be crossed the same way as it was crossed in the 40s.
The mentality that “everything is on the table” will not go away with McCain. They LIKE the idea that Bush/Cheney/McCain might just flip out, like Mel Gibson in the first Lethal Weapon movie.
I wonder if Palin, would try to prove that she is as tough as “the boys” might go ahead with a nuclear strike?
I think of Kennedy having to stand up with LeMay during the Cuban Missile crisis, we now know that if we had attacked we would not have gotten them all and that they had the local power to carry out a launch. Aren’t you glad Kennedy understood how two push back on the military and not feel that he was a “pussy” because he did?
You have to have an alternative to blowing stuff up and when they are so against sitting down and talking, blowing stuff up happens.
I think that having confidence in your power means that you don’t have to prove it all the time. Could she prove that we have nukes and will use them if necessary? Sure. And when might that happen? When the US is seen as “weak” by the people who love their nukes. Right after President McCain dies. I think I saw this scenario in an Outer Limits episode.
I think that our chance of Palin getting into a nuke dropping world might actually be HIGHER because she may feel the need to prove she is “tough enough” to do it.
Comment by spocko — October 4, 2008 @ 7:08 pm
In all honesty, though, it’s only the tv media hacks who are having a hard time making that choice. The public clearly viewed Biden as the victor, as evidenced by every post-debate poll.
This race isn’t as close as the news channels make it out to be.
Comment by Juan — October 6, 2008 @ 3:06 pm