Friday, October 3, 2008

The Winner of the Debate

It is not surprising to learn that 40% of registered voters believe that Sarah Palin won the debate. The election of the US President depends upon the results in a few, key states so Oklahomans for example never see political ads and presidential candidates rarely stop by because the voting pattern of the state is a foregone conclusion.

So it doesn’t matter if a candidate makes a complete fool of him/herself for roughly 40% of the electorate who can be depended upon to deliver their votes for a specific party. The 5-7% who are undecided will spell the difference.

John McCain is a hero with a long and distinguished career in public service. McCain should have been elected President in 2000 and the US would not be in such a mess right now. But because he stood against the right wing moralists of his party and refused to pander to intolerant bigots who thrived on division, the better candidate lost and we have only begun to reap the seeds of arrogance and stubbornness.

Choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate, considering melanoma can metastasize any moment is a slap to our faces. I personally expected more from a hero. To cave in at the summit of your vocation in order to keep your base happy at such a critical moment is a major, major disappointment.

Palin gives us the same, tired, dated talking points that successfully ushered a Republican era. Higher taxes from the Democrats--even if only those making more than $250,000 a year will be affected, is a bogus argument that has flown only because so many have been fooled into thinking that they belong to the upper class. Where will the bailout money come from now? Surely not from the multiple tax cuts Republicans have enacted that have benefited the wealthy. Paying taxes is an unpleasant reality but we all must do our part to maintain the bureaucracy and infrastructure which enables us to make a living.

With the extra money from taxes avoided, many of us were lulled into maxing out our credit cards and we spent and spent on SUVs, vacations, electronic appliances and luxurious homes without making ourselves more competitive, irresponsibly thinking the happy days were here forever. While we partied, foreign students took advantage of our excellent schools and lapped-up the unbelievable amount of educational opportunities that most of us took for granted.

Palin talks about the war in Iraq and deceitfully accuses Obama of surrendering to Islamic extremists. I just wonder, 20 years ago when a bomb destroyed Pan Am 103 and crashed in Lockerbie killing 270 people, what the consequences would have been if George HW Bush ordered the invasion of Libya, given that Gaddafi whom Reagan referred to as the “mad dog of the Middle East” was a Dictator-Tyrant who wantonly murdered political opponents and acknowledged he possessed weapons of mass destruction.

I wonder if 4100 American lives and a trillion dollars would have justified an invasion that satisfies the invasion-criteria that determined the Iraq invasion CONSIDERING Secretary of State Rice just visited Libya where relations have normalized.

Palin calls these times “tumultuous” and it certainly requires leaders who will not simply wink and repeat talking points in a folksy manner and instead provide replies which are the result of serious reflection.

2 comments:

Pedestrian Observer GB said...

Palin lacks substance and surprisingly there are people that can readily identify with her...... the only problem is we are not electing hockey booster mom to support our kids team, this is the whole country fer cryin' out loud.

Her entry and the process by which she got picked in the electoral contest is unnerving and disturbing. We have not learned from our past that it is not a good idea to elect a president (Bush) who we can eat barbecue and drink beer while leaving the economy in a mess.

Anonymous said...

.....since when my friends did people wisely elect "perfect " leaders ?...since that time when Barrabas was chosen instead of that Somebody.....do not expect much wisdom from people in their choosing. A good democracy mainly depends on good education and "good education" is itself still Babel-ish in its own definitions...