The next Vice-President of the United States…

…is a better fisherman than you.

Meet Sarah Palin, first-term Republican Governor of Alaska.  44 years old, former mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Miss Alaska runner-up, state champion point guard in high school, lifelong outdoorswoman.

She and her husband have five kids, the fifth of which was born last year with Down’s Syndrome.  She’s staunchly pro-life (she never even considered aborting her last child even though she knew well in advance he would be born with Down’s), a life NRA member, and won the governorship of Alaska running on a reformist platform over the objections of her own state Republican party and their preferred primary candidate.  She’s pro-drilling in ANWR (as are the vast majority of Alaskans), pro-small-government, and all in all, a truly exciting pick for the conservative base of the Republican Party.  Oh yeah, and she’s naughty-librarian hot.

And to those who say she’s inexperienced?  She’s got more executive experience than Barack Obama.

Come to the light, PUMAs.  Come to the light.  We have cookies.

Advertisements

12 Responses to “The next Vice-President of the United States…”

  1. Lauren Says:

    “Oh yeah, and she’s naughty-librarian hot.”

    Honestly? It pissed me off when people went after how Hillary Clinton looked during the campaign, and it pisses me off now that Palin’s looks are going to be part of this election.

    All through the primaries, no one commented on how the male candidates physically looked onstage. Yes, once it became Clinton vs. Obama there were the ridiculous “Obama-mamas” which got my ire up just as much. But the amount of shit that Clinton got for how she looked from day to day, the number of articles that focused on her hair or her clothing or her smile or her laugh that drowned out the issues that mattered infuriated me.

    So much for those 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling. Lesson learned: if you want to be a woman in politics, you’d better also be sexy.

    Comparing the list of things that Palin stands for to the list of things that Hillary Clinton stands for, they’re total opposites. Are you saying women should for Palin simply because she has two X chromosomes? Sure, I’d love to see a woman in the White House, but one who shares my political beliefs, not just my gender.

    No thanks. I can wait.

    Also, these PUMAs? They’re McCain supporters in disguise.

  2. Lewis Says:

    I don’t think they should vote for her just because she’s a woman. But some will. Same way that there are black people who are voting for Obama simply because he’s black, and a few idiot white men who won’t vote for McCain because he put Palin on the ticket.

    OTOH, when we’ve been hearing for weeks about disaffected Hillary supporters who think that their candidate got done wrong just because she was a woman? Now they have a choice to rally behind if they so choose. Some will take it. Most won’t. Maybe they’ll listen to her, and realize that conservative beliefs aren’t such a bad thing, and they’re actually closer to the Republicans than they thought they were. It happened with Reagan and the Reagan Democrats in 1980.

    I never bought into the looks thing with Hillary. There’s conservatives that make fun of the way she looks, and aside from a few pictures that have caught her in funny poses, I’m not one of them. I opposed her because of her positions, not because of her looks. Geraldine Ferraro was no hot mama, and though I didn’t vote for her in 1984, my first eligible election, I respected her then and still do, because she’s an honest, straight-talking politician (a relative rarity). Rush Limbaugh’s “they don’t want to see her age in office” remark about Hillary? Stupid, stupid, stupid.

    But, unfortunately, looks ARE part of the equation. You can’t tell me that Obama could’ve gotten where he has without being a good-looking man and a great orator. His positions on issues aren’t that different from any other Democratic Presidential nominee of the last thirty or so years. His strength is his ability to mesmerize and energize a crowd. Well, John McCain, a guy who only finds “charisma” by looking it up in the dictionary, now has a wingman (wingperson?) who has it.

  3. Itanya Blade Says:

    I have to disagree that Obama is not different from other democratic candidates.

    This is the first candidate in a while that has not taken the easy way out. He has challenged people to think. He hasn’t always takent the easy way out.

    And McCain not have charasima? McCain is very charasimatic. it is part of what he does extremely well.

  4. Lewis Says:

    If McCain’s got it, it pales among others. Palin is engaging, direct, genuine, attractive, and really impressive in the limited time I’ve been following her. Folks from up in AK sure seem to like her, in her first year in office she had the highest approval ratings of any elected state official in any state, over 90%.

    Obama’s charisma is something special. It really is a once-in-a-generation thing…kind of scary to watch from over here on the other side of the fence. His Achilles’ heel is that he doesn’t do nearly as well in a situation where he’s having to work on the fly. In that circumstance, McCain can shine as long as he can keep that legendary temper of his under check (which he’s done so far). When it comes to stump speeches, though, and the ability to engage a crowd, nobody touches Obama.

  5. officergleason Says:

    We’ll see in the debates if Obama falters–I doubt he will. The primaries are behind him–as are the toughest debaters. John McCain is no Hillary Clinton.

    While she has more “executive experience” Obama’s experience as a community organizer (which are, by the way, the same communities that I work in), state legislator and Senator outweigh Palin’s.

    The VP debates will be interesting to watch–as I’ve not heard of how Palin is as a debater.

  6. Lewis Says:

    Nor do I. She picked up the nickname “Sarah Barracuda” in high school because of the way she played point guard on her basketball team, and it apparently stuck through her political career in Alaska. But nobody’s sure how she’ll react on the big stage. That’s part of what makes the Palin pick interesting. If he’d gone with Ridge or Romney or Pawlenty, a “safe” pick, we’d know what to expect. Instead we get Sarah Who?

    Already the Democratic party establishment has started throwing the “zero experience” card around. But, they’d better be careful doing that. How much foreign policy experience does Obama have? How much domestic policy experience does Obama have? Four years’ worth at the national level, a few more at the state level, and none of it as an executive? At least Palin’s run some size of executive organization before. And Obama’s at the TOP of the ticket, not flying wingman. McCain can turn it right back around on them…having Palin on the ticket doesn’t completely insulate Obama from his own inexperience. Palin, at least, can learn on the job without actually having to make the decisions.

    McCain seems to be at his best in those informal “town hall”-style debates, where he cleaned house in the primaries. IIRC, I think there’s only going to be one of those, or maybe none, this time around. McCain got the better of the Rick Warren Saddleback Q&A session, but that was an odd format and I don’t think we’ll see one like that again this year. He’s not as good in a formal moderator-style debate, but I’d put him even with Obama.

  7. Shannon Says:

    Palin can learn on the job? What happens if McCain kicks the bucket early on in the presidency? Did you know he’s older than the peanut butter & jelly sandwich?

  8. Jewben Says:

    In all seriousness, while one can (and most have) argue Obama’s foreign policy and governing experience, his involvement in military affairs and international diplomacy in his four years in the Senate, his good judgment on events and situations that have repeatedly played out in his favor, and most of all his willingness to /change his stance when the situation changes/ speak well to his credentials as the director of America’s foreign policy. So, to, do his choices on military and foreign-policy advisory, because any boss is only as good as the people working for him.

    Palin has, of course, been in the spotlight for less than 24 hours, but I’m going to be amazed if she can display any significant foreign policy credentials – not just experience (because we saw how well that did with Cheney & Rumsfeld) but good judgment, willingness to compromise and respond to the situation, and general concern with foreign policy.

    I won’t touch much on her domestic policy beyond saying that from what I’ve heard, she opposes abortion even in the case of rape and incest, which is…I’m not a fan.

    Also bears.

  9. Torteya Says:

    I’m not quite sure how being for ANWR is something that needs be pointed out when talking about a conservative politician [i]from Alaska[/i].

    Despite whatever reasons and sexism/reverse-sexism or whatever might have influenced both her choosing and the people who will or won’t vote for her, I would call it a step forward that the GOP has finally decided to put a non white man in the ticket.

    Sweet Jesus, I can already hear that goddamned sexist retard Chris Mathews talk about her. God, somebody stop him.

    And to the PUMAs who, after hearing both Clinton’s speeches (and Obama’s), still vote for McCain. I really hope they stay the hell away from the Democratic party (hopefully they’d become apolitical/anarchist/whatever so you guys don’t suffer them either). I’d rather have people capable of higher brain function in the Dem camp.

  10. officergleason Says:

    Any Clinton supporter that votes for McCain Palin really didn’t understand Clinton’s campaign to begin with. Hillary was not running as the female candidate. She was running because of her qualifications, experience and ideals. Sarah Plain does not have half the experience that Hillary Clinton does. They do not share ideals. The only thing Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have in common is their gender.

    If that is all it takes to attract HIlliary’s supporters, then they didn’t get the message at all.

  11. officergleason Says:

    This being said, the Economist has two excellent articles on McCain and Palin. Keep in mind this is the Economist, not the New Republic or the Nation.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: