The following is a diary from dkos that shares one woman's experience of Sarah Palin. She admits up front that she is an Obama supporter and she tries to give a fair treatment of Sarah by sharing both good and bad impressions of her work in AK.
Sarah Palin: My Alaskan Opinion
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Investigative journalist looks at Palin
This article is the first of its kind that I've seen and I don't have any way to verify it. Take it for what it's worth (I can't reprint the lead; too despicable). I expect we'll see a lot more investigation into Palin's reputation etc. in AK since she is currently unwilling to meet with the press.
60 days to go...
And my email and facebook message box is filling up. Even though it's been obvious that I've thrown my support behind Obama for months, friends, Internet contacts, former neighbors, even family are asking me why.
A good question. Having voted Republican every single election except my first (when I liked Carter better than Reagan), it's surprising for some to discover that I'm not only disgruntled with Bush and co. but that I've jumped the fence to whole-heatedly back a Democrat, to work for Obama's campaign, not just to vote for him.
Over the next little bit, I want to talk about why I've switched teams and how Obama helped me to do so. I also want to ask in all sincerity some questions of our undecideds and Republican-leaning readers. I hope you'll share.
We've only got a few weeks left to decide this thing. We've got to get it right. McCain or Obama will be our next president. Not Biden. Not Palin. (Barring tragedy) The most important question to ask between now and then has to be: "Is it right to give another four year chance to the Republicans after 8 years of Bush?" (Bush, who lied about intelligence, WMD's, Iraq's role in terrorism, who has violated the Geneva convention in using torture against our prisoners, and who has allowed the economy to tank.)
One of the things Americans are good at is holding those they elect accountable. That's why congress swings from Democratically controlled to Republican and back. That's why it's hard for one party to win back-to-back-to-back presidential elections, if the incumbent has dropped the ball.
We expect better and we are anxious about empowering any one person or party with too much faith, too much trust, too much power!
This election ought to be a blow out for the Democrats. And it may yet be. President Bush has the lowest approval rating on record (29%). We have a struggling economy (record highs for unemployment just yesterday and the Dow struggling) and an unpopular war. That's usually enough.
But the difference maker this time is that there is an unacknowledged anxiety around electing a black man (just to point out - half black and half white). I'm running into it more and more. I heard from a CA friend recently who wrote to me that she thinks Obama is a terrorist! Really? Like the U. S. gov't. would allow a known terrorist (a convicted terrorist) to run for president?
A local friend of Jon's told him that he could never cast a vote for a "black man." On my canvasing route last week, I ran into the "But how can I trust Obama?" meme several times. I have yet to hear anyone ask that question of McCain (the "can he be trusted?" question), yet his campaign, vice presidential candidate and current president with whom he has proudly voted 90% of time have all lied directly to the American people. Somehow McCain's "trustworthiness" is not an issue.
The widespread, unrelenting, willful ignorance of the electorate as relates to Obama can only be explained by the unconscious anxiety that a half black man creates in white voters. Fortunately, the under 30 set seem oblivious to skin color. They love Obama and they can't relate to McCain.
I invite you over the next couple of weeks to share your thoughts and to think about why Obama is the better choice for president over McCain and his Republican party, no matter how "maverick" he wants you to believe he is. My aim is to at strip away the mischaracterizations of Obama that persist, to give reasonable support to how a conservative could vote for a democrat this time around and to expose the hypocrisy of the Republican party. Should be fun. :)
A good question. Having voted Republican every single election except my first (when I liked Carter better than Reagan), it's surprising for some to discover that I'm not only disgruntled with Bush and co. but that I've jumped the fence to whole-heatedly back a Democrat, to work for Obama's campaign, not just to vote for him.
Over the next little bit, I want to talk about why I've switched teams and how Obama helped me to do so. I also want to ask in all sincerity some questions of our undecideds and Republican-leaning readers. I hope you'll share.
We've only got a few weeks left to decide this thing. We've got to get it right. McCain or Obama will be our next president. Not Biden. Not Palin. (Barring tragedy) The most important question to ask between now and then has to be: "Is it right to give another four year chance to the Republicans after 8 years of Bush?" (Bush, who lied about intelligence, WMD's, Iraq's role in terrorism, who has violated the Geneva convention in using torture against our prisoners, and who has allowed the economy to tank.)
One of the things Americans are good at is holding those they elect accountable. That's why congress swings from Democratically controlled to Republican and back. That's why it's hard for one party to win back-to-back-to-back presidential elections, if the incumbent has dropped the ball.
We expect better and we are anxious about empowering any one person or party with too much faith, too much trust, too much power!
This election ought to be a blow out for the Democrats. And it may yet be. President Bush has the lowest approval rating on record (29%). We have a struggling economy (record highs for unemployment just yesterday and the Dow struggling) and an unpopular war. That's usually enough.
But the difference maker this time is that there is an unacknowledged anxiety around electing a black man (just to point out - half black and half white). I'm running into it more and more. I heard from a CA friend recently who wrote to me that she thinks Obama is a terrorist! Really? Like the U. S. gov't. would allow a known terrorist (a convicted terrorist) to run for president?
A local friend of Jon's told him that he could never cast a vote for a "black man." On my canvasing route last week, I ran into the "But how can I trust Obama?" meme several times. I have yet to hear anyone ask that question of McCain (the "can he be trusted?" question), yet his campaign, vice presidential candidate and current president with whom he has proudly voted 90% of time have all lied directly to the American people. Somehow McCain's "trustworthiness" is not an issue.
The widespread, unrelenting, willful ignorance of the electorate as relates to Obama can only be explained by the unconscious anxiety that a half black man creates in white voters. Fortunately, the under 30 set seem oblivious to skin color. They love Obama and they can't relate to McCain.
I invite you over the next couple of weeks to share your thoughts and to think about why Obama is the better choice for president over McCain and his Republican party, no matter how "maverick" he wants you to believe he is. My aim is to at strip away the mischaracterizations of Obama that persist, to give reasonable support to how a conservative could vote for a democrat this time around and to expose the hypocrisy of the Republican party. Should be fun. :)
Friday, September 05, 2008
How Obama explains his community organizing
Transcript:
Question: How is community organizing relevant for the presidency?
Obama:
This is very curious. They haven't talked about the fact that I was a civil rights lawyer, or taught constitutional law, my work in the state legislature, or US Senate, they focused on this 3 years where I worked as a community organizer, right out of college. As if I'm making the leap from 2-3 years out of college to the presidency.
I would argue that doing work in the community, trying to create jobs, rejuvenate the communities that have fallen on hard times, bringing people together, set up job training programs in areas that have been hard hit where the steel plants have closed—that's relevant only in understanding where I'm coming from, who I believe in, who I'm fighting for and why I'm in this race.
The question I have for them is: Why would that kind of work be ridiculous?
Who are they fighting for?
What are they advocating for?
Do they think that the lives of those folks struggling each and every day, that working with them to try and improve their lives is somehow not relevant to the presidency?
I think that is part of the problem, that they are out of touch and don't get it because they haven't spent much time working on behalf of those folks.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Community Organizing
I wanted to make one comment about Sarah's point that Community Organizing is somehow not a job with responsibilities (like being mayor) and that it is not worth putting on a resume of service to the country.
I was reading along at a political blog site where a woman called "Homeschool marm" made the remark that community organizing might be a worthwhile resume item if running for dog catcher, but not president of the United States. Her comment stunned me even more than Palin's weak snipe.
Any of the movements that the right cares about have been fostered and advanced through community action. Homeschooling as a free and clear right in all 50 states came through grassroots, jail time, trials and activism. My goodness - homeschoolmarm wouldn't even have the moniker she bears online without community organizing. The pro-life movement (pregnancy crisis centers, Operation Rescue, abstinence only movement) all owe their existence to community organizing. Campaigning for McCain requires community organizing - that's all campaigns are!
We don't even need to cite women's suffrage, the Civil Rights movement, unions and both sides of the gay marriage debate.
I find it utterly incredible that someone wanting to lead the country would caricature and put down Obama's choice (after being editor of the Harvard law Review) to give his first years of adulthood to serving the needs of inner city poor through community organizing as though that was somehow small potatoes compared to the noble service of being a mayor in Wasilla. Why must these compete for merit?
Meanwhile, Obama refuses to attack her family, asks his campaign to leave them in peace and has yet to make a single snide remark about her speech. I think he's still waiting to hear where she stands on issues, like the rest of us.
Update: Aha, apparently I'm not the only one wanting to defend the value of community organizing.
I was reading along at a political blog site where a woman called "Homeschool marm" made the remark that community organizing might be a worthwhile resume item if running for dog catcher, but not president of the United States. Her comment stunned me even more than Palin's weak snipe.
Any of the movements that the right cares about have been fostered and advanced through community action. Homeschooling as a free and clear right in all 50 states came through grassroots, jail time, trials and activism. My goodness - homeschoolmarm wouldn't even have the moniker she bears online without community organizing. The pro-life movement (pregnancy crisis centers, Operation Rescue, abstinence only movement) all owe their existence to community organizing. Campaigning for McCain requires community organizing - that's all campaigns are!
We don't even need to cite women's suffrage, the Civil Rights movement, unions and both sides of the gay marriage debate.
I find it utterly incredible that someone wanting to lead the country would caricature and put down Obama's choice (after being editor of the Harvard law Review) to give his first years of adulthood to serving the needs of inner city poor through community organizing as though that was somehow small potatoes compared to the noble service of being a mayor in Wasilla. Why must these compete for merit?
Meanwhile, Obama refuses to attack her family, asks his campaign to leave them in peace and has yet to make a single snide remark about her speech. I think he's still waiting to hear where she stands on issues, like the rest of us.
Update: Aha, apparently I'm not the only one wanting to defend the value of community organizing.
Here's a fact check for Palin's speech assertions and record
for those who emailed and asked (from Yahoo):
Attacks, Praise Stretch Truth
Example:
Attacks, Praise Stretch Truth
Example:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
Obama's legislative record
Palin over-reaches and lies about Obama's record:
Andrew Sullivan has a great round up of Obama's legislative experience.
Andrew Sullivan has a great round up of Obama's legislative experience.
At last count, sponsorship of 820 laws in Illinois, and authorship of 152 bills and co-sponsorship of 427 in Washington. The 2007 Ethics Reform bill alone cannot be dismissed as simply non-existent. And since part of Palin's own claim to substance is an ethics reform bill, it seems extremely weird that she should believe that Obama's record is a total zero.
Politics: My busy head speaketh
Here's where I am this week.
How can we possibly reward the Republicans with four more years of governing? Really, how in good conscience can anyone do that? There seem to be two key reasons people still support the Republican ticket.
1) Lower taxes. Somehow these R's have convinced everyone that they won't raise taxes. They believe that life will be less expensive under Republicans. Even George41 couldn't keep his "Read My Lips" promise after the Gulf War. Do you really think this new administration won't have to raise taxes to pay for a war that has cost us 10 BILLION dollars per month? There will be taxes. There will be new taxes. And both Dems and Reps will vote for them.
Additionally, let's look at the "tax rebate" from Bush this year. If you take into account the gas price hikes, the foreclosures, the job losses, the creeping inflation, how far does $1800 for a family like ours go? For other families? The Republicans may pretend they have your financial well-being at heart, but they are responsible for the horrendous mess we're in right now that makes the cost of living too high and the stakes too risky. Lower taxes in the form of inadequate rebates are unhelpful when gas prices make your pay check shrink every week.
Even more, why are we so fixated on taxes? The Republicans pretend that they care about the Middle Class - yet they haven't even mentioned the middle class by name once in their convention so far! I phone banked last night and the anger and outrage by disgruntled Ohio Republicans was palpable! One lady basically yelled for twenty minutes about how she felt taken advantage of by the R's for her Christian beliefs... and that they couldn't care less about her currently in-peril job at the Ford plant, the fact that she's going into debt to pay for gas to drive to work and that she is literally one pay check away from foreclosure. Near tears, she couldn't imagine how she could vote for McCain yet she's voted Republican her entire life.
Which brings me to my second point:
2) Being Prolife.
Final comment of the disgruntled R caller: And I'm pro-life so what am I supposed to do?
The real problem for these Republicans who feel betrayed by their party is their fidelity to the pro-life commitment. They have been so deeply influenced by the arch-conservative leadership of their churches and party that they literally feel they are breaking with Jesus and will be destined for hell to vote for a pro-choice candidate. I understand this. This is how I voted Bush instead of Kerry last time, making my decision IN the voting booth itself. I couldn't bring myself to pull the lever for a Democrat.
But let's talk about what it means to be "pro-life." Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis and Rick Warren all talk about being "whole life." This is not just "fetal" protection, but genuine care for human beings from start to finish. The Republicans have successfully scared voters into voting "pro-life" as their wedge issue for thirty years while virtually doing nothing about it.
Legislating against abortion will not happen this cycle either, even with Supreme Court Justice picks. That's because the country is not ardently pro-life. The idea of putting a 16 year old girl in jail for attempting an abortion will not sit well with Americans. Criminalizing abortion when there is still vigorous debate over what constitutes the start of life will only exacerbate the culture wars, not resolve them.
Remember Sandra Day O'Connor, selected by Reagan, to be our "conservative" justice who would help overturn Roe v. Wade? How did that work out? Don't bet on Mccain whose record is pro-choice, not pro-life, to pick arch conservative justices. Not going to happen.
Creating a compassionate, more just society where unwed mothers can find the services they need to have their babies is the way to curb abortions. Becoming an advocate for whole life (pregnancy, birth, maternal and childhood healthcare) is how mothers-to-be can face the demands of child-bearing and rearing without anxiety and fear.
Now is not the time to reward these Republicans who think they can pretend that the liberals are the problem with Washington when they have been in power for 8 years!! The cheek!
We can't vote on money (whether we are taxed more and by whom) and we can't vote on abortion (because neither side will actually bring legislative change). Both of these issues have been grossly misused by Republicans to convey power to themselves. They have little respect for the Americans who put them in office.
It's time to put them on notice. They have to earn our votes, not just count on them.
And what did I think of Sarah Palin's speech?
She's got panache, spunk. Love the accent. I don't have any idea what her views are on, well, anything. I was expecting her to go over the McCain platform. I don't mind hearing what she did as governor, but she made misstatements. She was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it. She left her town with millions of dollars of debt after she left it. She has used lobbiests to get earmarks for Alaskans. I don't mind if she changes her views. I just wish she'd say so.
I hate cheap shots politics and I especially don't like sniping by a virtual unknown in the political world. She spoke as though she and Obama knew each other and she could offer some kind of window into his soul. McCain can do that. She shouldn't, imho.
I do think her family is beautiful-looking and that she will appeal to small town families. I don't know how that qualifies her to be vice-president.
We did find on the phones for Obama last night that suburban moms in my city don't like the Palin pick and can't relate to her at all. That was startling. Didn't expect it. Also discovered that the couple of Hillary supporters we talked to are offended by the comparison of Sarah to Hill and they are now breaking for Obama. And then, of course, we had many McCain supporters (lifers in the Republican party) who wouldn't talk to us. :) That's West Chester for you.
By the way, my favorite comment on the speech last night came from Rick via txt message this a.m. (woke me up!): She jumped the shark.
How can we possibly reward the Republicans with four more years of governing? Really, how in good conscience can anyone do that? There seem to be two key reasons people still support the Republican ticket.
1) Lower taxes. Somehow these R's have convinced everyone that they won't raise taxes. They believe that life will be less expensive under Republicans. Even George41 couldn't keep his "Read My Lips" promise after the Gulf War. Do you really think this new administration won't have to raise taxes to pay for a war that has cost us 10 BILLION dollars per month? There will be taxes. There will be new taxes. And both Dems and Reps will vote for them.
Additionally, let's look at the "tax rebate" from Bush this year. If you take into account the gas price hikes, the foreclosures, the job losses, the creeping inflation, how far does $1800 for a family like ours go? For other families? The Republicans may pretend they have your financial well-being at heart, but they are responsible for the horrendous mess we're in right now that makes the cost of living too high and the stakes too risky. Lower taxes in the form of inadequate rebates are unhelpful when gas prices make your pay check shrink every week.
Even more, why are we so fixated on taxes? The Republicans pretend that they care about the Middle Class - yet they haven't even mentioned the middle class by name once in their convention so far! I phone banked last night and the anger and outrage by disgruntled Ohio Republicans was palpable! One lady basically yelled for twenty minutes about how she felt taken advantage of by the R's for her Christian beliefs... and that they couldn't care less about her currently in-peril job at the Ford plant, the fact that she's going into debt to pay for gas to drive to work and that she is literally one pay check away from foreclosure. Near tears, she couldn't imagine how she could vote for McCain yet she's voted Republican her entire life.
Which brings me to my second point:
2) Being Prolife.
Final comment of the disgruntled R caller: And I'm pro-life so what am I supposed to do?
The real problem for these Republicans who feel betrayed by their party is their fidelity to the pro-life commitment. They have been so deeply influenced by the arch-conservative leadership of their churches and party that they literally feel they are breaking with Jesus and will be destined for hell to vote for a pro-choice candidate. I understand this. This is how I voted Bush instead of Kerry last time, making my decision IN the voting booth itself. I couldn't bring myself to pull the lever for a Democrat.
But let's talk about what it means to be "pro-life." Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis and Rick Warren all talk about being "whole life." This is not just "fetal" protection, but genuine care for human beings from start to finish. The Republicans have successfully scared voters into voting "pro-life" as their wedge issue for thirty years while virtually doing nothing about it.
Legislating against abortion will not happen this cycle either, even with Supreme Court Justice picks. That's because the country is not ardently pro-life. The idea of putting a 16 year old girl in jail for attempting an abortion will not sit well with Americans. Criminalizing abortion when there is still vigorous debate over what constitutes the start of life will only exacerbate the culture wars, not resolve them.
Remember Sandra Day O'Connor, selected by Reagan, to be our "conservative" justice who would help overturn Roe v. Wade? How did that work out? Don't bet on Mccain whose record is pro-choice, not pro-life, to pick arch conservative justices. Not going to happen.
Creating a compassionate, more just society where unwed mothers can find the services they need to have their babies is the way to curb abortions. Becoming an advocate for whole life (pregnancy, birth, maternal and childhood healthcare) is how mothers-to-be can face the demands of child-bearing and rearing without anxiety and fear.
Now is not the time to reward these Republicans who think they can pretend that the liberals are the problem with Washington when they have been in power for 8 years!! The cheek!
We can't vote on money (whether we are taxed more and by whom) and we can't vote on abortion (because neither side will actually bring legislative change). Both of these issues have been grossly misused by Republicans to convey power to themselves. They have little respect for the Americans who put them in office.
It's time to put them on notice. They have to earn our votes, not just count on them.
And what did I think of Sarah Palin's speech?
She's got panache, spunk. Love the accent. I don't have any idea what her views are on, well, anything. I was expecting her to go over the McCain platform. I don't mind hearing what she did as governor, but she made misstatements. She was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it. She left her town with millions of dollars of debt after she left it. She has used lobbiests to get earmarks for Alaskans. I don't mind if she changes her views. I just wish she'd say so.
I hate cheap shots politics and I especially don't like sniping by a virtual unknown in the political world. She spoke as though she and Obama knew each other and she could offer some kind of window into his soul. McCain can do that. She shouldn't, imho.
I do think her family is beautiful-looking and that she will appeal to small town families. I don't know how that qualifies her to be vice-president.
We did find on the phones for Obama last night that suburban moms in my city don't like the Palin pick and can't relate to her at all. That was startling. Didn't expect it. Also discovered that the couple of Hillary supporters we talked to are offended by the comparison of Sarah to Hill and they are now breaking for Obama. And then, of course, we had many McCain supporters (lifers in the Republican party) who wouldn't talk to us. :) That's West Chester for you.
By the way, my favorite comment on the speech last night came from Rick via txt message this a.m. (woke me up!): She jumped the shark.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Gawd, Country, Bush, POW, Gawd, and even Clinton
get the most applause at the RNC tonight. Lieberman actually commended Clinton's record, though applause were polite, not enthusiastic.
McCain's POW experience was not described as torture by either Bush or Thompson. Sullivan points out that this may have been accidental, but the truth is, the techniques used on McCain are currently used by our own government.
I love the big screen (stroke of genius). Don't love the speeches.
I'll write more tomorrow. There's so much going on in my head about these two weeks of politics. Join me then for a journey through my very busy head.
McCain's POW experience was not described as torture by either Bush or Thompson. Sullivan points out that this may have been accidental, but the truth is, the techniques used on McCain are currently used by our own government.
I love the big screen (stroke of genius). Don't love the speeches.
I'll write more tomorrow. There's so much going on in my head about these two weeks of politics. Join me then for a journey through my very busy head.
Rick Neuheisel can exhale now
Gary A. Vasquez/US PRESSWIREBruins beat Vols 27-24 in OT
What a game... er, 4th quarter and OT. The Bruins' brand-spanking new QB, Kevin Craft, sent groans through the Rose Bowl after an atrocious first half wherein he tossed up four miserable interceptions. Boos followed him to the locker room.
Somehow, someway as a result of Neuheisel's commitment to relentless optimism, his reminder that he threw four interceptions in his first game as a college QB (I couldn't help but wonder which sports investigative journalist is going to track down that fact - is it mythology or rooted in reality?), Craft got back in the driver's seat, demonstrated that he has the essential, magic quality of a great QB (amnesia!), and led that team to two TDs (one drive flawless with 6 for 6 completed passes).
The two minute drill looked masterful! This is not Dorrell's Bruins who managed to squander 3rd and long every damned time they were confronted with one. This time Norm Chow created the tricks, the spin, the fun that made Bruin football a pleasure to watch and now to anticipate.
Gene Wojciechowski gets it right.
Don't ask how -- I'm not sure Craft even knows -- but the first half from hell turned into the second half from heaven. Craft began throwing completions, this time to his own teammates. And by the end of UCLA's 27-24 overtime win, Craft had become part of gutty little Bruin football lore...
Craft's second-half total: 18 of 25 for 193 yards, one touchdown, zero interceptions. By game's end he had completed passes to nine different Bruins receivers. He also had withstood everything Tennessee and the crowd could heave his way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)