I may eat these words, since no one knows much about her yet. But what I hear, I like. She has five kids, the last with Downs Syndrome so you know she means it when she says she’s pro-life. She supported Pat Buchanan in 1996 and she had very positive things to say about Ron Paul earlier this year. Her husband works for a living as a commercial fisherman, a former Army sniper with a Purple Heart. Being a lady will siphon off many Hillary voters, those masses of working-class and lower-middle divorcees who aren’t really liberal but voted for Hillary because they think all men are like their ex-husband. You couldn’t make up a better candidate and John McCain has shown himself to have a “will to live”.
Unlike Bob Dole or even George W., you get the feeling he actually wants to win this thing so he swallowed his pride and nominated a real conservative instead of his pal Joe Lieberman.
I may actually vote McCain. I figure there’s a 10% chance he dies in his first term anyway, being 72; he’s overweight and an angry anxious type, the sort of person whose reaction to the stresses of the Presidency will wreak havoc on his cardiovascular system in short order. If McCain lives, he may only serve one term, and Palin is young and will have a leg up on the next time around.
And the Democrats look stupid enough to attack her for being “just” a mother (no mother of course is “just” a mother; she helped her husband with his home business) before entering full-time politics a few short years ago. The Dems, of course, have always hated motherhood, especially the married taking-care-of-the-kids type.
10% odds of a good President is better than nothing, which is exactly the chance any third party has in this election.
More good news!
David Frum doesn’t like her:
So this is the future of the Republican party you are looking at: a future in which national security has bumped down the list of priorities behind abortion politics, gender politics, and energy politics. Ms. Palin is a bold pick, and probably a shrewd one. It’s not nearly so clear that she is a responsible pick, or a wise one.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=756704
To the neoconservative chickenhawk Frum, of course, “national security” means American blood for Israel, something a mother with a son in the military may be less eager to provide.
Wow! This race dynamic has really changed.
I’m energized for the first time since January.
Ole’ McCain showed me he was smarter (and more humble) then I would have given him credit for.
And stole the thunder from Obama.
Brilliant. We’ll see how this defines the race.
Okay, Tom – you’ve given me a good laugh tonight. Jeremy and I actually had this same conversation today. Of course, mine was more along the lines of “McCain’s so old he probably won’t run for re-election” not “maybe he’ll die”, but still…=)
I’m actually very impressed at McCain’s choice. I think it was genius. Before this pick, he was too liberal for the conservatives and too conservative for the liberals. I think he’s just drawn in the liberal women who want to vote for a lady, and the conservatives who don’t want to vote for Obama. And I think someone who can multi-task five kids and a home business qualifies for VP. =)
[...] turning, and quickly; the video of her firing off an AK certainly tickled folks in this household. Tom’s remarks are my favourites thus far, though (note: positive reference toward Dr. Paul from Mrs. Palin). [...]
I was reluctantly voting for McCain before this. Now I am a *little* more satisfied with this campaign. From what little I know about Palin, she seems very conservative and dynamic. Hopefully this is the best route to not have Obama in the White House- yeesh!
Deep breath, people.
Tom, you know I usually agree nearly entirely with you on political topics, but I think you are getting carried away here. The “will to live” you admire was the complicit media’s, not McCain’s. The wanted to make sure that there was no competition: establishment candidate v. establishment candidate.
McCain inspires no-one on his own. Let’s not forget that the smears that the Dems always use against the Republican presidential candidates in this case are actually true: McCain was 5th from the bottom of his class in college, in a class of over 400 [dumb]; he cheated all over his first wife (at least) including with his current wife, who he left for Cindy after she had become disabled in a car wreck [hypocritically anti-family values]; he’s so entirely out-of-touch with the modern world that he has to have his assistants retrieve emails or connect to the internet for him, and doesn’t know how many homes he owns [dinosaur, rich fat cat]. Plus, he’s reminiscent of Rudy in other ways: “noun, verb, POW.”
Anyone who is ecstatic over this Palin selection needs to bear in mind the position of VEEP is infamously not “worth a pitcher of warm,” er, “spit,” so I’d caution you not to put too much hope into the moderating effect Palin’s presence would have. MegaloMcCainiac will likely moderate her involvement in his administration, not the other way ’round. Something like Dan Quayle. I can see it now: “Well, isn’t that cute. Sarah has herself a little ol’ opinion. Well, now, honey, why don’t you make yourself useful for a minute and go get us some coffee. Thanks, but just leave it to us big, important men to handle everything. Is that a baby I hear a-cryin’? (Chuckle, chuckle)”
Don’t get me wrong; the more I read about Palin, the more I like her. She looks like the real deal, a conservative libertarian (or libertarian conservative). But that’s exactly why McCain won’t want her around much: everything about the man is fake.
I’d love to see Palin run on her own steam, but as far as voting for McCain because of her, count me out. The best one could hope for in a McCain presidency would be an explosive aneurysm.
I’ll be taking my 10% chance on a third-party candidate, probably Baldwin, but maybe Barr; or I’ll throw caution to the wind and write in Ron Paul (even though the “sore loser” law would bar his viability). At least that way, I will be able to stand looking at my face in the mirror come November 5th.
McCain = Obama, win or lose, with Palin/Biden or without.
Don’t worry Brian. As Texas is a lock for McCain, I’ll be voting for Baldwin no matter what. In a swing state I might be tempted, that is until I saw this:
http://www.chalcedon.edu/blog/2008/09/gov-palin-loves-israel.php
No American should be wearing the lapel pin of a foreign country. But who knows, the social pressure to appease the Pharisees is probably irresistible for all except a Ron Paul.
Ron Paul had good things to say about her the other night on Fox News.
As an aside about the pressure of the lobby:
Right now my family is reading through the Gospel of John (20 verses or so once a week, about all a four and two year old can handle), and I was struck by how many times the phrase “for fear of the Jews” is used in reference to Christ’s ministry. And reading this to my children, something inside of me is telling me that I need to explain what that means, because unfiltered it sounds….so….politically incorrect. It’s ridiculous how modern Christians like to spiritualize these passages and make the Pharisees out to be “the established church” or just “religious self-righteous people”.
How about the Bible says what it means? When it says “Jews” or “Pharisees” that’s exactly what it means, and that application is direct to our world. To paraphrase Hal Lindsey, the Pharisees are alive and well on Planet Earth!
Such is the pressure of that lobby, that someone like me who knows the score feels a bit of internal pressure to censor the Word of God on their behalf.
BTW, Tom, I don’t know if you caught this on the VDARE blog, but Sailer knocked another one out of the park today:
I don’t know what it is about Paul that is so lacking in virtually every other national politician. Or, rather, I do know what — character — but I don’t know why it’s so lacking. Are these really the concessions we’re willing to make as a people?
If so, maybe we don’t deserve to be a nation anymore.
The lady’s a member of a secessionist movement:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/another-aip-off.html
I still like her.
Brian,
You need to take a deep breath. Don’t waste your vote on a third party candidate. Step into the booth. Hold your nose, and vote McCain. I agree with Tom, his odds of making it through the first term aren’t good. The Lord works in mysterious ways and we may get a President we can be prould of.
“Waste your vote”??!?!??!!? Seriously?
Mitch, I will forgive your slip there. You have many more years of institutionalization into the two-party false dichotomy on me. I stand by my assertion that the only wasted vote is one cast for someone in whom you do not believe, and with whom you do not agree.
“Holding your nose” is wasting your vote. Voting for the so-called “lesser of two evils” is wasting your vote. In fact, if the “lesser of two evils” is elected, he (or she) then becomes the greater of two evils, because that is the one that gets realized. I will not be complicit in the election of that evil man, nor of his evil alternative (Obama). If you surrender to the Establishment candidate, you will have an Establishment President. When you vote for the Approved Candidate (TM), you will NEVER get a President of whom you can be proud. I would write in Thomas Jefferson, Lysander Spooner, or Sasquatch before I would vote for either McCain or Obama.
This year’s offerings are about as anti-America as one can get: either would sell out America to the lowest bidder; both would destroy us for his own aggrandizement, Obama by taxing and spending us into oblivion and more wars, McCain by extending us and over-extending us in wars to kill people who never posed a threat to a one of us (and in fact creating more enemies for us to fight); both would usurp our rights (what few are left) and subject us to further intrusion and subjugation.
But let’s stick to your dichotomy, Mitch. Going on their campaign rhetoric alone, let’s compare Obama and McCain. Obama promises programs that will by simple economics require much higher taxes; McCain promises to keep us embroiled in ridiculous foreign wars for as long as it takes. Hmmm. Higher taxes; or countless, needless deaths. (Don’t argue abortion; they both support it) Leave aside the promises of McCain to lower taxes; with the continuing devaluation of the dollar his exploits are sure to cement, raising taxes will become a necessity. And leave aside the obviousness of Obama continuing hegemonic wars into other theaters. These are not part of the rhetoric.
State-sanctioned theft (taxes), or state-sanctioned murder (war)? Which is more moral? Both are immoral, but higher taxes are certainly less permanent. How does a Christian — any Christian — defend McCain?
To coin a phrase, “What would Jesus steal/Who would Jesus kill?”
All I’m saying is: A vote for McCain may shortly be a vote for Sailer. You didn’t address that prospect.
As far as “many more years of institutionalization”, I don’t think I’m that much older than you. But I have been around long enough to realize it’s better to set a charge inside the windmill than to charge upon it from without.
I apologize for coming across so stridently, Mitch.
I’m just incredulous that someone who described himself as “convinced” about Ron Paul could then encourage others to “hold your nose” and vote for the biggest fraud perpetrated by and upon the so-called “party of small government” in recent memory. No, Paul’s long-shot candidacy has convinced me: I’ll not ever again waste my vote. I will not vote for another pretender to liberty like Bush or McCain, no matter the odds; I’ll not be complicit in their depredations.
In fact, I will vote my conscience and trust that God will honor my faithfulness. Maybe — just maybe — if Christians were to vote for moral, liberty-minded people (or even just liberty-minded people), instead of projecting their hopes and fears upon morally repugnant (by any definition of the phrase) candidates, America could be the republic it once seemed destined to be.
That said, I agree, Tom. Aside from her apparent tinge of neo-con Isrealo-bellicosity, I’d say Palin is a fairly solid pick. Not enough to make me vote for McCain, obviously, but anyone who supports seccession movements can’t be all bad!
I’m convinced Ron Paul got his butt kicked. He had a wonderful opportunity and he blew it. In the contest of big time politics he failed. If you have great ideas but can’t articulate them you lose. If you have high ideals but fail to inspire enough of the great unwashed masses, you lose. Ron Paul lost because he sucks as a politician. It’s tough to accept, but it’s a fact. Politics always has been and always will be a dirty business.
Palen did a great job last night. Maybe she’s the real deal and maybe she’ll end up being President. That’s enough hope to garner my vote.
I agree with Mitch. My vote will be for McCain/Palin. She fires me up and the alternative looks bleak.
On a side note, I think that God’s kingdom is still won one soul at a time, which makes ordinary people like you and me Just as important as the president of the US.
Even as great as this nation has ever been or will ever be, it is unlikely it will ever be 100% believers in Christ. So, for me, I would argue that our real passion is walking with Christ daily and allowing others to see our light shine. Also, to be strategic and prayerful for the people around us to know Christ and be strengthened by him.
I hope this makes sense, that I’m thankful for this country and our freedoms; but I don’t think this political race is THE most important subject for Americans right now (more important spiritual warfare). Just my 2 cents…
Re: Paul, you’re probably right. I just watched a clip of Scarborough and Buchanan discussing the fact that if Romney had had Paul’s message and his record, he’d be the nominee right now. Can’t say I disagree, Mormon or no.
As far as Palin, she seems to be genuine, from all I’ve read. But McCain is such an impostor — scratch that, he’s exactly what he claims to be, a neocon warmonger — that I am pretty sure I’d be more at ease with Obama’s titularly peaceful socialism. Taxes don’t come home in a body bag.
Good luck taking the plunge for McCain. I’m going with either Baldwin, or a write-in protest. (Even Barr is really starting to annoy me)
BJ, I believe there’s more to God’s Kingdom than just evangelism. Other fields where people are gifted, including science, business and even politics, are equally important. I call this the “missionary fallacy.”
There are way more people who feel called into “missions” than the Church can possibly support. This is surely a result of the focus on missions and evangelism as the end-all-be-all of the Christian life in church, totally ignoring the fact that 99% of people are not going to do that sort of thing, at least in a formal way.
The way God primarily grows His Kingdom is through the children of believers, and thus the most important entity in the kingdom is the Christian family, specifically the rearing of children.
Families, however, lack the romantic appeal of saving the pagans of Africa, and have much more complex needs than just donations to a mission fund. Families require very pedestrian things like a breadwinner and societal support.
Politics in particular has great import to families. Immigration is just one example, as we see the last remnant of true Christian civilization (the American Heartland) overrun by illegal aliens from Mexico and legal aliens from around the world. Muslims are building mosques in Houston for goodness sake. What does that say to our children that we would allow such a thing in our country? This is a political problem with political causes. And while spiritual warfare is at its root, ultimately the solution will take a political form of some sort.
There was a period of about 50 years, from the Scopes monkey trials to the late 1970’s, where Christians completely abandoned politics for the “higher calling” of prayer and evangelism. Such a withdrawal provided the enemy with ample opportunity. Oh, how the enemy would love it if we retreated again back to those “higher” callings!
50 million dead babies are a political problem. So I do not accept that politics or any other sphere of life is somehow inferior to another. They are all connected and none must be surrendered without consequences.
On this particular issue, though, I guess I agree. The country at large is without hope and even if Palin were everything some people hope, one person cannot change the system. If there were truly hope for the country at large, then we would see more Ron Paul types in Congress, but we do not. The hope IMO lies in a) the Internet lowering the cost of communication such that motivated constituents have more influence and b) the inevitable Weimar-style collapse of fedgov due to its financial bankruptcy (already a fact looking at Medicare and Social Security) which will provide opportunities for the better parts of the country to break away from the limitations of the Supreme Court, a liberal Congress and ultimately the fatal track of one-man-one-vote democracy in a nation facing our demographic future.
This thread caused me to reflect and visit the updated Ron Paul website. Some of my Republican clients were deligates to the State convention. They have remarked on how poorly the Paul supporters were treated. They were embarrased. They know the party has lost its way.
Perhaps there is hope.
Newsweek on Palin. Check out the videos:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/157696
[...] will likely think I’m just jumping on the “third party or bust” bandwagon. I am not, and offer this as [...]