Yes, it was a great speech, possibly the highlight of the Republican convention. And yes, it was the climax of a big day for the GOP. First Romney and then Huckabee made their effective case against Obama and Biden. Then Giuliani came in as the Mafia Man to rough up Obama, a bruising he delivered with obvious relish. I would not have thought Palin could top these three seasoned veterans, but she did. It doesn't really matter how McCain does; the Republicans are off and running.
Commentators have noted that Palin spoke with aplomb. The liberals had sought to portray her as a bungler and a problem pick, akin to George H.W. Bush's selection of Dan Quayle. But the attacks created for Palin a great opportunity. All she had to show was that she was not the small-town nitwit of Democratic propaganda. Palin also demonstrated that she could mount a devastating attack on Obama--basically a "community organizer" who knows how to talk a slick game--without coming across as mean-spirited. This is a real art, to know how to punch with a smile. As commentator Fred Barnes said later, this is not an easy skill to learn. Palin didn't really learn it; she is a natural.
What struck me most about Palin, however, was not her pungent one-liners or her savoir faire. Rather, it was her girlish innocence, her unexpected candor and small-town charm. Palin came across as a really wholesome all-American, a real contrast with all the men in the race. Both by her words and her style, she contrasted herself with both Biden and Obama. Biden is basically a mediocre fellow (he graduated in the bottom 10 percent of his law school class, where he was found guilty of plagiarism) whose only original ideas have been terrible ideas, like carving Iraq into small pieces. He is also a product of the back-slapping Washington D.C. establishment. Republicans haven't bothered to attack Biden because he isn't worth attacking. By contrast, Democrats are going crazy over Palin because she scares them.
Even Palin's so-called problems highlight her normalcy. So her husband had a DUI conviction twenty years ago. First of all it wasn't her, it was her husband. Second, how does this compare with Obama, who was snorting cocaine twenty years ago? The media, with its familiar one-sidedness, has been commending Obama's "honesty" over his drug use while blasting Palin for her husband's irresponsible driving. Then Palin's daughter got pregnant at 17: apparently the "family values" didn't entirely get through. Even so, Bristol and the boyfriend are keeping the baby and getting married. So responsibility wins out after all.
By contrast, Obama said he wanted to preserve abortion rights because if his daughters got pregnant one day he wouldn't want them to be "punished" with a child. (Let's be glad that Obama's mom didn't think this way because if she had at the age of 18, Obama wouldn't be around today.) Even Palin's alleged action to fire the state trooper who split with her sister and then harassed her is precisely the kind of action that most Americans would take in a similar situation. While Obama is a cunning Chicago pol who has played his rhetoric and his machine connections to rise through the ranks, Palin remains authenticially all-American with ordinary and recognizable problems.
The problem for the Republicans is that many Americans have become jaded about them. McCain's maverick reputation helps, but it doesn't alter this reality. Palin, on the other hand, is a completely fresh face. I predict she will appeal not only to Christian conservatives but also to working-class independents, male and female, who see in her the promise of real reform. Palin offers change, but this does not take the form of warmed-over socialism. Instead, it is change in congruence with traditional American values. I don't know if an unspoiled person like Palin can actually clean out the Augean stables in the nation's capital, but she does seem determined to try. She is the new star of this political race and already she has altered the whole equation.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 44)
46. MIW,
Sorry dude, I just have to do this to make a point. Forgive me. As Eric would say, let's me and you do a "thought experiment".
Another poster on another blog raised this point today to a certain degree, but I want to elaborate on it for our conversation together.
You are a Republican. You believe that Conservatism goes hand in hand with Christianity, family values, ethics and all kinds of good shit like that.
Pretend that you don't own a T.V., Radio or Computer, but you've been taught about what Republicanism stands for, and you are proud to be a part of it.
You are told of some individuals that are speaking at both Conventions. You're getting a somewhat play by play by a friend of yours about who is who and what's going on.
Fred Thompson - How many wives?
Rudy Guliani - What 3-4 wives?
McCain - You know his deal
No party affiliation is mentioned
Joe Biden - First wife and daughter die in accident. He stays a committed single dad and travels home from Washington every single night. Remarries a few years later and has stayed married.
Barack Obama - Still married, loves his wife and has two kids.
Now the friend asks you, what parties do these individuals belong to?
What is your answer?
And I want to leave this one with you to.
Bill and Hillary are still together. The guy gets blow jobs and bangs everyone, but their still married. Sure, one could say that they are still together to further Hillary's career, but that's just speculation.
I've heard Republicans through the years just go off on them about that kind of stuff. How could Hillary still be with him? Crap like that.
Say Sarah's husband is caught banging another steel worker from the steel workers union (by the way Republicans don't like unions), but Sarah sticks it out.
You jerk offs would be praising how she stayed strong, and kept the family in tact and showed forgiveness.
This is the kind of doo doo that you guys do.
From the outside, it's quite funny listening to you guys.
Botts at 12:14AM on Sep 5th 2008
47. Troy,
I hate to break this to you. This might come as a shock, so make sure you're sitting down.
The Republicans had control of everything for over 6 years. Did you know that during those 6 years, this Country still had welfare and you still paid for it with your tax dollars?
Interesting huh?
Botts at 12:20AM on Sep 5th 2008
48. I am not sure if Palin was picked in hope of bringing Hillary female supporters to the McCain side. Clearly Hillary females are highly educated feminists who value career over family, are pro-abortion and have a disdain for people of faith. McCain may have unwhittingly struck gold. Palin has energized the "average" housewife and mother. Those who see children as truly gifts of God not obstacles to personal achievement. Palin's personal courage is illustrated by bearing a less than "perfect" child. Knowing the challenges he will pose did not deter her from giving him life.
HN at 12:45AM on Sep 5th 2008
49. ATHEIST
I know what christianity is.
You should be ASHAMED to tell people you are Catholic.
Reply to: I'm under 35, conservative, and Catholic. Its a shame that you use these comment sections to induce flame wars. Why not stick to intelligent discussion and asking thought-provoking questions instead? I plan on voting for McCain now more than ever b/c of Palin. All of my friends (Catholic and non-Catholics alike) also feel the same and are excited about actually shaking up Washington to bring about some good positive change
_________
another dimwit Catholic who talks about "intelligent discussion"? Oh, if only he could.
I raised a question.
Chapter 2 of Mark, a demonic spirit in the synagogue in Capernaum identifies Jesus as holy one of god.
I said, "That was a CON GAME. Dishonest people running a CULT... wanted to recruit victims... by saying their guy had the power to command demonic spirits."
We KNOW what this is.
Catholics... ALL of them... are a disgrace. They are NOT intelligent. They spread NONSENSE. Their Pope is a joke. An idiot who says God doesn't want Africans in a country with a high AIDS rate to use condoms... is evil.
Bad Catholics. Bad, Bad Catholics. Be ashamed of that name.
It means you are the Victim of a ridiculous, silly Resurrection cult... and the world did NOT end with the resurrection of the dead.
I can post this stuff, but the Catholics are truly too dim to respond in an intelligent way.
William Hays at 12:41AM on Sep 5th 2008
50. ATHEIST
Oh, yeah.
Under a McCain-Palin administration...
and, in a Worse Case Scenario, a Palin administration....
I mean, come on, is this woman qualified to take over if McCain dies?
But she will try to appoint Supreme Court justices to take away a woman's right to an abortion.
which will send this country into a civil war.
We've got to stand up to dims like Palin and say, "your religious beliefs are nonsense. A woman's right to have an abortion should not be limited by dimwits with a God delusion.
William Hays at 12:45AM on Sep 5th 2008
51. ATHEIST
Why did he pick Palin?
He's 72 years old. Most polls put McCain way behind. He KNOWS the country doesn't want to put a 72 year-old man in the White House, but he doesn't have the integrity to step down.
So he picks an pretty, unqualified Governor from Alaska.... because he likes to look at her.
He's going to lose and he doesn't have much time left. Who would you pick?
Palin isn't that bright. Obama was a prof at Harvard Law School. The only chance is to reach out to dumb Christians and say, "Look at me. I'm not bright enough to actually understand what the Bible says, so I'll never tell you what a crock it is."
Repeat after me.
End... of... the... world... cult.
Paul said the dead would be raised in new bodies... while he was still alive. Paul died ~ 65 AD.
Christianity is a lie.
William Hays at 12:59AM on Sep 5th 2008
52. ATHEIST
Sarah Palin was raised in a Pentecostal Church, not a Catholic one.
Let's look at what being a Catholic.... says about your mental condition. Are you... possessed by a demon?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081506.html
Jeremy Davies is a priest of Westminster, the leading diocese of the Catholic Church of England and Wales,
Promiscuity,
as well as homosexuality and pornography,
says 73 year-old Fr. Jeremy Davies, is a form of sexual perversion and
*** can lead to demonic possession. ****
Offering what may be an explanation for the explosion of homosexuality in recent years, Fr. Davies said, "Among the causes of homosexuality is a contagious demonic factor."
Fr. Davies continues: "Even heterosexual promiscuity is a perversion; and intercourse, which belongs in the sanctuary of married love, can become
** a pathway not only for disease but also for evil spirits." ****
___________________
What does the Bible say about demonic possession?
Here's a site:
http://www.greatbiblestudy.com/deliverance_believers.php
What it means to be possessed with a demon: The Bible makes it clear that there are different kinds of demons that cause different problems for the person in whom they dwell. Some demons cause blindness, others cause deafness, others cause madness (mental illness), others cause fear and depression (King Saul), others cause epilepsy (Matthew 17:15-21), and so fourth. Therefore, if a person is under the power of a spirit of blindness, they won't see (Matthew 12:22), if they are under the power of a spirit of infirmity, they will have some sort of physical infirmity (Luke 13:11), if they are under the power of a spirit of fear, they will be fearful, or if they are under the power of a spirit of anger, they will have uncontrollable anger.
Even though Jesus paid the price for our iniquities (Isaiah 53:5), doesn't mean the demons won't want to hang around until they are actually kicked out. If demons left automatically when their rights were removed, then there would be no need to cast them out. Sometimes though, they do leave without being told, but that's not always the case. In Matthew 8:16-17, it tells us how Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Him taking on our iniquities/infirmities... it was by the actual casting out of demons
William Hays at 1:13AM on Sep 5th 2008
53. I don't want an "average housewife" in charge when McCain has a health trauma happen in office. I want someone well-seasoned and realistic. Hillary has the balls to do that but Palin does not. If she were the repub's wonder woman she'd be at home raising her five children (who might not be pregnant at 17 and shotgunned into a marriage). Her name will be "Patsy" before they are done with her.
whoanelly at 1:14AM on Sep 5th 2008
54. Botts: "Would he have nearly the support Obama has today?"
John F. Kennedy.
Next time you want to do a thought experiment Eric, try to think about it first.
Eric: Botts, perhaps it's you who should do some thinking. Kennedy had a distinguished record of service in the military, won a Pulitzer, served three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he passed important legislation concerning social welfare and labor/management relations, and was into his second term as a U.S. senator, where he was on the Foreign Relations committen and the Joint Economic committe (among others), when he was elected president. He had already traveled all over the world while in public office, and was even considered for VP in 1956.
Are you seriously comparing this man's accomplishments to Obamas? My friend, you only strengthen my case when you present such weak counter arguments.
Botts: "Otherwise, you just sound like an intimidated white dude who can't stand the fact that a black dude is smarter than you ...by far, and could actually run this country."
Eric: What I said had nothing to do with the fact that Obama is black, but with how people are responding to this fact. Again, your knee-jerk 'racism' response (which you softened somewhat with this: "Now, you might not be this way at all, but this is what your "thought experiment" is making you sound like"; in fact, none of this could be legitimately inferred from what I wrote) again only serves to strengthen my point.
Eric at 1:41AM on Sep 5th 2008
55. LOL @ #5...I'm in the "35 and younger" category, and I'm NOT voting for Obama. And there are several others who won't be. So spew all you want. You don't represent us all.
#3: I'm glad you've become judge and jury on brightness for anyone who espouses a spiritual belief. Sounds like plain ol' bitterness to me. NEXT!
As far as the comments go pertaining to Sarah Palin, it's likely that the media will go a little easier on her, considering she used to be one of their own. I noticed Katie Couric being neutral, almost upbeat at the end of the RNC. Women tend to understand each other in general, and I imagine women in the media have a sort of unspoken bond. I don't think that was lost on Couric. Palin doesn't strike me as the type to be afraid of much, including the opposition she will surely face if she makes it to the White House. She managed to make a great speech delivery but still retain a feminine air, giving gentle touches to her children in passing or a warm smile to her husband. She can be firm, energizing, and still nurturing and womanly, which other female politicos seem to have lost sight of.
Anyhow, no one seems to talk about the fact that comparing Palin with Obama is like comparing apples and oranges. Neither of them are terribly experienced, but one is running for the actual presidency while the other is in the secondary position. I don't have a problem with Obama's inexperience...I just think if people are going to cry about Palin's credentials, they shouldn't be aligning them with Obama's. Palin isn't running for President, no matter how big the possibility that McCain could "reach his life expectancy" by the end of his presidency. Obama is. Compare Obama with McCain and Palin with Biden for their respective positions. Maybe Biden should have been nominated to the DNC with Obama as his VP. Then the comparisons would be more aligned.
Ang at 1:54AM on Sep 5th 2008
56. "Eric: Botts, perhaps it's you who should do some thinking. Kennedy had a distinguished record of service in the military, won a Pulitzer, served three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he passed important legislation concerning social welfare and labor/management relations, and was into his second term as a U.S. senator, where he was on the Foreign Relations committen and the Joint Economic committe (among others), when he was elected president. He had already traveled all over the world while in public office, and was even considered for VP in 1956."
Eric, let me remind you of your thought experiment in case you forgot.
"Let's imagine a man with all of Obama's qualities: his charisma, his background, his rhetorical gifts, his good looks, his youth and energy, etc. However, there is one difference: this man is white.
Would he have nearly the support Obama has today?"
You described Kennedy to a tee my friend. Now here we go with "experience" again. My friend, Obama has plenty of experience. "Experience" consists of everything a person goes through in life. The question remains, does Obama's experience give him reasonable credentials to lead a Country. It's completely subjective to each individual who should be objectively looking over everything.
He passes my test, black or white. 12 years in Politics. Taught Constitutional Law (A Biggie), community organizer, and more. He has crossed party lines in the Senate to pass legislation that was put into law. No he didn't serve his Country in the military, but he certainly has served his Country well.
Now if you're going to come back and say you said "background", which you did, I had to really look past that a bit, because the chances of a pure White guy coming from a black African from Kenya isn't likely. You know what I mean.
"Eric: What I said had nothing to do with the fact that Obama is black, but with how people are responding to this fact."
What? Huh? What? It had everything to do with him being black which is why you posed the damn "thought experiment" to begin with. You are asserting something with your statement. The gifted black guy is getting more exposure and got this far because he is a gifted black guy.
Now imagine if he were White. That's your thought experiment dude, not mine.
"Again, your knee-jerk 'racism' response (which you softened somewhat with this: "Now, you might not be this way at all, but this is what your "thought experiment" is making you sound like"; in fact, none of this could be legitimately inferred from what I wrote) again only serves to strengthen my point."
Your points are weak at best, and I gave you no such thing as a knee jerk reaction. This is what you brought to the table.
Would a White guy with the same credentials be doing the same things.
My answer to you, is yes it can happen. It all depends on the person. Are they ambitious enough. Excitement, hope and vision comes in all colors. And if you believe in your vision enough, and are passionate to share it, people will respond to you.
Botts at 2:13AM on Sep 5th 2008
57. Eric,
I can speak for no one but me own white liberal self(unlike yourself with your powerful honky leftist ESP) but guilt has nothing to do with my vote which at his point is going to be Obama.
Republican fatigue is the main factor.
The 'real American' party outed a CIA agent during war time for political reasons, that this has been forgiven and forgotten is an outrage. Someone should be standing against a wall with a blind fold and a cigarette over this one.
There is only one undisputable fact about the war, certain companies made billions. Those companies did so without having bid for those contracts. The 'pro business' party essetially ditched the most basic tentant of capitialism because they and their friends stood to make a lot of dough. There was a time when this was called war profiteering, it was a hanging offense.
Even if you buy all the other bullshit about the war this should piss you off.
On my morning jog I pass at least six houses foreclosed and being sold by a bank and at least five more that have been for sale for months. It might be more, I quit counting a while ago. I don't run all that far. I know of many bright educated people out of work with little prospects.
I could go on.
Greed, corruption, and incompetence, and Mccain seems to be offering more of the same.
tmo at 2:19AM on Sep 5th 2008
58. Since no one elgible to run this year has any presidential experience at all can we declare this a non issue? Let's pick the smartest person instead since every one of them is going to be learning on the job.
tmo at 2:25AM on Sep 5th 2008
59. Oh yeah, there is another non guilt related reason this cracker will be voting democrat this year.
tmo at 2:27AM on Sep 5th 2008
60. "Greed, corruption, and incompetence, and Mccain seems to be offering more of the same."
Why anyone still supports this party is beyond me. Blatant corruption.
Botts at 2:34AM on Sep 5th 2008