Todd S. Purdum on Sarah Palin | vanityfair.com

I was wondering about the Sarah Palin phenom, slow day.



Todd S. Purdum on Sarah Palin vanityfair.com:

Read the entire article, but, I think the following sentence says it all;

"What does it say about the nature of modern American politics that a public official who often seems proud of what she does not know is not only accepted but applauded?

Merriam Webster defines a phenomenon as:
1)an observable fact or event; a: an object or aspect known through the senses rather than by thought or intuition: b: a temporal or spatiotemporal object of sensory experience as distinguished from a noumenon c: a fact or event of scientific interest susceptible to scientific description and explanation. 3a :a rare or significant fact or event b: an exceptional, unusual, or abnormal person, thing, or occurrence.

As like most of the world I had not heard of Sarah Palin until she was selected by John McCain as his running mate. Also like most people I thought McCain was attempting to attract the female vote by selecting Palin. Obama did not select Hillary Clinton as many thought he should, but had selected Biden a week earlier. McCain bypassed several other well known female republicans and stronger male republicans in order to make a statement, be mavericky so to speak. Palin wowed them at the RNC and they were all excited. She said cool things like comparing herself to a pit bull in lipstick, and jesting about the work of community organizers and the whole bridge to nowhere mess. Oh she had'em, they loved her. Then she traveled with McCain for at least a month, no lone appearances. She continued to give the same juicy speech which started to atrophy and dry out.
Then the press started asking unscripted questions which had nothing to do with pigs, pit bulls, lipstick or bridges to nowhere. The press discovered the 49th state and attacked like locust. Everyone wondered why she was being protected and always traveled with McCain. Biden was traveling alone, making speeches and answering questions. Then came the Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric, interviews, SNL, Ayers, the monkey, the cries of "kill him", "terrorists" and her (and her families) expansive wardrobe. Yet the crowds roared on, the predominately white, gun clinging religious crowd yelling patriot slogans and hate.
Is this a phenomenon? Does this meet any of the definitions by Merriam Webster? Palin's dip into the national pool was an observable fact, and was not temporal or spatiotemporal, but was it a rare or unusual fact or event? Well it was weird by political standards and I believe she was in way over her head and capabilities.
For me, she came off cocky, unprepared and opportunistic. The latter is not negative in and of itself, but not in concert with the former. An analogy Palin would like is a player needs to know when to pass the ball when that player has no history as a outside shooter. Palin took the shot unprepared with no history or skill, and she missed.
The McCain/Palin loss was not totally her fault but she did not help it. She may not have heard those people yelling, "kill him" and "terrorist" at her speeches the first time, but she had to have heard them thereafter, she made no attempt to stop these people. Through the spending spree for herself and her family, her lack of knowledge in geography, the canned superficial responses to questions, her lack of knowledge in world politics, blaming the media for her short comings, through it all, she remained cocky.
Palin was as a puppy that was smacked on the nose and sent from the national arena. She is still whining and blaming the media because she was not potty trained.
She went back to Alaska, continued to air her dirty laundry while arguing publicly with the baby daddy of her grandchild, had 15+ actions filed against her personally, made an attempt to turn down stimulus dollars and was very vocal against Obama's policies. I won't even mention the airport to know where the state is building with stimulus dollars.
This past Thursday Sarah girl quit. In her usual superficial rambling way, she said a lot of nothing as to her reasons. The one thing I found interesting in her resignation was that she did not want to be a "lame duck" in the position. Keeping in mind that she has another 17 months before the end of her first term in office.
Phenomenon, maybe, but definitely strange, odd, and headed for the history books for a chuckle or two.

REPORTS: Exiled Iranian Crown Prince seeks Israeli backing for opposition | Herald de Paris

REPORTS: Exiled Iranian Crown Prince seeks Israeli backing for opposition Herald de Paris

I have to wonder if we are the "manipulator" or the "manipulatee" on this one. Our history in back door politics is well documented in several countries. I've asked this before, is Mossavi the right answer or just convenient? Is the CIA involved in Iran politics? Are people in the streets of Iran being killed, tazed, gassed and beaten to resolve an unsolvable internal situation? I really hate the idea that I am questioning my countries involvement in another countries politics. At this point there is no evidence indicating US involvement regardless of accusations from Ahmadinejad or Kohemini. Iran is a threat and must be contained, but so is North Korea. How many of our principles are we willing to obfuscate to get the result we want?
Is Mossavi a "naked decision?" If you are naked and pushed out in front of a crowd, your alternatives are limited. 1) accept your situation and stand tall; 2) Try to cover your private parts , or 3) run like hell hopefully in the right direction. While not a pleasant advent, you have minutes, or seconds to decide with little wiggle room and often a decision set in stone.
Reminds me of the story about the wounded bird. A bird is wounded and lands on the ground. A cow comes along and poops on it to keep it warm. The bird starts chirping and making noise. Soon a wolf comes along and hears the bird. The wolf removes the poop from the bird and proceeds to eat it. The lesson; it is not always your enemies that poop on you, nor is it always your friends that remove it. Be careful Iran.

White House Drafts Executive Order to Allow Indefinite Detention; Move Would Bypass Congress | Herald de Paris

White House Drafts Executive Order to Allow Indefinite Detention; Move Would Bypass Congress Herald de Paris

I read this and again felt let down by my President. With his support of DOMA and refusal to repeal DADT, his lack of voice for civil rights issues are becoming a hindrance for me. I would feel better if he just suspended the hearings on DADT, but so far he has been silent.

Bothersome, nonetheless

Wonder Coping

I wonder why I am so bothered lately by issues that have been around for years. These issues have bothered me in small doses for quite some time, but for some reason they seem to be impacting me seemingly physically lately. Most of these issues were addressed during the 2008 Presidential campaign, some were alluded to, and others are related by association. Separately I probably would just shrug it off as a political issue, voice my opinion, sign a petition or two then go along. But not this time.
I am not so naive that I thought Obama would solve all the nations problems during his tenure what ever that will be, let alone in 5 months. I guess I knew he would have to compromise on some issues and capitulate all together on others. I was willing to give it time and support him no matter. I hate "one issue voters" because they are shallow and display no attempt to accept other views. When I hear anti choice advocates say they will not support a candidate because the candidate is pro choice, I walk away. There were and are issues which Obama supports that I do not. I voted for him because I thought he could do the best job at the time. As times change, so does my choices and the reasons I make them. From campaign speeches I felt that Obama would support issues I found important, but I did make trade off on others he did not support, my choice. I weighed many of these issues and what he said with how I felt. I did not compromise my values or my beliefs, I weighed what I though important and significant on the issues. President Obama came closest what I though was right. I didn't get caught up in the first Black President euphoria, but I did get excited by the prospect of a Black man thinking as I did and running for President.
While I am not second guessing myself for it is far too late, but I have come to the conclusion that you really can not put too much faith into the words of anyone during a campaign. Oh, I knew that things were said during the moment that had no validity in real life, but lately it seems President Obama is making decisions not based on promises, but perhaps on his true feelings.
The DADT law was signed in 1993 by Bill Clinton. The DOMA was signed in 1996 by Bill Clinton. Now Bill had a republican house and senate to deal with so I will forgive him for taking the cowards way out on both those issues. Obama has a democratic house and senate and great public support, yet, he backs down from both issues. His lack of movement on DADT is most discouraging and the recent support by DOJ of the DOMA is just another slap in the face by the administration for those who fought for his election. Obama's refusal to address gun control and the huge lobbying issues in DC are other issues I take great umbrage. All of these issues were addressed during the campaign and yet he plays dodge ball with them all.
I continue to support Obama at this time because I still think he was the best choise at the time. I support most of what he has accomplished so far, and I dissagree with other issues like those above and our approach in Afghanistan, or Gitmo. I may feel differently in a year about what else he accomplishes, but I hold that it was the best choice at the time. I am coping.