Monday, September 01, 2008

An Interesting Thought

From BeldarBlog

I obviously don't know for sure what conversations Gov. Palin had with her family, and in particular with her daughter Bristol, before giving Sen. McCain her decision. But given this history from 2004 — when a veto from Track stopped her from running for a U.S. Senate seat she might very well have won, in which case she would have become Barack Obama's Senate classmate — I would wager a very, very large sum of money that Bristol Palin was given a veto right again. I would wager that she was warned, in detail, about the certainty that her privacy would be invaded in a sickening, vicious manner.

And I would wager that Bristol Palin must have said: "Go ahead, mom. Tell Senator McCain 'Yes.' I know what's coming, but my baby and I will be okay."

Which makes Bristol Palin a very brave young woman indeed.


Stella said...

Maggy, we could then agree that with all the slander against Clinton, she, too, is brave. We women have to be brave. Remember the old saying that women have to do twice the work to get half as far as men: and, fortunately, that's not difficult.

Naturally, I disagree with Palin's drilling policies, wolf hunting from helicopters, and anti-choice stance. She can be anti-choice if she chooses, but that doesn't give her the right to tell others how to conduct their lives.

However, I'm not going to throw dirt regarding her family. I considered the (Bill) Clinton bashing inappropriate, with the exception of lying under oath. The rest was family business: I give the same consideration to the Palin family.

Obama deserves a lot of credit for not playing dirty politics. From the Washington Post:

Obama spoke to Palin by telephone and wished her luck -- though not too much luck -- in the race. Biden also called Palin, and the two shared tales of the lengthy and secretive processes that led to their selections, aides to Biden said.

Obama described Palin as "a compelling person . . . with a terrific personal story. I'm sure that she will help make the case for Republicans."

What I resent is McCain picking her because she's a woman, as if all women think alike. Look at us: could we be more any issue-opposite? :L)

I think if McCain wanted someone tough, he should have chosen you. Hope you're doing well, Maggie.

BostonMaggie said...

I agree Clinton was is anyone who runs for higher office knowing they will be ripped apart.

Palin's pro-life stand poses no danger. No one is going to overturn Roe vs. Wade. All but the most hardcore realize that there has to be some choice for those in the first trimester. But some stuff needs to be tightened up, like partial birth abortions.

I think when people bring up the fact that she is pro-life it's just a tool to engender fear.

I am not threatened by a moderate pro-choice candidate.

Please note - I said pro-life and pro-choice. Those are the two camps. Using the prefix "anti" is again an attempt to demonize a legitimate view.

There are four groups in the country. A small, hardcore pro-life minority who favor outlawing all abortions. A small, hardcore pro-choice minority who favor abortion, up to and including partial birth abortions. A small minority who simply don't care. Then you have the majority of Americans who while they don't like the idea of abortion but realize that it needs to be safe, legal and rare in the first trimester.

I feel that I know McCain well enough that I can safely say - he didn't pick Palin just because she was a woman. It didn't hurt. It was a consideration. But it was not the only or even the primary reason.

I have been rooting for Palin since March. I certainly didn't make this pick simply because she is a woman.

Saying Palin's gender is what got her the job is the same baloney we got when Ferraro was picked. It's spin and it's fear in the part of Obama supporters.

If he only needed a woman there were other safer picks (Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Elizabeth Dole).

Stella said...

Caught being negative with my "anti-" adjective. Apologies.

I'm not sure Palin's selection is "spin." There are a lot of platforms she supports which which I vehemently disagree. Most importantly, I agree with you 100% that Kay Bailey Hutchinson or (even better) Elizabeth Dole would have been far better choices for the GOP.

Ferraro never really had a chance given the era and the fact that she was part of a team running against Reagan and inexperienced compared to Bush Sr.. She certainly had some questionable financial dealings, but she's tough soul. I always admire that.

I certainly didn't make this pick simply because she is a woman. Of course you didn't Maggie! I don't question your intellect. You're too informed to make a decision based on gender. I had the same issue about voting for Hillary (I didn't) solely because she's a woman. There are issues she supports with which I strongly agree; yet, some of her political maneuvering concerned me.

I am happy with Joe Biden (yes, I do know about law school). I hoped for General Clark. I do respectfully disagree that McCain choosing a woman was a ploy, so shall we agree to disagree? Given my interaction with other Obama supporters, I can assure you we are not afraid. It's an election: all politically aware people are ramped up.

I read quite a few articles that McCain was planning to choose Lieberman, and Rove was pushing hard for Romney. I can say I'm glad you got the candidate you wanted for VP. I was happy with the vast selection of good Democrats after reading their voting records, so I was willing to support most of the candidates.

As always, best thoughts to you.