Monday, September 1, 2008

The Palin pick scares Democrats; Gustav's impact on RNC

One of our fellow bloggers already predicted that the Palin pick was a wacky but brilliant decision. Now that we have the weekend behind us, and with the RNC just started, we can further confirm the genius behind John McCain's decision,
  • The news during the weekend was without question the Palin pick. When was the last time the mainstream media got excited with a Republican issue? Only Arnold's bid for the governorship of our wonderful state of California seems to have come close in recent memory. And even that... During the primary season the Clinton-Obama fight might have eclipsed the Republicans but I would gladly sign for having between now and November 4th the media as excited with the McCain-Palin ticket as they have been during the last weekend.
  • Obama's acceptance speech, despite being the most watched acceptance speech of a presidential candidate in US history, was either ignored or not given enough attention by the media.
  • The Republican base got so excited by the pick that the McCain campaign raised 4 million dollars over the Internet in one day and a half. John McCain said in an interview to Fox News last Sunday, "I wish I had have taken her a month ago".
  • And what is probably the best evidence that the Palin pick has effectively neutralized Obama, polls from Gallup and CNN show a very modest (in CNN's case not even statistically significant) bounce for Obama after the DNC. Going into the DNC, I am sure the Democrats had higher expectations than that ;D.
Democrats are sure panicking. Given how game changing the Palin pick has been, that reaction is understandable. In fact, Joe Trippi warns their fellow Democrats that they shouldn't underestimate Palin. But that's one thing and quite another to react, as the most recalcitrant of liberals have, with fallacious, unsubstantiated nonsense smear attacks against Sarah. If what we saw during the last 2 days is any indication, it might be a very nasty campaign by the other side. But if that's the best they can do against the McCain-Palin ticket, it's tantamount to an implicit acknowledgement that our liberal friends are scared to death about what seems right now the very real possibility that John McCain will be the next President of the United States, a very different scenario than what they imagined just one month ago when Obama was enjoying his status as American celebrity with the Germans.

As I am finishing this post, a scaled down RNC has just started; as I watch my fellow Republicans in Saint Paul greeting Ms McCain and Ms Bush, it's evident that they continue to be electrified with Palin. My thoughts are with the Americans who have been affected by the Gustav hurricane. A prompt action by the federal and state governments together with a weakened storm makes me believe that Gustav's impact will be less severe on the human front than Katrina was three years ago. Let's hope it's the case.


TheMassMouth said...

Thankfully, as we now know, Gustav has spared New Orleans.

Tomorrow we get back to business.

Hopefully, John McCain wins.

Then it's time for the two reformers, who have made their bones by reforming the Republican party, to really REALLY reform it, i.e., rescue it from the ugly hand of the evangelissimos, as well as from the pork-barrelers and the big-governmentalists, the torturers, the signing statment tyrants, the politicized justice department, and the warrantless wiretappers.

Has anyone forgotten Harriet Miers ? A woman. Endorsed by GWB, no less. The President. But shouted down by...the evangelissimos.

I have already blogged about the pressure from the Bible Right that forced John McCain to not choose the VP that he REALLY wanted...

Fortunately we already know that THAT sort of veto will not happen to judicial nominees in the McCain presidency. Because his judicial nominees will be presented to an overwhelmingly Democrat Congress, one in which the evangelissimos won't even be able to mount a filibuster.

THAT reassures me that our Supreme Court will not begin establishing a Christian version of Sharia Law on America and its beautifully diverse 300 million citizens -- and immigrant citizens-to-be. And that America can continue to be a nation in which religion goes its way and politics goes another way, as our founding fathers wanted.

Ron Davison said...

I guess I missed the brilliant part of this strategy. Obviously it makes news for the weekend, but what is it about the candidate that so excites you? (And I would not look to the RNC for confirmation of your feelings - I watched pieces of the DNC and, like every convention from either party I've ever seen, those people are just cheers waiting to happen.) Why should the average American be excited about Palin's plan for America?

TheMassMouth said...

IF --- IF, I say -- we get lucky, and John McCain wins AND is able to govern as the John McCain we McCain-iacs know and love, we will indeed get a man who is Barry Goldwater and Teddy Roosevelt both:

CONSERVATIVE - but not a religionist.

PROGRESSIVE -- and proud of American power. AND a Navy man.

Barry Goldwater's conservatism consisted of small government principles, federal spending cut to the bone, and leaving most power to the people and the states; and of strong confrontation, and no backing down from, foreign tyrants, especially those who ruled the Soviet Union.

On social issues he was an uncompromising libertarian. He was for gay rights and he was pro-choice. He was pro-choice because he hated the idea of government making such choices for people.

Other than the pro choice thing, That is John McCain.

PROGRESSIVE: Teddy Roosevelt stood up to the corporate oligarchs. He was a conservationist -- created the National Park System. He attacked corruption in government wherever he found it. And he did it ebulliently, happily, boldly.

That is John McCain.

America, and the Republican party, will be better a hundred-fold if there is a REALLY McCain-ish John McCain presidency.

TheMassMouth said...

to ron davidson: Your skepticism about Sarah Palin is understandable -- read my other posts at this blog site.

Still, we are electing John McCain. Sarah Palin will be his understudy, so to speak.

He sees her as a younger, newer version of himself: reformer willing to take on the corruption in her own political party, if need be. Just as he has done these past 20 years. As John McCain see it, Sarah Palin reinforces his POSITIVE mesage of reform and change -- change that we really CAN believe in, not radical political change such as the leftism that BHO would bring, but change away from corruption, overspending, and executive abuses of power...and executive incompetence.

I hope that he is right and that she doesn't end up looking dorky or too rookie to believe in. So far I'm not sure. But I am cautiously optimistic.

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...

ron davison,

There are several things that got me excited about Sarah Palin; to be honest, I was kind of surprised about John's pick because up until the announcement I bought into the conventional wisdom that Mitt Romney was going to be picked:

1- She's a woman. It's about time that the US has a woman President or VP. At the same time it's not "any woman" it's the type of woman with great appeal: energetic, fighter, Governor and a mother of 5. The latter point is important. I am 33 (soon 34). Women of my generation grew up in a post-radical-feminism era. They've watched many women who are in their 40's and 50's now sacrifice things such as motherhood to achieve career success only to deeply regret it. Sarah is a good example that one can be a good mother and have a successful career. She's figured out the work-life balance. She is far from being the first one to do that (we have our Governator's wife as an example) but the fact that she is a Governor, a tough Governor in fact, adds an extra dimension to the excitement.

2- Her uncompromising commitment to fight against corruption inside the Alaska GOP and "business as usual". This is probably what John McCain liked about her most, her maverickness. Sick of hearing scandals about politicians from both sides, Sarah's example is very refreshing.

3- Her religious beliefs might not be important to you, but the fact of the matter is that the US is overwhelmingly religious. For many people, not only women that's important. At the same time, my hope is that she will keep God's and Government's businesses separate. She's been able to that in Alaska. I was an agnostic for many years (I recently reversed to my Christian beliefs). I can tell you that "everything else being equal" (I stress the quoted sentence), I trust more a moderate/balanced believer than a moderate/balanced atheist. But as I said, my expectation is that the McCain-Palin ticket sticks to the first amendment of the US constitution.

4- Let's be honest, she brings actual executive experience to the ticket. She's been responsible for a budget close to 2 billion dollars, in a state whose population is 700.000. While the US is a bigger/more complex entity by at least one order of magnitude, the truth of the matter is that none of the two people on the other ticket has had any successful experience running anything. Sarah Palin could bring to the US Government the type of excitement Mark Hurd brought to HP. Both came from smaller entities and I see a similar excitement among the base of the Republican Party as I saw among the HP shareholders when Mark Hurd was picked HP's CEO (I made the mistake of selling my HP shares only a few months after Mark was named HP's CEO :( ).

So yeah, the excitement is evident. Whether former Clinton supporters will be attracted to Sarah is a harder question to answer, but certainly there are some who are electrified about her.

Vote! said...

I am excited about Saran Palin because she is a proven reformer, she's not afraid to go up against the good ole boy establishment, she is an outsider, outspoken, brave, super intelligent, shows remarkable judgement and exactly what this country needs.

TheMassMouth said...

Well now. Already Sarah Palin, the woman whom evangelissimos love, is facing her first big-time crisis.

But what do I know ? I, who advocated for Tom Ridge or Joe Lieberman and found myself insulted and pilloried by the evangelissimos who want every feus to live but John McCain to die, politically ? So here we are.

For John McCain's sake, Ms. Palin had better TRIUMPH over these twin crises. Mere survival will not be enough. But hey -- this isn't the Republican party, vehicle for the election of Presidents, it's a "do it MY way or lose" brigade of Bible Anarchists.

I am sickened. Disgusted. This should NOT Have happened.

If Big Mac wanted to choose a REFORMIST female running mate -- and that was a good idea for sure -- why didn't he choose Senator Olympia Snowe ?

Why not Meg Whitman ?

Why not WHOEVER ?

You know very well why not. Do I need to say it AGAIN ?

All the more vital that IF Big Mac does move beyond this and wins we need to extricate the Republican Party from the Death Grip in which the Pro Life has it locked in...

suek said...

>>THAT reassures me that our Supreme Court will not begin establishing a Christian version of Sharia Law on America and its beautifully diverse 300 million citizens>>

You mean like we had prior to about 1950? Oh between 1776 and 195x was _so_ repressed!

suek said...

>>I am sickened. Disgusted. This should NOT Have happened. >>

Oh yeah. Because you know...those religious people are _so_ intolerant...

>>to really REALLY reform it, i.e., rescue it from the ugly hand of the evangelissimos>>

TheMassMouth said...

Today John McCain commands 95 % of Republican voters: those are Reagan-like numbers.

Well and good. I sure hope that it continues. Because merica needs a President like John McCain. That he is a good thing. Better impulsive than diffident. That he is a warrior is a good thing. Better a warrior than a weak-knee. But best of all, John McCain is our time's version of Teddy Roosevely (and Barry Goldwater), as I have blogged here. That is a VERY good thing.

It is the period AFTER the election that now concerns me. The Republican party needs to extricate itself from the grip in which folks now hold it who believe that religion should be made political. Maybe it should be, in Sharia nations. America, however, has a Constitution that contains a First Amendment. Church and state are to be entirely separate; both are free to flourish, but SEPARATELY.

In political contexts I do not discuss my faith. It is none of anyone's business other than those who are part of my faith circle -- assuming that I have one, and I'm not even going to discuss that. You are free to speculate on my relationship to faith: I, however, will say nothing about a political space, as this one is. Here, and in politics generally, I will address political issues -- budget, reform, immigration, foreign policy, conservation, oil & energy, Federal Reserve Bank, etc. Lifestyle issues there are none in politics. Lifestyles are for individuals to decide upon without interference by me or by anyone, and certaily not by anyone in a government. The same goes for families and their family decisions.

Those who feel compelled to descrbe themselves as "Christian" -- or other theology, in a political context mix oil & vinegar, apples & oranges, and when they so describe themselves they imply -- probably by intention -- that a lecture is coming or, worse, a directive. Please spare me both, thank you.

I will end this post with a personal remembrance. I was in college at the time, a freshman. Into my dorm room walked a pastor berating me for putting down on my college registration form "no religious affiliation." (I had in fact done so. I did not at that time feel that I belonged to any denomination, yet.) Frankly, I was enraged. "What business is it of yours, my relationship to God," I responded. "Who appointed you to be keeper of my soul ?" He was about to say more...I told him to "Get out of my room and never ever talk to me again!"

I am still angry about that day. That man had invaded my personal space, my inner self, my soul. Who DID he think he was ? He wasn't my father !

That is how I see these folks who move into our politics with the word "Christian" on their lips. No thanks, I say. You can preach to me all that want...from a pulpit. From a political lectern ? Never !

suek said...

>>America, however, has a Constitution that contains a First Amendment.>>

The first Amendment states that the Congress (note: federal legislature, not state legislatures. States could and did have official religions) shall make _no_ laws regarding religion.

>> Church and state are to be entirely separate; both are free to flourish, but SEPARATELY.>>

Please find that for me. It isn't there. If you think so, prove it.

Afrolistic said...

This is a great post. I have friends who live in New Orleans now. They told me they know for sure that Gustav will not be as bad as Katrina because Bobby Jindal will see to that.

But even with my shameless plug for Jindal, I'm glad the RNC is taking time out focus on issues that are bigger than political parties.

TheMassMouth said...


It's September 3, 2008 now, and I haven't changed my mind about the Sarah Palin pick. Though she seems authentic and a "breath of fresh air," as Fred Thompson called her -- in a speech that was strong ad eloquent -- it's clear that she simply is unready. That's bad enough; it has sacrificed the Readiness issue. Worse is the weakness that her selection shows in John McCain. As I've already blogged, if you're going to run for president, you had better, firs of all, show that you control your own party. By choosing a VP for the sake of those who DID NOT support John McCain in the primaries, he has delivered his campaign into the hands of thos who oppose him.

This is not a good sign.

Now the talk is that Palin will be forced off the ticket, that John McCain will soldier on with her for a bit and then quietly ask her to withdraw. In no way would that be a good thing.

Or, Ms. Palin might make her speech tonight and then disappear. That wouldn't be an especially good thing either.

Or, the entire flap might blow over by the end of September or, at latest, mid-October. The life span of almos every political bombshell this year has been quite brief. Think Rev. Jeremiah Wright. In April that was huge. Today one barely recalls his name. Fact is that the two presidential candidates are news enough. They will be on TV morning, noon and night every day until November 4th. Long before that, they will draw in all of the attention, and the Palin Thing will fade into the background.

I'm not hapyp about that either. Our VP should be an asset to the campaign rather than a distraction. But ... it IS what it is. poll just appeared, from Rasmussen. Hillary Clinton vs. Sarah Palin:

Hillary Clinton 52
SarahPalin 41

Not much different from how BHO polls versus John McCain right now.

So, the whole Palin Flap looks to be much ado about nothing.

Ferny for McCain at Stanford said...


You are definitely a Trojan Horse from the liberals. Now echoing here the nonsense smears which come from The Huffington Post and the Daily Kos that McCain is thinking about replacing her when he has said again and again that he is happy with Palin.

There was something fishy about you since your first posting in this blog. I wanted to believe you when you said you want McCain as our next President yet you keep attacking him with the most vicious, unsubstantiated attacks coming from the liberals. You don't have any credibility whatsoever.

More than ever, McCain-Palin '08!

I go to Stanford too said...

"Sarah is a good example that one can be a good mother and have a successful career."

Actually, she is a GREAT mother...if you're a guy trying to schtupp her daughter!