Showing posts with label sarah palin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sarah palin. Show all posts

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Great Speech By Sarah Palin At the RNC Tonight - RNC Day 3

You know, left wingers are so fickle sometimes. On some of the political boards that I frequent (some of whom are not overly conservative-friendly), a number of people criticized Republican VP Nominee Sarah Palin's acceptance speech tonight. I thought it was a fantastic speech, showed that she had the balls to fight with the big boys and that she was not going to be a pushover. Yet, these bleeding heart left-wingers are saying that she played dirty by bashing Obama, Biden, and the Democrats during the speech.

For Pete's sake, did they watch their own convention? Obama, Biden and company were not only spewing out snide remarks about the Republicans, but they ridiculed John McCain as well. So it's OK for the Democrats to insult and rant about their opponents, but when the Republicans address their criticisms and push back, it's now below the belt? Biden's "scrappiness" is generally considered a positive for him, yet if Palin provides the same level (if not more) of being aggressive, it is now wrong? Give me a break. For all the liberal whining about double standards for men and women, let me tell you that they should practice what they preach for a change.

Palin showed in her speech tonight that she wasn't afraid to scrap, and while I will admit, Obama and Biden have been muted in their comments on Palin, I suspect it was because they wanted to tread carefully for fear of sexism, to handle the initial response to her delicately because she is a woman. I seriously believe had she been a man, they would have torn into her at the outset. But Palin is not afraid to call a spade a spade, which may not win her friends, but like everything else, honesty and integrity will earn respect. That doesn't mean everyone will agree with you, but it means that they know where you stand and that you are consistent.

Critics will say that Palin did not provide much detail about her plan and provide solution specifics - that is true. I don't know if she has a good grasp of McCain's vision, after only 5 days or so of being chosen as his running mate, but whether she did or not is beside the point - I think even if I had McCain's plan committed to memory, I think it would not be proper for the VP candidate to spell out the plan - after all, that sort of takes the limelight away from the presidential candidate, who happens to be making his speech the following night.

Calling her McCain's attack dog is demeaning - it implies she can't think for yourself, and you know, for her to be mayor and governor, those aren't exactly jobs that allow for decision delegation. As I said earlier, she is exactly what McCain needs, to balance out his more quieter demeanor. I think that Palin's presence and her personality will fire up people who think and vote conservatively, but are afraid to let their voice known. I think McCain made an exception choice in choosing her over, say, Mitt Romney. Case in point - my wife, who was watching the speeches with me, indicated that of all the speeches, she absolutely detested Romney's (well, the Hawaii governor's speech was the worst in terms of monotone delivery and lack of excitement and frequent unnecessary pauses). My wife thought Romney sounded too slick and was the caricature of a slimy politician. I don't think that she's that off there. Romney (who was one of the folks on McCain's shortlist for VP) - could you imagine him as the VP candidate - no one would believe anything he was saying - in fact, folks in the crowd were not even paying attention.

I thought Palin's speech really brought out the fact that she was just like everyone else, with her own set of challenges and joys and disappointments. I think she did a good job in introducing herself to the masses, but not spending the whole time in doing so. She highlighted her experience and wasted no time in punching back at the criticisms leveled toward her so-called "lack of experience" that the media and left-wingers seem to be happy dishing out.

Now, speaking of which, my thoughts on the rest of the speeches...or least what I caught starting at around 8:30PM EST.

Carly Fiorina - well, didn't think much of the speech. Didn't draw me at all. Being the former CEO of any company doesn't impress me much - knowing that they got millions of dollars of severance on termination doesn't sit well with me. So I don't have much to say about former eBay CEO Meg Whitman's speech either (I am hating eBay more and more every day and the direction it's going, away from auctions). Mitt Romney's speech I could have done without - he said nothing substantive, and that freaking grin on his face annoyed both my wife and I.

I absolutely loved Mike Huckabee's speech. But that shouldn't be a surprise seeing that I supported him (financially) during the primaries. So for those who say that it's silly for me to comment on any of this being that I am from Canada, is hogwash. I can still contribute to their campaigns and being on several U.S. political forums, I can certainly "spread the word" as a foot soldier for the campaign. Anyway, Huckabee's speech, as usual, was full of animation, tons of humour, and ended with a very positive and moving story about military service and freedoms. Possibly one of the best speeches of the night.

Rudy Giuliani's speech - I'd say that was a good attack speech, but it did come out as a bit more negative and scare tactics. But you know, it's like if someone was insulting your wife or friend or family member - unless you had no balls, you certainly wouldn't take it lying down. I know I won't - and if I say something that ends up hurting someone's feelings - oh well. We need more people to tell it like it is, and less wussies who try to employ every sensitivity tactic in the sun. Not sure if the U.S. electorate would appreciate negativity like that. But I thought several parts were brilliant and funny at the same time, while speaking truth. But all that being said, I think you can be aggressive, but there are times when overdoing sarcasm may not exactly aid your argument. I suspect that the Giuliani speech was one of those times. Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee, and Lieberman yesterday as well as others have all come to the defence of Palin, against the liberal media and Democrats who have been trying to bash her for the past few days. Good to see them standing side-by-side with their colleagues.

Worst speech of the night was by Linda Lingle (I think that was her name), governor of Hawaii. Yikes, what a bad speech - I thought she was the set up person for Palin - thank goodness she wasn't. Her speech about Palin was monotone, and paused way too frequently to expect applause - and the crowd was seemingly getting tired of the forced applause from this monotonous speaker who was very robotic in her delivery. I heard later that they had to cut out the video intro for Palin due to time, and this, I think, was a major mistake, since video intros are generally received well, invoke an emotional response and right then and there the candidate walks out. Give them credit - the Democrats executed this exceptionally well with the Biden and Obama intros. I only hope that they do one for McCain. But they should have considered Lingle's speaking style, what time of night she would have to speak, and then probably put her on a different day - maybe she was set to go on Monday's lineup, which was (rightfully) shortened due to Hurricane Gustav.

Tomorrow's speech by McCain will, I think, be the most important speech he will ever make.

P.S. I gotta say, the CNN coverage is OK, but man, they are so in Obama's camp, it's not funny. I mean, really, they screen their boards to only put through comments that either praise the Democrats or slam the Republicans. And their polling is biased as well - look at other news site polls - it shows Obama and McCain at a dead heat right now - CNN shows Obama with a sizeable lead - like, if you take your impressionable internet savvy generation and use them as a benchmark, after shoving Obamamania 24x7 on them, I guess that is what the polls will look like. I'm really disappointed how biased CNN really is. But it kinda sucks, since as we don't have cable, the online stream from CNN is really the only way we can watch the convention.

Friday, August 29, 2008

Sarah Palin - A Great Choice for The U.S. Republican Vice-Presidential Nominee

For hardcore social conservatives like me, I have always been a bit wary of John McCain. To me, while he may be a fiscal conservative, his social conservative stances leave a lot to be desired. And whether you agree with me or not, ask yourself this – would you want to have a leader follow his or her convictions consistently, not waffling on issues or staying on the fence, even if you may not agree with his/her positions. For me, I have great respect for some liberals with whom I vociferously disagree, but admire the fact that they hold to their positions consistently, despite the environment in which they find themselves or the political climate in general. McCain, to me, is not one of those people, although I will grant that he is a very sincere person, but given a choice between him and Obama, it’s a pretty clear choice – Obama is full of empty promises and while this may not be that well reported in the national press (ie. CNN is decidedly biased towards anything Obama), there are lots of discussion forums where disgruntled citizens of Illinois have candidly stated that he has nothing relatively nothing for them, since he has had his eyes on being the presidential nominee rather than focus on the job at hand. That’s why I like guys like Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana, who was on McCain’s shortlist to be VP, but expressed that he was elected to be governor of Louisiana and that’s what he’s going to focus on. Saying no to a VP spot may not necessarily be the wisest move long-term, from a political perspective, but I admire Jindal’s dedication to this constituents.

So McCain’s choice of VP would have been very important to alleviate the fears and concerns of social conservatives. For all the Obama-maniacs who seem to let the fanfare and the hype drive their thinking rather than logic and common sense, they would dismiss social conservatives as having any relevance. But let’s face it, groups like Focus on the Family have a lot of sway to American conservative voters. Groups like the NRA have contributed decisively to the success (or lack thereof) of a particular candidate. It is not popular to be a conservative these days, so most people don’t go around confessing their conservative views. Liberals have suggested that McCain's rally later today (introducing his running mate, among other things) will not draw many people. I suspect that there will be much more than the 15,000 that are expected to attend. Conservatives tend to come out when it counts and not the flashy spectacles that liberals are famous for.

So it absolutely delights me that John McCain has chosen Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his 2008 Vice-Presidential running mate earlier today. Now, the comments from liberals and democrats have already started to pour in. They think that McCain chose her because she is a woman. They think McCain chose her to appease Hillary supporters. Of course, if you think with her emotions rather than with your brain, you will come to this conclusion. But while I think that having a female on a ticket may show that McCain is sensitive to the fact that women are just as integral to the ballot box as men are, I think that the real reason that he chose her is because she is the truest conservative of all of the potential candidates vetted for the VP spot (with the exception of Mike Huckabee, who would be a great choice, but has been known to put his foot in his mouth at the wrong time). That balances out McCain’s clearly noticeable weakness with socially conservative voters. I think it's pretty insulting to Palin to suggest that she was chosen JUST because she is a woman.

Now, the other argument coming from the democratic camp is the lack of experience card. Sure, McCain railed against Obama for his lack of experience, but I think we're not talking about the same thing here. Obama is running for President. Palin is running for Vice-President. With the exception of Dick Cheney, many of the vice-presidents have had more or less a hands-off approach on a daily basis, working behind the scenes instead. This gives a great opportunity to learn the job behind the scenes. The presidency, however, is no place to learn on the job, since you are constantly in view and mistakes are magnified. Now, I know the other argument that comes from this and it is a valid one - given McCain's age (70-something), what if he croaks or is incapacited - will Palin be able to fill the role of Comamnder-in-Chief? Maybe. Maybe not. But they also said that she was too young to be a mayor at 32, too young and inexperienced to run as a state governor against a multi-term incumbent and yet she still won. Remember, Palin does have political experience in leadership in different capacities for the past 10 years or so - which is more than I can say for community activist - turned senator - Obama. I think that McCain chose wisely due to her staunch and unwavering conservative record and beliefs. She is an evangelical born again Christian, is decisively pro-life, and is a lifetime member of the NRA. Whether you agree with her or not, there's no way in hell you can mistake her as a liberal (unlike Tom Ridge, and Joe Lieberman, some other candidates in the running). Tim Pawlenty would have been a great choice too, but Palin's positions on issues is strongly known.

All that being said, she has a tough road ahead, especially in how she will prepare to debate the veteran Joe Biden (who by the way, I will concede was a decent choice by Obama, much better than Hillary Clinton). Will Biden eat her alive on foreign relations issues? Possibly. She can't come up with 30+ years of experience in a month or two - but in seeing her on interviews and such, she is a very articulate politician and has bucked the odds, so I certainly wouldn't discount that she can hold her own.

Having such a strong conservative on the ticket instantly strengthens McCain's viability. It should be very interesting in the days and months ahead. While you will never hear this on CNN, independent polling nationally in the U.S. actually puts McCain ahead of Obama right now. CNN and other liberal establishments put Obama slightly ahead, but if you look at the actual state-by-state totals and how they are made up, you can see that CNN is finding opportunities to inflate some numbers. Even the CNN number have shown a decreasing trend in support for Obama since the primaries ended, and it's gone down even more since he did not make Hillary his running mate (I think this will come back to haunt Obama, even though I think that Biden was and is the better choice).

While I've already sent McCain's campaign several contributions, I'll scrape up some more cash in the days ahead to show my approval for this most excellent pick.

McCain/Palin '08!!!!!