Citizen Voices

Does it make me an elitist if I don't think the ‘average person' should be the vice president of the United States? 

The Palin interview with Charlie Gibson felt like watching a bright undergraduate accidentally show up for a PhD thesis defense: confident posturing, thoroughly rehearsed responses and an overwhelming sense that she has no idea what she is talking about. You can't blame the average citizen for not knowing what is described by the "Bush Doctrine" - but Palin's ignorance was and is astonishing. This is not a spell potato(e?) sized gaffe, it's a dangerous insult to the nation.

And what of the torturous reverse engineering that went into her Abraham Lincoln based explanation of  the   Youtube sermon : "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God, that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." ?

 Lincoln referred  to the tragic brother versus brother, cousin versus cousin nature of our Civil War when he said:

Palin claims to have intended this same sentiment in her sermon. The inference would then be that she feels our current enemy might also be on God's side; that Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, Sunni terrorists, Shia terrorists and any other IED planting insurgents might also be doing "God's will." I would never presume to know God's will," she told Charlie Gibson. But at about 2.45 into the Youtube video Palin  seems to have a different  philosophy regarding the will of God when she says: "We can work together to make sure God's will is done."

Palin has every right to believe the War in Iraq proceeds according to her God's plan or that like Bush believes, the war is a Crusade of sorts. But swallowing the revisionist, disingenuous gloss she put on the "God has a plan" sermon goes down like a horse pill. I just wish she had the strength to stand honestly by her convictions, to let the American people know that she would be a Commander in Chief who would rely more heavily on God's plan than on a knowledge of foreign affairs and that her faith sometimes allows her to know God's will. It must be a great comfort and source of confidence to her - of the sort that gives rise to Bush Doctrines.

michael valentine from spring Valley
September 13, 2008 at 04:20 PM
President Bush claimed that God wanted him to be President. If anyone hears God's voice telling them this or that ... and part of it is to start a war ... it's Satan talking. Satan does a good imitation of God and so ensnares many.

JKMora from San Ysidro
September 14, 2008 at 03:07 AM
Chris, I agree with you. I find Sarah Palin's nomination for VP downright scary. She is totally unqualified to ever assume the presidency. I am puzzled by what the Republicans see in her and why they are so fired up over having her on the ticket. Is she really the ideal of conservative Christian womanhood and political activism? If so, it is a very confused and strange message that conservatives are sending to the women of America. I believe that the Republicans are operating under the assumption that the government can regulate our morality and that they know what that morality should be, if only they can put moralists in positions of power. Much has been made of Palin's small town upbringing and mentality. I grew up in a small town myself, but luckily I had parents (staunch Wyo. Republicans) who knew that their daughters needed to see the world and become knowledgeable about other nations, languages and cultures in order to be leaders in the modern world. Palin appears to be extremely limited in her knowledge of the world. How can she possibly interact with world leaders as a Head of State? How can she understand the linguistic and cultural diversity of our nation and the multiple perspectives, interests and opportunities this diversity brings to our nation? As a woman, a Christian, and a citizen, I find her nomination to be deeply insulting, and a clear indicator of McCain's cynicism and lack of sound judgment. Can anyone explain what the Republicans are really trying to accomplish? Is there an explanation?

Matthew C. Scallon
September 15, 2008 at 04:12 AM
Murder boards here must be easier here than they are back where I went to school in the Midwest. That's one explanation as to how Chris can compare Charles Gibson to a PhD thesis master. Either that, or Chris is just another ideologue who hates anything any pro-lifer has to say about anything. As to the "confident posturing, thoroughly rehearsed responses and an overwhelming sense that she has no idea what she is talking about," such could equally --if not more greatly-- apply, gender bending permitted, to Charles Gibson, unless Chris has the misbegotten notion that Mr. GMA went to the Tim Russert school of interviewing, studying the material himself hour after hour and not leaving the heavy lifting to producers, editors, and interns. Spare me. Mr. GMA had more weasel words in his questioning than verbs: "There are some people who say...," "There are some women who look," etc. Many those who interview prospective vice-presidents should have more qualifications than the ability to their producers' notes.

Chris
September 15, 2008 at 07:04 PM
Agreed - Charles Gibson is a bufoon, all the more reason Palin should have been able to sail through this interview. You misread the blog if you think I compare Gibson to a master of anything. I have never discussed my views on abortion here, thus your idealogue charge won't stick. But how could any one but an idealogue feel good about Palin's interview performance or her nomination. Again, brilliant, cynical politics that could sway the election in Rep.'s favor - but also one that shows a total disregard for country. Please, tell me what you found convincing, intelligent or innovative in anything Palin said.

Matthew C. Scallon
September 16, 2008 at 09:57 PM
@Chris: "Agreed - Charles Gibson is a bufoon, all the more reason Palin should have been able to sail through this interview. You misread the blog if you think I compare Gibson to a master of anything." I misread? Spare me. I quote:"The Palin interview with Charlie Gibson felt like watching a bright undergraduate accidentally show up for a PhD thesis defense." If Palin be the "bright undergraduate," Charlie Gibson would therefore be thesis master. At least, Chris and I agree on something in regard to Charlie Gibson. "I have never discussed my views on abortion here, thus your idealogue charge won’t stick." Really? From a different blog entry: "I suspect that the only real tradition being protected here (wittingly or not) is our puritanical belief that sex must be limited to a procreational and not recreational activity," and "As for who other people marry, I'm pro-choice." Now, I'll grant Chris that he doesn't say in so many words, "This is my take on abortion." However, I can be forgiven, as a gentle reader of said blog entry, to believe that the blogger in question has the shibelloths of one side of the baby-killing debate. If that be in error, I await correction. "But how could any one but an idealogue feel good about Palin’s interview performance or her nomination." According to one NPR host, a host whose show is absent from KPBS' terrestrial broadcast, White women regardless of party affiliation are "flocking to her side." Now, unless you're ready to characterize any White woman as an idealogue, I've offered up the exception which disproves Chris' conjecture. "Again, brilliant, cynical politics that could sway the election in Rep.’s favor - but also one that shows a total disregard for country." Total disregard? That statement smacks of demagoguery, as if our country won't survive because of some vice presidential candidate. Has Chris studied how many bad vice presidents we've had? And yet, somehow, the republic has still muttled through. "Please, tell me what you found convincing, intelligent or innovative in anything Palin said." I found nothing from either Palin or Gibson substantive. I also find that neither of the two tickets holds a patent on persuasion or innovation, although I consider both of them to have more intelligence than the present Administration. For someone who accuses me of misreading his blog entries, Chris makes liberal --no political pun intended-- use of eisegesis when it comes to my comments. Nowhere did I say anything positive about Palin's answers. The whole interview was more akin to a "Showbiz Tonight" fluff piece than a PhD thesis murder board. That was my point. I hope I've been able to clear that up.

Chris
September 17, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Matt - Science update: condom, the pill, choose your contraceptive, oral sex or whatever - recreational loving without procreation exists! Moreover, Pro-choice is not pro-abortion. I don't want Charlie Gibson for VP and could care less who writes his questions - but a VP candidate should be able to handle a romper room interview. Palin couldn't. But again, I thank you Matt, my most dedicated reader. Chris

Matthew C. Scallon
September 17, 2008 at 06:00 PM
@Chris:"Science update: condom, the pill, choose your contraceptive, oral sex or whatever - recreational loving without procreation exists!" Continued science update: according to the NIH and the CDC, no form of artificial contraceptive is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy, especially when most are not used as directed; therefore, all of them have the potential of conception. Grown-ups like Chris should understand that. "Moreover, Pro-choice is not pro-abortion." It amazes me how easy it is to read Chris, even though he claims not to have said anything about abortion. There you have it; he's has finally chimed in. No big surprise, but, as a pro-life Democrat, I was holding out hope. Alas, it is not so. "I don’t want Charlie Gibson for VP and could care less who writes his questions - but a VP candidate should be able to handle a romper room interview. Palin couldn’t." Does Chris mean that Gov. Palin should have handled the questioning as Sens. Clinton and Obama handled the "flag pin" and "bitter" questions from David Hartman's pathetic replacement during the Pennsylvania primary? Compared to the way that my fellow Democrats handled Mr. GMA, Gov. Palin looked down-right stately. Mind you, that's still a backhanded complement, since she had such a low threshold to meet. "But again, I thank you Matt, my most dedicated reader." If that be so, I feel sorry for Chris. He doesn't even register into my top 20. And, for someone who claims not to respond to my comments, Chris sures writes a lot about my comments, sometimes accurately. I will say this from him: the verbal jousting has been fun on my end.

Mental anguish
September 18, 2008 at 05:16 PM
I have to say I was very disturbed by your comment on NPR this morning. You 'hope Sarah Palin is embarrassed during the vice presidential debate.' Why not hope that the vice presidential candidates have an informative debate that talks about the substance and the issues. Wishing mental anguish is just petty. As for the 'task from god' qoute, her specific words were "(p)ray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God. That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan." Certainly open for interpretation. Thanks for the OpEd but I interpret this differently that you. Call me an ideologue, but I believe that all candidates have the country's and the people's best interest at heart. There are the exceptions that are corrupt, but ALL politicians are ambitious and self-interested to various extents; spare the faux indignation. Attack the issues and positions not the people, otherwise you sound like one of the political advisers on the payroll 'hitting the talking points.'

Chris
September 18, 2008 at 07:07 PM
Mental anguish. Respectfully, I don't think I have attacked Palin for any personal characteristics. I have attacked her clearly liberal interpretation of what the separation of church and state means, I have attacked her woefully inadequate responses to straightforward policy questions. We can interpret her "God's plan" comments differently - but I did so on her terms. I looked at what Lincoln said - and tried to square it with what she said. It can't be - please enlighten me if you can. As for my "embarrassed" comment - it was probably too harsh in tone. But I am convinced she is unqualified for the job and thus hope that an electorate that only responds to American Idol type TV spectacle will be treated to the truth that is Sarah Palin thus far - a spokesmodel unable to face the press or discuss issues in an open forum. For me the indignation is real when the stakes are the future of the country.