In today's pages: Palin, McCain and Gustav
It's pick-a-fight-with-Republicans day at the Times' Opinion Manufacturing Division, so get ready to hit the comment boards, people! Tell us how wrong we are, not once, not twice, but three times! Well, only one of those pieces comes from the Times' editorial board, and it actually praises John McCain and GOP leaders for their reaction to Hurricane Gustav. But this being the Times, the board leavens its praise for McCain with a helping of criticism of President Bush:
McCain once presented himself as the president's opposite, but in recent months has begun to sound more like him, embracing the religious right, amping up his hawkish rhetoric and promoting the sort of tax cuts he once attacked as irresponsible. Gustav gave him the chance to again show himself as his own man.
Columnist Tim Rutten agrees that Palin's pregnant teen-age daughter Bristol, as well as Bristol's boyfriend, their friends and teachers, should be off-limits to media scrutiny. But he adds:
That said, the fact of Bristol Palin's situation and the way in which she and her family have chosen to deal with it are legitimate issues, because they involve public policy issues on which Sarah Palin, candidate for vice president, has taken political positions. Palin, for example, opposes sex education in schools, including all access to contraceptive information for adolescents. Similarly, she believes that abortion should be illegal.
Palin and her family have made decisions in the face of personal challenges such Bristol's pregnancy that have been consistent with their personal beliefs, Rutten writes. But Palin's "particular brand of social conservatism," he opines, "would deny other American families and other American women the freedom to make these same intimate decisions according to the dictates of their own consciences, religious convictions and traditions."
Ouch. Finally, best-selling secularist author Sam Harris, founder of The Reason Project, offers some ghoulish actuarial data about McCain's chances of dying in office to support his argument that Sarah Palin simply isn't good enough to be the veep. "McCain has so little respect for the presidency of the United States that he is willing to put the girl next door (soon, too, to be a grandma) into office beside him," Harris writes. Hmmm. this "girl next door" just happened to be skillful enough as a politician and leader to become a governor, doesn't that count for something?
That's probably enough controversy for one day, but wait, there's more! On the editorial page, the board decries a proposal from the City Ethics Commission to require lobbyists to wear a scarlet letter special badge when they enter City Hall, and it urges Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign a bill barring merchants from electronically storing sensitive (read: hacker-enticing) credit-card data. On the op-ed page, author Karen Stabiner offers a modest proposal for easily family get-togethers at Christmas: celebrate a airline hub cities! (She's kidding.) And journalist-turned-author Stephen Kinzer notes how even leftists are growing tired of the increasingly authoritarian actions of Nicarauguan revolutionary-turned-president Daniel Ortega.
Snice conservatives seem to be the ones having their childeren these days, as opposed to killing them, we only have to wait out the next generation to be rid of their poison self-centered ideologies.
Posted by: Carol | September 03, 2008 at 08:05 AM
Why would you expect McCain to support some of President Bush position on some of the issues they both are Republicans.
I'm so tired of 16 years of partisan politics, what happened to representing the will of the people.
I don't want main stream media trying influence the outcome of elections, just stick to the essential facts.
Posted by: Robertcs | September 03, 2008 at 08:01 AM
Just one more example of the media selling out to Liberal Democrats. There is very little fair journalism anymore. Most are for sale and the Democrats have bought them all up.
Posted by: Antonio | September 03, 2008 at 07:59 AM
I notice that the evangelicals (or what they call themselves these days),because Palin is against abbortion and sex ed. in schools are rooting for her. This is the same bunch (Souther Baptist,etc.) that will not allow a woman to be pastor of a church or to teach men in bible studies,sunday school,etc. So, it is OK for a woman to be VP. But what happens if old John dies? What hyposricy!
BJ Kuhn
Posted by: BJ Kuhn | September 03, 2008 at 07:58 AM
Selfrespecting women need to unite behind Sarah Palin and John McCain. The democrats have proven that their talk about equal rights for women is just that "talk". The democratic party had their chance with the most qualified candidate with the most popular votes, Hillary, ready, willing and able to accept the nomination as the most qualified democratic candidate this year. Instead the democrats nominated another male with no qualifications other than giving prepared speeches and running campaigns. That action was a slap in the face for women around this country. Simply put the democrats bypassed the most qualified candidate because she is a woman and proved that they are so against women that they will even nominate a totally unqualified candidate inorder to avoid nominating the "woman". Stand up for women and vote McCain/Palin 2008. In 2012 we the people I hope will be lucky enough to have Hillary running against Sarah for President.........at that point I will vote Hillary 2012.
Posted by: soupyet | September 03, 2008 at 07:57 AM
Reason "Why has the liberal media never gone after Obama..."
You must have no long term memory. Reminds me of someone with amnesia. Media has been going after all candidates, but while we're at it, let's discuss how the Republicans have gone after Obama. Palin fails at just about every point that the GOP has claimed Obama fell short. Palin is a joke, McCain choose a running mate based off of her female anatomy and her age. Time to get real on issues, time for all Americans to be given the same freedom. The Freedom to choose for themselves, choose which religion they want, choose when life begins, choose their own rights, while not trampling on the rights as others. McCain/Palin choose themselves over the rights given to the American People.
Posted by: Nicholas | September 03, 2008 at 07:56 AM
Senator McCain DID NOT place "the Nation First". when he selected Gov.Palin as his running mate .
If he had, he would have considered the ramifications of having an individual WITHOUT any Foreign experience as VP.
No one knows when thier time will come but if Senator McCain's time comes when he is President, Gov.Palin will be responisble for the future and lives of over 200,000,000 men,women and children.
Gov,Palin has never been exposed to any of the Foreign issues.
Without any exposure ,how will Gov, Palin be in the position to anwser that 3 AM call and make an immediate decision that can impact this country forever.
With the serious issues facing America today overseas, the 3AM call can happen at any time.
We need to be clear. The decision on Foreign policy is much more serious than doing line idea cuts in the budget or going after Special Interest Groups.
Making an incorrect decision on the Budget or Special Interest WILL NOT place the lives of 200,000,000 individuals on the line!!
Posted by: Ed G | September 03, 2008 at 07:55 AM
Thank God he picked Palin! How lucky can we Democrats get! He could have picked a Biden or maybe even better. Whenever I see them together, my eye always seems to be on her; she has much more appeal than Mc Cain. But when actual voting time comes in Nov. , there is no way I am oing to vote for her.
Posted by: Helmut Oesterling | September 03, 2008 at 07:53 AM
Lay off Sarah Palin, she's a decent person and could do Washington a lot of good. Sam Harris should go back in his hole.
Posted by: Nancy Combest | September 03, 2008 at 07:51 AM
To the LIberal Times: LA Division,
Condoms aren't the answer to everything, fools. What about the "choice" to say no in the first place? Oh that's right...forgot that most of you liberals think we humans are nothing more than animals incapable of taking responsiblity for our own actions. A baby isn't part of a women's body. It's a separate entity that is growing inside of her because she "chose" to have sex. Rape is the exception to the rule...most babies are conceived consensually. How about if before you freaks at the Times or your girlfriends get your next abortion, you get an ultrasound first. Times have changed, now we know the truth about when life starts and it's time to reverse Roe vs. Wade!
Posted by: Carol | September 03, 2008 at 07:51 AM
1) The biggest problem with McCain's judgement is timing: Palin will be fully vetted in the court of public opinion AFTER the convention. I am sure McCain’s timing is a mistake. At first it will be argued the press is being biased, which will just draw it out.
2) In presenting herself, Palin will necessarily inform us all that her effort is to specifically reform an unbelievably corrupt Alaskan Republican Party. Oops! That can't spin too well nationally can it? Also, goodbye Republican Ted Stevens' U.S. Senate seat.
3) Some fundamentalist Christians will the turn the page on her. Family values means being their for your kids, not just having them. Most Christians will perceive greater family values in the Obama family than Palin's and some fundamentalists will manage to realize that also. At the same time, the numbers of knee-jerk, anti-choice voters is going down. Younger evangelicals rank poverty and social injustice as a more significant issue.
Posted by: Thoren | September 03, 2008 at 07:45 AM
Palin was a very risky choice for McCain. I don't think she was correctly vetted, and was a last minute switch from another candidate. I feel it will turn out to be an extremely bad choice for McCain. Right now she is getting a great deal of publiciy, be it bad or good, it's publicity. If Republicans accept it's ok for her daughter to get pregnant at 17 and unmarried because the end situation was handled by marrying at 17 - they are hipocrites. Adding a shotgun marriage to this situation will only make matters worse.
Posted by: Lewis Baker | September 03, 2008 at 07:44 AM
Palin would be a breath of fresh air. Have you ever lived in Chicago with all its scandel. We as a nation have to clean our capital and it is not going to happen with a group from Chicago. He had over a 50 Ear marks in 3 years. That is not change its payoff.
Posted by: LW | September 03, 2008 at 07:44 AM
Goodness, she was the least educated, the least experienced and the one who more than any other woman is needed desperately by her family. How selfish of McCain and Palin herself. She has years and years to become Veep or Prez...NOW is the only time she can be there for her pregnant teen-age daughter and her 5 month old Down's syndrome baby. Some family values! Those children need their mom more than we need her right now.
Posted by: VictoriaM. | September 03, 2008 at 07:44 AM
You see none of this makes sense at all. Obama's mom was pregnant with him at 17, but you dont hear about that.
Obama's brother is living in africa on $25 a year, but you dont hear about that.
Obama bought a house from a convicted felon, then even expanded his plot of land by getting more land from rezko after the house purchase. But you wont hear about that either.
So tell me why again? I think these cases about Obama are MUCH MORE interesting than the Palin stories they are TRYING to bring up.
Lastly, How come they are comparing Palins experience to Obamas? Isnt that just the libeal media shooting themselves in the foot PROVING to themselves that Obama doesnt have enough experience!??
Posted by: Anthony | September 03, 2008 at 07:44 AM
One's got the feeling that this was a desperate move on Senator McCain and or the republican party to exploit the female. Senator Clinton, a female, was rallying a lot of attention on the Democratic side of the presidintal ticket so the republican party thinks that that's what America wants. It's not about black or white, male or female but what the candiate can bring to the ticket as far as domestic and foreign experience. Sarah Palin might be smart but there's a lot of other right wing consertive canadates with more Washington intelligence then her. Shame on them for thinking that were not smart enough to figure that out.
Posted by: TR | September 03, 2008 at 07:44 AM
Picking for VP a mother who seems not to have a clue about implementing her own conservative family values with her daughter, calls into question both her judgment and awareness and Mr. McCain's sanity. Also it is concerning that her radical right views play to the Neo-cons who would like nothing more than to continue the passion play of failed Reagan/Bush-I through Butchy-boy/Cheney policies until America is even a bigger disaster. To be sure McCain/Palin victory would signal the death of the "middle class" and accelerate America's march to third world status. The uber rich win and 300 million others go begging. It is embarrassing for me to say that I once was a Republican. But even stubborn old elephants can grow a brain when hit with a 2x4.
Posted by: B D Howard | September 03, 2008 at 07:43 AM
Sexism, my foot. I don't care much for Plain's family troubles, although anyone entering the national political sphere knows that their family connections will be scrutinized closely. I do care that McCain has picked someone with so little interest or experience with national issues. I do care that McCain has picked someone who appears to have ethics issues, and interest in book banning and association with an extreme anti-choice group that does not favor birth control or abortion in cases of rape or incest. There where plenty of other qualified women and men out there, and his decision to pick Palin was a poor one.
Posted by: Catherine | September 03, 2008 at 07:43 AM
McCain was brilliant to choose Palin. He looked at the US political map and saw that he needed to shake things up to get the states needed. A safe predictable pick would've ended the run and follow in BO's footsteps.
Gutsy, good call. She's the most succesful and respected governor in the US and has more experience and success to point to than Obama.
Posted by: Blake | September 03, 2008 at 07:43 AM
Palin is McCain's Harriet Myers... Where's the judgment?
Posted by: James in NC | September 03, 2008 at 07:43 AM
I suggest that Palin is quite certain of her decisions and accepting of the consequences. There are strong families to support the children and the new baby. I don't expect there will be a tragedy involved with the child-parents, they'll get married, they'll have money, and however their life turns out, the child will live and thrive.
To many, their circumstances are not at all unusual, money and family and kids and stuff going a little bit off.
Mostly, they don't like people who take a different view, and they don't want to have any part of it. Let the chips fall where they may.
Maybe. Dunno.
Posted by: Gerald Berke | September 03, 2008 at 07:43 AM
Just so I can understand liberal "logic"; explain to me 1) how Kennedy can murder a young woman and be re-elected 25 times as a Democratic senator, 2) how Robert Byrd can serve as a kleagle in the KKK and be the Democrats longest sitting senator 3) if a teenage kid of a Republican gets caught doing what virtually all teenagers have done - somehow her mother’s character, values, and ability to govern is called into question.
Is this the same "logic” that calls GWB a war monger when it seemed perfectly fine that Truman incinerated 300,000 civilians in an instant (Remember that liberal credo "the end does not justify the means") while Kennedy and Johnson killed millions in Vietnam?
Is this the same “logic” that caused Obama to pick Biden who received less than 900 votes and was the first candidate to drop out the Democratic primaries yet walk away from Hillary who had 18,000,000 votes?
Is this the same “logic” that required the networks to run stories and air the photos of the underwear laden prisoners at Abu grab 100 times more than the stories regarding the decapitated civilian prisoners of Al Qaeda?
Is this the same "logic" that says “we must keep people from developing the wilderness so only I can use them when I camp and hike”?
Is this the same "logic" that says we must do everything we can to save some obscure snail that nobody has ever or will ever see but it's perfectly fine to suck the brains out of unborn children in an effort to kill them and call it an a abortion?
Is this the same “logic” that says abstinence only sex education doesn’t work when virtually every girl who becomes pregnant had been taught endlessly about birth control meaning that that isn’t working either but you never seem to mention that in all your rants?
Is this the same “logic” that says liberalism is about individual freedom and the uncensored expression of one’s beliefs in an effort to make the country a better place but conservatives are ridiculed for practicing their own form of religion, expressing their opinions towards public education, the war, welfare, the death penalty, abortion, etc, etc, etc?
Is this the same “logic” that says health care is biased towards men yet men live on average 7 years less than woman?
Is this the same “logic” that espouses redistribution of wealth but never seems to get around to addressing investment of time, commitment of money, risk of losing everything, or endless liability?
Is this the same “logic” that demanded we not quarantine AIDS victims when the virus was first exposed in the early 80”s because it would be a violation of human rights, so instead 10’s of millions of additional people have been killed by the virus?
Posted by: Robt | September 03, 2008 at 07:41 AM
Why has the liberal media never gone after Obama like they have attacked Palin?
Answer: LIBERAL SEXISM
Posted by: reason | September 03, 2008 at 07:34 AM
Palin disgust me. As a republican she should not be not the ticket. It was a total screwup my mccain.
Posted by: Tony | September 03, 2008 at 07:34 AM
What worries me most about McCain/Palin ticket is their environmental policy (especially regarding drilling in the ANWR). I think it is evermore important for us, as consumers to support ‘green businesses’ that benefit the environment. For example, http://www.simplestop.net stops your postal junk mail and benefits the environment.
Posted by: Clark | September 03, 2008 at 06:57 AM