Tag: Issues

Palin: A Candidate To Nowhere

John McCain’s running mate has been called a lot of things, but the one that seems to be sticking, at least for now is the one of “Reformer”.  Ok, she is a woman, a working Mom, but that is about where all the positive stuff stops.  But yet, the media is trying to saddle her with a title, but no one is sure what that titla will be, at least for now.

Like the “infamous” bridge she leads nowhere.

She like McCain hates earmarks but……

Palin, in fact, requested $198 million in federal earmarks in February, including such expenses as $487,000 to fight obesity in Alaska and $4 million to develop recreational trails.

The bridge, which was to be largely paid for with a $220 million federal allocation to connect a tiny island in her state to the mainland, has been Exhibit No. 1 in claims by Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign that Ms. Palin is a maverick reformer, ready to change Washington.

Although numerous news media organizations found that she supported the bridge until she turned against it.

And then there is her “marvelous” tenure as governor of Alaska.  But……….

• • Palin’s practice of billing the state for expenses incurred while staying in her own home.

• • Revelations that as mayor of Wasilla, she hired a Washington lobbyist to help her bring $27 million in earmarks to the small town.

• • And according to a profile of Palin that appeared in the Sept. 13 issue of Newsweek, Palin has given her friends jobs and appointed lobbyists to oversee industries they used to represent.

“Her record shows her to be, in many ways, a typical politician who rewards her friends and punishes her enemies,” the article said.

She, Palin, has the media all a flutter and women chomping at the bit, but so far nothing has been showed to make her a perfect candidate other than she is a woman.  She a candidate in name only, nothing has been given that show that she is the real thing.  Just a lot of clap trap from surrogates and pundits.

She is proving to be a typical Repub candidate…all flash, no substance.  A few cute slogans, but thin on issues.  She makes an excellent attack dog because anyone that refutes what she says will be labeled a sexist. In this case, gender is an asset and one that McCain needed badly.  Why?  He does not have to talk on the issues, he can keep driving home the patriotic, hero kissing,  tax cutting,  oil loving,  bovine fecal matter that IS the Republican Party .

The Election Is Not About The Issues

Rick Davis made the remarks to editors at The Washington Post, which published them Tuesday.

“This election is not about issues,” Davis said. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.”

Davis accused Obama of “misdirection” Wednesday in his attempts to criticize him for the comment.

“One of the points I made is that not only are issues of economics and trade and foreign policy and education and others very important to voters, but it is the composite of all that stuff, how the candidates … feel about those things and also their views on leadership and character and their values that will be the conglomerate of what makes the final decision for most voters,” he said on a conference call.

Obama is expected to use Davis’ Post quote as an example of how the McCain campaign is attacking him as a “celebrity” as a way to distract voters from issues. The campaign could hammer this theme in the coming days, potentially with TV ads.

“We appreciate Senator McCain’s campaign manager finally admitting that his campaign is not in fact about the issues the American people care about, which is exactly the kind of cynical old politics people are ready to change,” Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said in a statement. “Senator Obama will continue to make this election about the big issues.”

This should not be a surprise, with Repubs it is seldom about the issues that face Americans.  The really cool part is that they can convince the American people to vote against their own best interests.  That is an accomplishment that Repubs can be proud of and something for the polisci books to consider.

Dems Will Come A-Calling

Now that McCain has gotten his running mate and the public is about to puke at the endless BS, the Dems will be looking for chinks in their armor.  IMO, the first one should be that Palin passed a windfall profits tax in Alaska and the treasury is swelling with cash.  A good place to start.
— Palin didn’t back McCain in the primary. She stayed neutral in Alaska’s January primary — perhaps on account of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR. “A lot of us are sitting back and waiting to see if there will be new players in there,” she said in 2007. “That’s probably why that box that says ‘none of the above’ is so popular right now.”

— Mayoral performance. Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident. She argues that the debt was needed to fund improvements.

— Stevens and Young, redux. Palin has distanced herself from the state’s two most popular politicians, but both appeared at Palin fundraisers during her 2006 gubernatorial bid.

— The environment. As governor, Palin vetoed wind power and clean coal projects, including a 50-megawatt wind farm on Fire Island and a clean coal facility in Healy that had been mired in a dispute between local and state governments.

— And, maybe, censorship. According to the Frontiersman newspaper, Wasilla’s library director, Mary Ellen Emmons, said that Palin asked her outright if she “could live with censorship of library books.” Palin later dismissed the conversation as a “rhetorical” exercise.

Just a few suggestions for the media.

Candidates And Energy

I found this chart in the Detroit Free Press and wanted to post it to help my readers understand where their candidate may be on the issue energy–at least for now. These two flip and flop more than a fish out of water.

BARACK OBAMA ISSUE JOHN McCAIN
Send out stimulus checks of $300 per family

.

 What he’d do now if he were president Suspend the 18.4-cent a gallon federal gas tax.
Opposed to offshore drilling, saying it offers no short-term benefits and doesn’t address energy issues; opposed to drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. On domestic drilling Wants to lift ban on domestic offshore drilling to reduce dependence on foreign oil; opposed to drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Wants more aggressive investigation into speculation and reforms; wants energy traded on regulated markets

.

 On oil speculation Supports government investigation and punishment for illegal actions; wants reform of oil futures markets.
Supports taxing companies selling oil at more than $80 a barrel, with money going to energy programs; wants repeal of tax breaks for oil industry

.

 On taxing windfall profits of oil companies Opposed, says it hurts domestic production and investment, increasing dependence on foreign oil.
Focused on national energy policy aimed at ending dependence on foreign oil but says states should set speed limits. On reducing speed limits to reduce energy use Supports exploring all conservation options but says decisions must be made in consultation with states, industry and consumers.
Create $150-billion investment fund used in part to advance technology and commercialize plug-in hybrids and produce new biofuels; double fuel standards for vehicles in 18 years; mandate that all new vehicles have flex-fuel capability by 2013. On autos Promises up to $5,000 tax credit for purchase of low- to zero-carbon emissions car; promote flex-fuel technology; offer $300-million prize for battery that can make current plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles commercially viable; enforce fuel standards.
Create investment fund to reduce oil consumption by 10 million barrels a day by 2030 through technology, including clean coal; favors market-based system to cut pollution; says nuclear plant safety must be addressed. On what’s next Commit $2 billion to clean coal technology; push for 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030; use market-based system to cut greenhouse gases; supports research in advanced energy alternatives.

Obama And Welfare Reform

Obama’s transformation from opponent to champion of welfare reform is the latest in a series of moves to the center. Since capturing the Democratic nomination, Obama has altered his stances on Social Security taxes, meeting with rogue leaders without preconditions, and the constitutionality of Washington, D.C.’s, sweeping gun ban.

The shift in Obama’s rhetoric on welfare reform has proceeded in stages. When Clinton was poised to sign welfare reform while running for re-election in 1996, Obama called it “disturbing.” A decade later, as an underdog running for president against Clinton’s wife, he spent 2007 avoiding the subject. By the time Obama emerged as the Democratic frontrunner in the spring of 2008, he began leaving the impression that he was for it all along.

When implementation of welfare reform came before the Illinois state senate in 1997, Obama cited a lack of job training, insufficient oversight, and provisions blocking legal immigrants from receiving benefits as his reasons for opposing a federal welfare overhaul imposing work requirements and time limits.

While campaigning for president in 2007, Obama refused on two occasions to say if he would have signed the same welfare-reform bill approved by the husband of his top rival.

By glossing over his early opposition to welfare reform, Obama is stepping closer to the political mainstream. But by undergoing this transformation only once it became politically convenient, Obama’s critics will charge that he puts calculation ahead of conviction.

A Sign Of The Times?

I have just about enough on the Obama campaign sign that looked similar to the presidential seal.  I even got an email that said that he would replace the existing seal when he is elected.  Do you people really believe this crap?

It echoed the official presidential seal, with a Latin version of his “Yes, we can” motto replacing “E pluribus unum” and his rising-sun campaign logo replacing the bald eagle’s Stars and Stripes shield. It was on Obama’s lectern when he spoke at a Democratic governors meeting. The GOP chided him, and national news organizations pounced on the story.

The roar about this is just silly.  What about the stylized flag images used in campaign signs?  Does this mena the the seal of an office is more important than the symbol of the country?  Personally, I do not give a crap!

To me this whole uproar is from a group whose candidate is so thin on “real” issues that they try to find anything to change the subject.  Personally, I want to hear where the candidates stand on the issues and the solutions that they propose to the problems facing Americans.

Why Democrats Lose

This is an interesting turn that is covered in  George Lakoff’s new book, “The Political Mind”.

Lakoff blames “neoliberals” and their “Old Enlightenment” mentality for the Democratic Party’s weakness. They think they can win elections by citing facts and offering programs that serve voters’ interests. When they lose, they conclude that they need to move farther to the right, where the voters are.

This is all wrong, Lakoff explains. Neuroscience shows that pure facts are a myth and that self-interest is a conservative idea. In a “New Enlightenment,” progressives will exploit these discoveries. They’ll present frames instead of raw facts. They’ll train the public to think less about self-interest and more about serving others. It’s not the platform that needs to be changed. It’s the voters.

The basis of Lakoff’s theory is simple: the mind is the brain. Any connection that forms between your thoughts also forms between your neurons. As you internalize a metaphor, a circuit in your brain “physically constitutes the metaphor.” This parallel development continues as mental complexity increases. “Narratives are brain structures,” he proposes.

The general idea makes sense: brain and mind are dual aspects of the same thing. But Lakoff seems to forget that the language of mental construction is itself a metaphor. He describes how synapses are strengthened, neurons “wire together,” “neural binding” fuses “permanent circuits” and a worldview solidifies through “long-term bindings to the core.” With these elaborations, he mechanizes the brain-mind relationship. The brain’s structure and dynamics don’t just embody thought, he says; they physically constrain it.

To Lakoff, this explains why conservatives win elections. They manipulate us more effectively. They’ve been “preparing the seedbed of our brains with their high-level general principles so that when ‘tax relief’ was planted, their framing could take root and sprout.” And “as a result, progressive messages don’t take root.”

And there is the key to wining elections–manipulation!

Women Switch To Obama

I realize that this may not be the best post for some to read, but it happens.

Marilyn Authenreith, a mother of two in North Carolina, felt strongly about supporting Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary.

But once the former first lady quit the race, Authenreith switched allegiance to Barack Obama, mainly because she thinks that he — unlike Republican John McCain — will push for universal healthcare.

Now that the Democratic marathon is over, Clinton supporters like Authenreith are siding heavily with Obama over McCain, polls show. And Obama has taken a wide lead among female voters, belying months of political chatter and polls of primary voters suggesting that disappointment over Clinton’s defeat might block the Illinois senator from enjoying his party’s historic edge among women.

The rancor peaked two weeks ago with televised images of furious Clinton loyalists protesting a Democratic Party meeting in Washington to settle a dispute over Florida and Michigan delegates.

“There are women still struggling with a real sense of grief that Hillary is not the nominee,” said Maren Hesla, who runs campaign programs for EMILY’s List, a group that promotes female candidates who support abortion rights. But that sense “will grow smaller with every day that passes from the nomination battles.”
Aides suggested that McCain’s support for a gas tax holiday, a hawkish foreign policy and steps against climate change would appeal to many women.

But in a year that strongly favors Democrats, McCain faces an uphill battle to cut into Obama’s advantage among women, who made up more than half of the voters in recent presidential elections.

“Women are voting for Obama because they dislike [President] Bush, they dislike McCain, they dislike the war, and they’re upset about the economy, and those facts override any concerns about the Clinton-Obama primaries,” Democratic pollster Mark Mellman said.
In the days since Clinton abandoned the race and endorsed him, the political arm of Planned Parenthood and other women’s groups have rallied behind Obama and joined forces to attack McCain. Among other things, they have highlighted McCain’s opposition to abortion rights. The Republican’s moderate image, they say, has misled many women into thinking he supports abortion rights.
“Women see themselves as more economically vulnerable than men, more likely recipients of the social safety net at some point in their lives, and they see a larger role for government,” said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University.

An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found a wide gap last week: Women favored Obama over McCain, 52% to 33%. The survey also found that voters who cast ballots for Clinton in the Democratic primaries preferred Obama over McCain, 61% to 19%.

I had asked several times, why women would vote for McCain after Clinton suspended her campaign.  Most of the trash I received had not to do with why they would switch just that most were pissed at the Clinton loss.  At least now I have a better grasp at what is going on with women voters.  But if one does not agree–I am listening.

Voters Get Info From Net

This could answer many questions.  But if the voter is not looking to understand but rather to reinforce some bias then this is a terrible turn of events.

A new study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project shows Internet technologies that are hot in the world of consumer goods sales are also working for those seeking the Oval Office.

The Pew report found nearly half of all Americans used the Internet, e-mail or mobile text messaging in ways relating to the primary campaigns this spring. Pew also found the percentage of adult Americans who went online daily to get political news or information more than doubled since the last presidential election, increasing to 17 percent from 2004’s level of 8 percent.

The message for Internet-naive candidates: Get onboard and sell yourself via the Web.

Another big online activity among those interested in the campaigns and those doing the campaigning was social networking. Pew figures 10 percent of Americans used sites such as Facebook or MySpace “to gather information or become involved” in the primaries.

Another Pew finding: People have become more comfortable doing money transactions online and that equated, in the primaries, to donating funds to their candidates of choice. Six percent donated online this spring, 4 percent more than in 2004, Pew determined.

Online advertising expert Michael Bassik, VP of interactive marketing at MSHC Partners, said that while the Pew report confirms the 2008 primaries saw extraordinary use of the Internet by interested people, the candidates might have missed the boat when it comes to advertising.

“When you look at the fact that nearly half of all adults got information about the primary through new media and compare that with fact that the candidates collectively spent less than 2 percent of their ad budgets to advertise on the Internet, clearly there is a tremendous disconnect between the amount of information people want to receive from the Internet and the amount of information candidates deliver to these audiences,” said Bassik.

This is good and this is bad–if the voters is truly searching for answer then this is an excellent turn, but if they are just looking to find worthless info that will increase their hatred or their bias–then this is not so damn good.  A personal note is that I have done a bit of impromptu polling and I would say that most voters are “low information voters”, which is a polite way of saying something derogatory, but beyond that, I have found that most that I have talked with have been looking for anything that will reinforce their bias.

White Men And Obama

Recently I saw a poll that said that white men do not relate to Obama and his background and values.  I read it twice and still would like to know what that means.

Is that a racial thing?  Is it because he grew up in a mixed race family?  What are the values that they cannot relate to?

I did an impromptu poll on this and found that the about 100 people I asked about Obama, not one had a good reason why they did not like Obama as a candidate.  I got everything from he is a Muslim to he is a socialist.  None of which is true, but NO ONE takes the time to check so for that reason I feel that is because he is a black man or people would spend a little time checking out the candidate.