A Vice Presidental candidate thread.

You can think that, but it doesn't make it true. Some people are actually interested in this, and have read actual books and [/i]research[/i].

Wait. Do I need to define those terms for you?

firefly, thanks for the detailed and thoughtful response. I am always glad to see honest and reasoned responses, which is a breath of fresh air here.

First of all, I disagree that most women are feminists. Yes, they want equality and rights, but I don't believe this makes them a feminist. Yes, I have a narrower view of feminism.

Now, in regard to Palin, you are taking the feminist line that McCain is using Palin, that Palin is a relative unknown. Well, I would argue that several of his potential running mates, including men, were mostly unknowns. Romney is the best known, and not that well known by all voters, but all the others were virtual unknowns.That is often the case for vp picks. So if the unknown had been a man, is McCain using him because he is an unknown? Vp picks are picked to carry certain states, if that pick is popular there, so does that mean they are being used? Vp picks are picked for other reasons, but does that mean also they are being used? Sure, they are always in a sense used, all vp picks are being used, but they are being used for the things they bring to the table, popularity, ability to draw votes, ability, experience, appeal, character, all of the above. Palin is no different, except she also bring gender into the mix.

If anything, you prove my point. You are stereotyping women as always being pro-abortion, anti abstinence, etc. etc., which is not the case. At least Palin can now represent a large proportion of women that previously the feminist types have claimed to represent. Alot of people are tired of Hillary, firefly, just plain tired, and the mantra that she represents all women is a myth.

Same thing with the black community, yes probably 90% of the black community will vote Obama, as they do always any Democrat in recent decades, but I keep hoping that someday they will wake up and realize the Dems do not represent them, that conservatives also can and do represent their best interests. MLK was a Republican, for starters.

As for Palin, she has been a mayor, now a governor, which in my opinion makes her more qualified than Clinton. Palin has actually been out there doing something, managing real things, directing people, running a city, running a state. I would advise you not to take this woman lightly. I am still learning about her, and I am not ready to say she is wonderful, but this is the type of woman I am looking for, a doer, not a talker and a political activist feminist like Hillary. Palin has just as much potential if not more than Hillary to change how people think about the abilities of women.

In regard to abstinence and her daughter being pregnant. Abstinence works, but she jumped the gun and became active, but most importantly, it appears she is taking responsibility like an adult, and did not kill her offspring, and apparently will marry the father of the child. Far more admirable than going to an abortion clinic and having a "doctor" exterminate the life. I don't think this issue can be used by the Democrats to any advantage. If they try to make this an issue, along with abstinence, I think it will backfire on them. Abstinence is the most honorable, but if you fail at that, then taking responsibility is the next best proof of being responsible and an adult. Everything else is less honorable, just my opinion. The primary purpose of sexual activity is procreation, and that is what I believe. I believe in birth control measures, but not as an excuse for young people to routinely engage in irresponsible activity, and for that to be taught and encouraged, no. If that is peoples choice, fine, its a free country, but at least the schools should not be teaching this to every person's kid with their tax payer money.

Don't try to make something relatively simple into something complicated, as if only an intellectual that has read numerous books on the subject knows what a feminist is.

That's the thing - it isn't simple, Okie. You only think it is.

Republicans have a habit of claiming extremely complex situations are in fact simple, and then proving that they don't know what the hell they are talking about.

Cycloptichorn

My first choice for GOP VP was Kate Hutchinson, and was a bit surprised that our candidate chose Alaska's Palin instead. Surprised, but supportive. I trust that our candidate has carefully considered the alternatives, before exercising his right to choose a running mate. McCain's political experience and life have consistently shown him to make decisions based on what is best for the country. His courage in accepting risk to pursue what he believes is best is far too rare amongst career politicians. Gov. Palin is a risky choice, but McCain has seen in her qualities that he believes will make her an asset to the campaign and later to the country.

I believe she will have very wide appeal to the GOP base, and with independent voters, both male and female, across the country. In many ways she is the female equivalent to "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington". American voters have a soft spot for candidates who are just "plain folks". Palin is the least professional politician to run on the National Ticket probably since Andrew Johnson ran as Lincoln's VP during the Civil War. She has every appearance of being a political outsider, the citizen next door, even more so than Obama.

Neither of the them have the experience even close to the GOP Presidential candidate, or the Democratic VP choice. The Presidency isn't, or at least shouldn't be entirely, a learn on the job position. With a successful GOP bid for the White House, McCain as President will bring all of his experience and devotion to the office. VP Palin will be his apprentice. With an Obama Presidency it would be the VP who would have the unpleasant job of persuading his boss not to make wrong headed decisions. Obama is a young man, and may in a second term finally be ready to lead. Some voters may be concerned that McCain will die in office because he's an older person. He's released his medical records, and there are no danger signals there. Men these days are living longer and more active lives than in the past. The risk that Palin will become President as quickly as John Tyler did is very low.

The most important and impressive thing I've seen so far about Palin is her character and courage to initiate an investigation aimed at malpractice and fraud on the part of senior GOP politicians in Alaska. The risk to her political career for doing that was huge, yet she did the right thing anyway. She has accepted responsibility in her political life, and demonstrated that she can lead. There is about her an air of authenticity, and she is genuinely "of the People". She and her family are truly of the middle-class. She is the sort of person who would work well with McCain. Both have demonstrated the character and courage to put their values above Party and personal gain.

I believe this is going to be a very interesting campaign, but in the end I expect the nation will be well led with President McCain and Vice-President Palin occupying the White House. Now we need to recover the Congressional seats needed to effectuate the changes proposed in the GOP platform.

A vote of support from you, Ash, is the same as a denouncement of the candidate. It seems that the blinders you applied to the Bush admin are still lingering.

Cycloptichorn

I enjoyed your post, Asherman, and I think your thoughts are similar to what I have, for which I put in different words. Let us both hope Palin turns out to be as authentic as we hope she is, and that this risky choice turns out to be a genius move by McCain.

I was aware you brought up Hutchinson before, as a very good candidate, but if Palen turns out as advertised, she has the executive experience that somebody in Congress does not have. Evidently she is no pushover, she may actually have the toughness that Hillary supposedly has. In this regard, McCain has been accused of using Palin, but if initial assessments are correct, Palin is not one that is used, she has a mind of her own and will exercise it.

Okie, what 'initial assessments' are you basing your judgment on?

Cycloptichorn

I don't think the polls back you up on this. Rather the opposite, in fact.

Don't try to make something complicated into something simple. There are lots of different kinds of women who fit the word "feminist," which, judging from what you have written, you don't understand in the least.

okie, thank you for appreciating the fact that I do give a lot of thought to my replies. I also give a lot of thought to your replies, and I do feel you are being honest as well. I enjoy actually discussing things, and I enjoy it all the more when the discussion is with someone who does not agree with me. I do respect what you have to say.

But, okie, the Republican talking point that Palin has good "executive experience" because she was a mayor, and is now a governor, overlooks the very small scale and scope of her activities in those jobs. She was not the mayor of NYC, or Boston, or Tulsa--she was mayor of a tiny town with about 6,700 people--not exactly a high-powered or high-pressure job. Similarly, being governor of a sparcely populated state like Alaska is not quite the same as being the governor of California, in terms of the complexities the job presents, the diverse interests that must be balanced, the budgetary problems, etc. She does not have impressive credentials as an outstanding "executive" that balance out her deficits in terms of dealing with national issues or foreign policy issues. And apart from her stint as mayor, and two years as governor, she has not done much else of note.

Forget Hillary Clinton, compare Palin with Kay Bailey Hutchison, the senator from Texas--a very impressive Republican woman--or Olympia Snowe, the senator from Maine--another very impressive Republican woman. These are women with extensive experience, excellent national reputations, and proven ability. Were either of them on the ticket, no one would be complaining they were unqualified or that they represented tokenism. Palin is no where in their league in terms of her background.

To say that being a senator isn't a "real job", or that being a mayor or governor is better experience than being a senator, to prepare one for the presidency, or vice presidency, is just ridiculous. Senators have to perform executive duties, they manage staffs, and they make decisions all the time, particularly when they cast votes on legislation. To say Palin is better qualified than Obama (because he's only a senator) is also to say that she's better qualified than McCain (since he's just a senator too). You can't really feel she's better qualified to be president than McCain, do you? But that's where your line of reasoning leads.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I do consider Palin and Biden in terms of their fitness to assume the presidency if need be. And that is because three VPs in my lifetime have suddenly had to assume the presidency. It is a definite concern because of McCain's age, but it is always a concern for me. And to those who say she's a fast learner and can learn on the job, I would remind them that John Tyler became president (following the death of William Henry Harrison) after being vice president for only one one month. Sometimes you don't have the time to learn, since you never know what twists of fate might occur. You really do have to be prepared from day one--particularly given the times in which we live. Palin is not prepared to lead the country if need be.




I actually agree with you about abstinence being the best option regarding teenage sexuality. I think teens, particularly those under 18, should be discouraged from being sexually active, for a lot of reasons. But the same way that Palin's daughter didn't practice abstinence, a lot of other kids can't, or don't want, to control their impulses. So birth control information and access to birth control methods, as well as sex education, is absolutely necessary to prevent unwanted pregnancies as well as sexually transmitted diseases. And, yes, I want the info taught in public schools, with my taxpayer dollars, because I feel every child is entitled to the information, and they might not get it elsewhere, or they might pick up inaccurate information. Eliminating unwanted pregnacies saves taxpayers a great deal of money, so the investment in sex education should be seen as money well spent. Teaching about something, and providing factual information, does not encourage sexual activity. Knowledge is not dangerous--ignorance is.

I do not agree that sex is only for procreation, but you are certainly entitled to your beliefs on that score, okie.

While I am firmly pro-choice, and believe that legal, medically safe abortions must be available to all women, my own personal feelings on the matter are quite complex. I do not know that I would have ever chosen to personally have an abortion, but I do not wish to impose my beliefs on other women. Every woman must make the choice for herself--I just want the choice of abortion available to all of them. I do not judge women who choose to have abortions, and I do not judge women who choose other options.

What puzzles me is that so many people who are "pro-life" also support capital punishment, which I do not support. If murder is wrong, it does not become right when done in the name of the state. Seems to me if you profess the value of all life, you should not support capital punishment, or even killing in wars. Sometimes, killing in self defense is necessary, including in time of war, but that still doesn't make it right in my mind. That is basically how I feel about abortion. Sometimes, for some women, it is necessary, and it may be viewed as a form of self defense. A woman may chose to abort precisely because she does value and cherish life, as paradoxical as that might seem. It's not up to me to put limits on what other women chose to do with their bodies, and I do see a non-viable fetus as part of the woman's body. I am not pro-abortion, I am pro-choice.

firefly wrote-



There has been a large increase in access to birth control methods and education in this matter in the last fifty years. Has that resulted in a decrease in unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

Don't you think that the political acceptability of permissive behaviour is the biggest factor? I think that access to birth control methods and sex education has left a lot of young girls defenceless with the inevitable consequences. I think that the availabilty of abortion causes more abortions.



How do you define "sex"? How do you define "woman"?

Abstinence about sex and liquor just doesn't work. Even when people use religion to advance that idea.

Does anybody really think that "abstinence of war" will happen? Want to buy a bridge I have to sell in Montana? Cheap.

spendius, it was the access to birth control pills, coupled with greater social permissiveness in the 60's (anyone else remember "free love") which seems to have facillitated the greatest shift in sexual behaviors, particularly among women. Oral contraceptives gave women a very reliable means of birth control that was completely under their control. It also allowed for more spontaneous sex, since it wasn't necessary to have to insert or use any other device prior to having sex. Coupled with a shift in the mores, the notion of maintaining virginity until marriage just gradually faded in importance, particularly as women started delaying marriage until later ages, and as they began seeking careers. Feeling free to have sex, just as men did, without a double standard operating, was also an outgrowth of the women's lib movement in the 60's. But, without oral contraceptives, it is not likely that women would have felt this freedom. The "pill" liberated them from worrying about unwanted pregnancies.

So, from my point of view, spendius, you are quite wrong in saying that access to birth control methods has left young women defenseless. Oral contraceptives still provide a high degree of protection from pregnancy and they do not require the cooperation of the male partner--it is a method the woman controls. So the woman is better protected now than she was 50 years ago. Diaphragms, which are also under a woman's control, are pretty reliable, but must be inserted in advance and must be removed later. But no woman has to be defenseless against unwanted pregnancies if she faithfully uses a highly reliable method of birth control.

Obviously, the more unmarried people who are having sex, the more STD's will start appearing in the population--and that's what began happening in the 70's. Birth control pills and diaphragms will not control or protect against those. For that you do need a condom, and that requires the cooperation of the male partner. If the male is unwilling, the young woman (or any woman) must choose between the risks of losing her boyfriend, or the risks of contracting a STD. Too many women make the wrong choice. Too many men risk their own lives, and their partner's lives by refusing to use a condom.

Of course the availability of abortions results in an increase in abortions. Before abortions were legal in the U.S., women had a choice between going to back alley butchers or travelling outside the U.S. to obtain an abortion. I daresay that legalization affected the abortion rate somewhat, but women still sought abortions before they were legal. If anything, there was greater shame for an unmarried woman to be pregnant in the era before abortions were legal in the U.S.--so women were motivated to seek illegal abortions or to travel to countries where abortions were legal or more readily available.

Our culture has become more permissive over the past 50 years in many ways. We are surrounded by sexual imagery and sexual provocation now. We sexualize the appearance of girls at a younger and younger age. Even if we advocate sexual abstinence to young people now, the general culture sends a different message. The shame and stigma of premarital sex for women has pretty much vanished. Now a young woman (or a young man) who trys to remain a virgin may feel like an oddball. But all of these changes were due to a confluence of factors, and not to any one thing.

If you don't know what sex is, spendi, I'm not telling you.

okie wrote: "In regard to abstinence and her daughter being pregnant. Abstinence works, but she jumped the gun and became active, but most importantly, it appears she is taking responsibility like an adult, and did not kill her offspring, and apparently will marry the father of the child. Far more admirable than going to an abortion clinic and having a "doctor" exterminate the life."

When she made that decision to "jump the gun" and become sexually active, why didn't she and her partner take responsibility--like adults should--and use birth control? The father of the child, Levi Johnston, wrote the following on his myspace page:

"I'm a f - - -in' redneck who likes to snowboard and ride dirt bikes. But I live to play hockey. I like to go camping and hang out with the boys, do some fishing, shoot some s- - - and just f - - -in' chillin' I guess."

And:

"Ya f - - - with me I'll kick ass."

And, acknowledging that he had a girlfriend, he stated, "I don’t want kids."

Because of the hard work of all the social reformers who came before her, Bristol Palin has a choice. It is her choice to continue the pregnancy or to terminate the pregnancy. It's a deeply personal choice that belongs to her. No one is denigrating her choice to give birth. On the other hand, Bristol Palin is planning to marry an immature boy who has openly stated that he doesn't want kids. How does a pregnant teenage girl's pending marriage to a boy who doesn't want kids equate to the responsible "adult" thing to do?

The WaPo is now reporting that Sarah Palin and her husband were part owners of a business that was shut down by the state for noncompliance with state regulations.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/02/palin_scrubbing_car_wash.html

Is it possible that Palin had a worse day today, then yesterday?

Oh, I think it is. I truly do.

Cycloptichorn

firefly wrote-



Oh--I know what it is ff. Scientifically. I asked if you knew.

I will try to get round to the rest of your post tomorrow and have a go at explaining why I think you have misunderstood mine.

Palin not only failed to record that business in running for office as required by law, but was shut down for noncompliance. Such nice christians running for one of our country's highest office.

Excellent example for her children too!

Well, Bristol Palin's boyfriend will be joining the family at the Republican convention.

Levi Johnston to join Palin family at convention
By RACHEL D'ORO, AP

WASILLA, Alaska -The boyfriend of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's unwed, pregnant daughter will join the family of the Republican vice presidential candidate at the GOP convention in St. Paul, Minn.
Levi Johnston's mother said her 18-year-old son left Alaska on Tuesday morning to join the Palin family at the convention where Sen. John McCain will officially receive the Republican nomination for president. The boy's mother, Sherry Johnston, said there had been no pressure put on her son to marry 17-year-old Bristol Palin and the two teens had made plans to wed before it was known she was pregnant.
"This is just a bonus," Johnston said.
The young man's presence could set off a media frenzy around the young couple as photographers and cameramen scramble for pictures of the two teenagers. On Monday, Palin and her husband, Todd, said their 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, planned to have the baby and wed a young man identified only as Levi. The family asked the media to respect the young couple's privacy as has been the tradition with children of candidates.
Sarah Palin is scheduled to address the convention Wednesday night and traditionally her family would join her at the conclusion of her speech.
Sherry Johnston said she was worried about her son dealing with all the attention. She said it was difficult enough for teenagers to deal with any pregnancy, having the entire nation watching made it worse.
Levi Johnston, a high school hockey player for Wasilla High School, is not listed on the team roster for 2008-2009, and his mother wouldn't say if he graduated. She said simply he's no longer a student and any further information would have to come from him.
The intense media scrutiny has stunned this suburban community about 40 miles north of Anchorage, with reporters camping out near the Johnston home.
"This is out of my league," Sherry Johnston said. "I'm just a country gal and I want to keep it that way."
She spoke Tuesday while standing in the driveway leading to her pale gray, two-story home situated on a densely wooded country lane. The home, like many in Alaska is adorned with moose and caribou antlers outside.
Many social conservatives have rallied behind Gov. Palin and her family's troubles. The McCain campaign has said the Palins are like any other American family and that "life happens."

-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Bristol's pregnancy is one thing, but teenage marriage, in these circumstances is quite another.
I find it very hard to believe that this young man, and perhaps even Bristol, do not feel pressured into getting married. Judging by the quotes from his My Space page, he doesn't sound anywhere near being ready for marriage. But they are going to parade him out as part of the happy family portrait.

These are the "family values" the religious right espouse?