Synchronized debating

Think you've heard it before? You probably have! "You really have to pay attention to words." - John McCain

Get the latest news satire and funny videos at 236.com.

This is a fascinating video for several reasons. Certainly, John McCain and Barack Obama have reiterated their talking points time and time again, but this video shows just how carefully the language of said points was crafted and learned. As much as we make fun of Sarah Palin for being front-loaded information, there's no denying that sometimes, that's what happens in politics.

A politician is a carefully groomed and crafted persona. We've talked often about codes: John McCain is the Seasoned War Hero, Barack Obama is the Young, Bright Upstart. The way that these two men talk (and express their political views) fits into these crafted niches.

We've talked about the inherent mistrust in American politics. Of course, people don't want to feel like they're being lied to or fooled by someone, but most voters want that crafted, calm persona. When Howard Dead screamed from the depths of his gut, voters (and the media) were scared, or at least surprised. This scream, this man - is that what a voter would remember in times of crisis? Did Americans want Dean's "finger on the button" as it were? The answer is clearly no. Americans want the politician whom they view as safe, level-headed, and consistent. Where does this aura of security and power come from? Does it stem from natural charisma groomed by handlers who know what Americans want to hear and see? What codes Americans want to "read"?

Repetition increases memorization. The more times a voter hears something, the more likely they are to remember it. Is that why politicians say the same things in almost the same way, time and time again? Or is it a function of the opposite process: politicians remember the way policies were repeated to them before speeches, and thus the words come out the same way each time.

The Onion and media bias

At least The Onion is an equal opportunity comedy outlet:


Cindy McCain Claims She's Just Like Any Other Female Human


Obama Undertakes Presidential Internship To Ease Concerns About His Lack Of Experience

Cindy McCain is a robot, John McCain is old, Barack Obama is inexperienced but eager. We've all seen these codes before.

Media Bias

So, almost two months down the road, does this article still hold true?

Since the beginning of the semester, the topic of media bias has come up often, whether we're talking about Obama/McCain, Biden/Palin, Clinton/Palin...the comparisons could go on and on. Who is the media really looking out for? To whom are they favorable? Of whom are they suspicious?

In some ways the aforementioned article speaks of an out of touch liberal media that is suspicious of any journalist who leans to the right. Conversely, the same article could be taken at face value and thus reveal a conservative bias in the press.

Just last night I had a discussion with a friend about the controversial unairbrushed photo of Palin on the cover of Newsweek a few weeks back. He asked me if Newsweek had a notable liberal bias, and if Palin knew when she was being photographed that her pictures would remain as is and be used "against her" to quote him. I mused that Newsweek was probably trying to sell magazines and create an eyeopening, interesting cover, and that the article critical of Palin was followed by a pro-Palin article by Republican spin-master Karl Rove.

But, honestly, I'm not sure. How much of what the media says is based on bias? And what sort of bias? Liberal bias? Conservative? Bias towards whichever version of the story is the truth? Which version will sell more magazines? Alignment with the writer's gender, race, social background?

Bias can be based on motives other than political. The trick is looking out for it. I guess that this view circles back to our discussion of social codes. Often, the public is naturally suspicious of people in the media, ex David Letterman, Karl Rove, Lou Dobbs. We expect people to have biases, which is a bias in and of itself.

John F. Kennedy campaign ad

Barack Obama's grandparents: II

Obama recently suspended his campaign to visit his ailing grandmother in Hawaii, via a 767 jet. This Huffington Post article has an interesting video that addresses this expenditure in response to Palin's $150,000 makeover. Truly, comparing the two and declaring Obama's spending more frivolous is one of the more callus attacks I've seen from either side.

Speaking of ads...

I was watching CNN this afternoon and they had a spot on "What Is a Negative Advertisement?" Are the words misleading? Can ads that are factually accurate be negative? To discuss this point, they brought on a McCain strategist and an Obama strategist. Of course, since the two were bickering the entire time the segment seemed like one big negative ad against both candidates. Negativity is the nature of politics. If you can't win on your own merits, then become the lesser of two evils by slandering your opponent. It's unfortunate, but it's true. It seems that few Americans are actively politically informed and will seek out "the truth." Many will grab onto a few chunks of information regarding a candidate or campaign. Barack Obama is a terrorist? Well, ok then, John McCain it is! By increasing the amount of negative information known about your opponent, one is more likely to get some of those pieces to stick with the less informed members of the voting populace.

This is an interesting twist on a negative ad against negative ads:



The Museum of the Moving Image website has some fascinating history about how campaign advertisements started:

The idea for the spots came from Madison Avenue advertising executive Rosser Reeves, who had created the M&M "melts in your mouth, not in your hands" campaign. Reeves convinced Eisenhower that spot ads placed immediately before or after such popular TV programs as I Love Lucy would reach more viewers, and at a much lower cost, than half-hour speeches.

Take a look at one of the very first 30-second campaign advertisements from 1952. There's even the beginnings of the negative ad meme in there with the Truman donkey:

Sarah Palin: What does the Vice President do again?

I bet that most of us remember this:



It appears that Sarah Palin still doesn't know what the VP does. In her defense, she was explaining the role of the VP to a third grader, but still, she's pretty much wrong. I've been watching this story via some message boards and TV news outlets, and most commentators aren't giving her a pass.

I think she should give the Constitution a thorough read, perhaps for the first time.

Barack Obama's grandparents

There's been a lot of talk about race and the campaign this week, so I wanted to post this blog entry that puts a more human face on the whole issue.

Who is Barack Obama? He's an American.

The Onion and Palin

In times of crisis, The Onion can use comedy and satire to great effect. About a month ago, one of their articles pleasantly surprised me and I wanted to share it.

Point/Counterpoint is usually ridiculous and a bit overblown. Read this Point/Counterpoint from the viewpoint of a normal Onion reader who expecting comedy. Don't scroll down until you're done with the first part of the article, then see who rebuffs the eloquent, well-written diatribe against a Palin Vice-Presidency.

"Waterboard Obama"

This nifty little sticker was on the Sacramento County GOP website until early last week. The first sentence is clever, I'll concede that point. It doesn't make too much sense, but I can see the humor. Waterboard, however, is a step too far. Joking about waterboarding is disturbing, in my mind, at least.
But, to prove that things don't have to involve torture to be disturbing, I shall include this gem:



This is another piece of classy, timeless piece of GOP humor. The Obama buck addresses the question: "If elected, what bill would he be on?????" The answer: "Food Stamps, what else!" Now, surround the half African American Democratic nominee with ribs, fried chicken, watermelon, and koolaid and watch the laughs and support roll in - or, feign ignorance and claim that "It was just food to me. It didn't mean anything else." when you are accused of making a racist joke.

Since our discussion is centered around comedy this week, I have to wonder: where does one draw the line? Certainly politicians have been lambasted over tasteless jokes. One only needs to think of when McCain said "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" or when John Kerry's punchline was "stuck in Iraq."

I'm sure that the both the aforementioned graphics were considered comedic by some, as were the ill-fated McCain and Kerry comments. But, for all involved, these jokes caused much more trouble than anything else. At this late state in the campaign, it is clear that both candidates are trying not to mess up - saying something outrageous, whether because of a failed joke or a misspoken phrase, could be disastrous for either candidate. Laying low and not giving the media or their opponent fodder is the best plan of attack with 16 days left to go.

Repbulicanism and the "Obama Flag"

Over the last few months, I've realized that thus far I've led a politically insular life. I grew up in a very liberal and racially diverse part of Connecticut with parents who never really discussed politics. After graduation, I went to a small female liberal arts college in the Pioneer Valley in Massachusetts. In a school of 2700, the Republican Club had 15 members. In a poll taken in my first year, less than 1% of the student body called themselves "Republicans." In this environment, I never really considered myself very liberal. There are people I know who are much much more liberal I am...but then came the stark realization of the world outside the northeast.

"Fly over states" - everyone has heard that term, either said in a derisive or joking manner, it's a term that's thrown around a lot during election years. But now, with the invention and proliferation of the internet, the people in the fly over states are finding their voices. Voting for Republican candidates because they share your religious ideology, even if, under their plan, you can't pay for health insurance, is a mindset that I can't understand, but I'm striving to.

Consequently, I try to expose myself to conservative viewpoints. I read the Wall Street Journal, I seek out conservative blogs, I watch FoxNews, and truly, some of what's being said makes sense. There are reasoned conservatives, just as there are reasoned liberals. But then, there are those whose viewpoints I just can't fathom.

That's a long introduction to say that I go out of my way to read Michelle Malkin, but I think it's an important bit of background. This tiny article stunned me because of the comments left by Malkin's readers.

"Of course that’s not Obama’s flag; his has a field of lighter blue and the golden Obama egg about to hatch. His secret flag is white on one side and black on the other. /s.

Anyone notice that there were no black people in Obama’s economic commercial that ran about every other break all weekend? (Note to trolls: my noticing it make me observant; not a rascist.) But then again, the market I live in is fly-over country. I wonder what color the folks were in more diverse areas (if he bothered)."

Secret flag? Honestly, I don't know if I understand what that comment is about.

Look back 10 months - what was FoxNews saying about McCain's campaign?



Conservatives against McCain - is that why McCain choose Palin, a true, dyed in the wool conservative? Palin checks every box on the right, even on some issues which John McCain does not.

For the generation that made "friend" a verb...

Once again, the WSJ always has interesting, interactive graphs. This one took me a minute to figure out because the data is pretty comprehensive.

Also, in a very meta and self-aware article, the WSJ takes a look at how the first "Internet Election" has changed the face of the campaign:

"Sen. Obama's victory in Iowa, the first contest, shocked pundits and turned the Democratic race upside down. "If people had been taking Obama's Facebook numbers more seriously, they would not have been so surprised when he won the Iowa caucus," says Ms. Williams.

She found that candidates with the most Facebook supporters and blog mentions before the caucuses -- Sen. Obama topped the list -- won the most votes. That correlation with votes was much higher than for more-traditional gauges like polling, fund-raising and media attention, her study showed. In primaries, which require less of a grassroots effort, more-traditional measures foretold the winners."

The internet and Facebook specifically have changed the way (at least young to middle-age) Americans get their news and election data, as well as show support for a candidate. But what implications does that have for this and subsequent elections?

Speaking of comedy...

This collection of Obama jokes actually had me laughing more than most of the ribbing from late-night comedians.

Every time I read this joke, I laugh:

A Christian, a Jew and Barack Obama are in a rowboat in the middle of the ocean. Barack Obama says, “This joke isn’t going to work because there’s no Muslim in this boat.”

Debate III: Proudly Pro-Life

How long has McCain been proudly pro-life? His pandering to the religious right is getting out of hand. Referring to Obama's stance as pro-abortion and telling America that Obama does not support giving medical care to children born of botched partial birth abortions is disingenuous and fear-mongering.

Obama nicely rebuffed this point by telling McCain that there's already a law on the books requiring medical care for children of botched partial birth abortions.

Debate III: Spread the Wealth

John McCain has the Sarah Palin-esque trait of repeating phrases, and one of the ones that he's been perseverating on during the debate is that Obama wants to "Spread the Wealth" of "Joe the Plumber."

Joe the Plumber sounds a lot like Joe Six-pack, but it's slightly more bizarre. Again, he appears to be appealing to the Average American, but by throwing a profession in the mix, he's narrowing the definition even further.

Debate III: First reactions

As I watch the third debate, I'm watching for big moves by McCain and damage control by Obama.

The portion on negative advertisements was an interesting one. At first glance, McCain seemed like he was personally hurt by the Obama campaign's ads, and in response Obama brought up the "Kill him" and "Off with his head" comments from McCain supporters. McCain brushed this off by saying that he tries to calm his supporters down, but of course this statement goes against his past actions, and the fact that his rallys have begun with his organizers cheering "Barack Hussein Obama" to rile up the crowd.

All in all, McCain seems to be getting angry and he isn't keeping his composure as much as usual. He seems frustrated, flustered and upset. It seems like he has a lot to say and wants to make sure that he gets it all out, even if it's not pertinent to the question. Additionally, Obama's ability to look at the camera comfortably gives a much different view to the audience than McCain's visible discomfort.

These are my reactions at first blush. I'm going to have to go back and watch some segments to catch what I missed.



P.S. - McCain just mentioned Columbia and the War on Drugs. That's another point I'll have to come back to.

John Cleese: Michael Palin is no longer the funniest Palin

Speaking of humor and satire, John Cleese (along with Michael Palin) was one of the founding members of Monty Python. Cleese's dry British wit frames the Palin issue (and what we've been talking about in class) quite well, I think.

McCain slandering Obama: Agreement in the press

I found this article from the NYT's Op-Ed column. It relates to and expounds upon a lot of what I was saying in the posts below.

I hadn't heard about this before the article:

"No less disconcerting was a still-unexplained passage of Palin’s convention speech: Her use of an unattributed quote praising small-town America (as opposed to, say, Chicago and its community organizers) from Westbrook Pegler, the mid-century Hearst columnist famous for his anti-Semitism, racism and violent rhetorical excess. After an assassin tried to kill F.D.R. at a Florida rally and murdered Chicago’s mayor instead in 1933, Pegler wrote that it was “regrettable that Giuseppe Zangara shot the wrong man.” In the ’60s, Pegler had a wish for Bobby Kennedy: “Some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter his spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow falls.”

This is the writer who found his way into a speech by a potential vice president at a national political convention. It’s astonishing there’s been no demand for a public accounting from the McCain campaign. Imagine if Obama had quoted a Black Panther or Louis Farrakhan — or William Ayers — in Denver."

Frank Rich makes a good point. The media still seems reticent to pick apart Sarah Palin as ruthlessly as they could, lest they be accused of being unfair. Her lack of experience and disagreement with McCain on several issues should have precluded her from the nomination, but it doesn't seem to matter.

Following one of the links from the Rich article, I found this campaign ad from the McCain camp:



Despite the lack of evidence that Obama has used Frank Raines as an advisor, the juxtaposition of two African American faces with sinister lighting plays on latent racial fears. I haven't seen this ad on TV, and I hope I won't, but at this point, I wouldn't put it past McCain.

Addendum to the previous post

I don't know if the first video is working, so I'll post the url also.

McCain: Where does he draw the line on his crowds slandering Obama?

Lately, the McCain/Palin speeches have been peppered with more and more people shouting slanderous and violent comments at the mere mention of Obama's name.

This video does a nice job of showing some of the clips followed by analysis by a Republican and Democrat. (Please ignore the strange camerwork. It was recorded off of someone's television)



Negativity begets negativity. The McCain campaign has been using negative advertisements for the last several months, ever since John McCain threw his honor by the wayside to try and win the election. They can't be surprised about these comments coming from the crowd - it's understandable that people on the right would fear Obama because they've been misinformed and lied to. This article by Jonathan Martin from Politico does a nice job of recapping the last few weeks of negative comments and the crowds' rabid reactions. Free speech only extends so far - death threats are not protected speech.

Only recently has John McCain tried to quell the shouting from his supporters, probably at the urging of some of his advisers. At a rally last Friday, a woman in the crowd said,

"I don't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's an Arab."

John McCain sagely responded, "No ma'am, no ma'am. He's a decent family man...[a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues. That's what this campaign is all about.

Newsweek and the Palin Problem: Part II

Swift, unbiased action has been taken against the Newsweek cover and the article I cited in the post below. Once again the meme of elitism rears its ugly, bespectacled head (from a book by Marx, no doubt):

"Granted that the liberal bookworms at Newsweek may think “She’s One of the Folks” is a slight in itself. Main stream media academics, like Barack Obama himself, do not seem to get middle-America. Liberal idealogues see “us” as clinging to guns and bibles, not quite smart enough to understand the important issues. Never mind that Democrat voters are the ones having trouble with ballots and hanging chads, and graduate from high school at a much lower rate than Republican voters.

“She’s One of the Folks” is an inside joke to a handful of liberal elitists that nobody else in the country will get. And they know it, which is why the Sarah Palin Newsweek cover went a bridge too far on the joke, like salting quiche at an Obama wine party."

Bookworms. Liberal elitists. Obama wine party. Truly, this article pigeonholes the left much more than anything Meacham said in the original article. Whenever elitism comes up, I wonder how people have forgotten Obama's roots so quickly; or, even John McCain's. McCain was a child of privilege, and a spoiled brat who pulled strings to get his way in the Navy. Yet, somehow, he's managed to run an entire campaign (nay, career) on being an Average American whose life was changed by his experience as a POW.

If you get a chance, read the comments on the the aforementioned article. Take this snippet for example:

"Lisa, you’ve obviously never heard of or met a flim flam man.
Hes the guy who buys a stick of gum with 10.00 bill and gets change from a twenty.
Thats what Obama is.
You want to talk about basic math ?
Tell me , please, with all the money being put out right now how does he plan to pay for all the sh*t hes been promising ? [...]
After 7 years of war and now this meltdown its no surprise that people are reaching for something, anything, out of desparation.
But your all missing the point.
The last 7 1/2 years has been pretty good to most people, otherwise there would of nothing to fall from."

The article directly following The Palin Problem in the print version of Newsweek is Palin, McCain and the Weeks Ahead, a well-formed counterargument by Karl Rove. I didn't find it as convincing as the cover story, but Karl Rove certainly knows how to play to a candidates strengths. The more I hear about Palin, the less I trust her and the McCain campaign. Using a female candidate as a publicity stunt is not only disingenuous, but dangerous. Female politicians shouldn't be a novelty.

Newsweek and the Palin Problem

No matter which way you lean politically, this Newsweek article by Jon Meacham does a thorough job of explaining why so many Americans would have a problem with a Palin Vice Presidency. Meacham quotes Palin saying to a Radio talk show host,

"You know what? It's time that normal Joe Six-Pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency.' I think that that's kind of taken some people off guard, and they're out of sorts, and they're ticked off about it, but it's motivation for John McCain and I to work that much harder to make sure that our ticket is victorious, and we put government back on the side of the people of Joe Six-Pack like me, and we start doing those things that are expected of our government..."

Joe Six-Pack? Call me crazy, or a stodgy academic stuck in an ivory tower, but Joe Six-Pack? The stereotypical archetype that conjures an image of an uninformed, Budweiser drinking, truck driving, Ivy-League-college-education-resenting "average" American.

Who are we (we being anyone) to say who the Average American is? America is a huge country in terms of land mass, political, religious, and cultural diversity. "Joe Six-Pack" represents a portion of America. Not Average. Not Real. There is no more authenticity to what Joe Six-Pack says than what the Dean of Columbia says.

A candidate should be able to relate to Joe Six-Pack, just as they should be able to relate to college students, single parents, and CEOs. Empathy is something that a President needs, but it is not the only thing. The President must, in times of crisis, be able to inspire a nation, and take the reigns and lead. They must have the political experience to know what America, as a whole, needs. As Meacham writes, "Would we muddle through if Palin were to become president? Yes, we would, but it is worth asking whether we should have to." Do we want a President who is learning as they go with a strong base of informed politics, or do we want someone who only had a vague idea of the Vice Presidential duties slightly over two months ago?

As Meacham stresses, this issue is not related to class. Intellectual curiosity, extraordinary achievements (especially from someone from a humble background), and the power to lead. Ordinary people doing extraordinary things. It's the American dream. But, when does the Average American realize that they need a President who understands the issues in a well-balanced and well-rounded manner, rather than being a "deft crammer" who is "not going to pore over briefing books and charts and white papers and reports for hours and hours."

Palin could make an excellent foil to John McCain, and could, presumably, be a good Vice President. But, two major questions arise:

1) What if something happened to McCain?

2) Is Palin the best choice for the first woman in the second highest office in the land?

McCain is old and in poor health. There's no putting it lightly. Were he to be elected, he would be 76 by the end of his first term. Already, this is a serious issue that puts his Vice Presidential pick under closer scrutiny. Is Palin ready to be America's first female Vice President, let alone President? Winking, blowing kisses, stumbling over the issues, cramming like a B- average college college student. Are those qualities that Americans want associated with a female in power? Using her femininity and her folksy and cutesy mannerisms to charm people into thinking that she has the power to lead is disingenuous and, in my opinion, sets the feminist movement back 30 years. Please, Ms. Palin, shape up if you want people to think that you can lead.

Gender and sex appeal

Compared to the Vice Presidential debate, last night's Presidential debate had fewer winks, blown kisses, and sexy looks. Sarah Palin's out of control winking and acting cutesy and folksy got me thinking. Hilary Clinton was lambasted in the press for showing a quarter inch of cleavage last summer. Seriously. I've seen principals, college presidents, and CEOs dressed more provocatively at church.

Sarah Palin has worn skirts without stockings in public. Fine. There's nothing wrong with that, but why the double standard? Is it the "Well, gosh darn, I don't know how to be fancy like you folks!" phenomenon?

Vice Presidents (and Presidents) should not be picked based on sex appeal. But, how is Sarah Palin playing the "cute" card and how is it working? Do Americans see a beautiful woman or do they see "themselves"? I know that I would be floundering if I were the Vice Presidential nominee, but there are several reasons that I am not. Is Palin just used to using her good looks and charm to pull herself out of uncomfortable situations, or has she been prepped by the McCain campaign to play up her folksy features to appeal to the average American?

This video does a good job of condensing the winks (if you can stand it):



Stephanie Miller nailed it while she was on Larry King Live. Folksy is fine, but Vice President should be someone who is knowledgeable enough to run the country. You can't bluff your way through the Presidency or Vice Presidency. You can't be spoon-fed party lines and talking points for four years. There are too many mistakes to make. We've already had George Bush for 8 years. America needs something new, and that doesn't mean inexperienced and incompetent.

Debate two: McCain and hypothetical situations

John McCain doesn't seem to know that by saying, "If we had done what Obama wanted in Iraq, X, Y and Z would have happened," isn't a viable answer.

Hypothetical situations =/= the truth, no matter how hard you try.

Debate two: Drinking game!

"My friends"

"Let me be clear..."

"Ronald Regan"

I take it back. If you play with a combination of those three phrases you'll get alcohol poisoning.

Debate two: Trickle Down Economics?

Is John McCain proposing some new fangled version of trickle down economics? Cutting taxes + refund = more spending by the top = trickling down to the little guy?

Can anyone straighten this out for me, please?

Economic crisis helps Obama take the lead - Prepare for Debate Two

The Wall Street Journal always has pretty interesting graphs, and this new graph caught my attention. The corresponding article gives a good indication of the "whys" behind the numbers. If there was a line graph with "political moderate" is considered as the midpoint, it seems that Obama is closer to the center coming from the left than McCain is coming from the right. As independents decide upon a presidential candidate, it seems like they are voting (at least in the polls) with their gut reactions as well as their politics. John McCain's cold shoulder approach to Barack Obama during the last debate, and his economic stumble last week have hurt his poll numbers. Some Americans felt uncomfortable with McCain's lack of eye contact and aloof attitude.

When even FoxNews says that McCain needs a "knockout in the second debate," I am eagerly waiting to see what happens. Hopefully, there will be a good number of questions about the economy. I have no doubt that both candidates have thought extensively (and been prepped with the same fervor) about the current economic crisis, but recently, Obama has seemed more knowledgeable on the subject.

I'm going to be looking at McCain's eyes and body language. The town hall setting should be interesting to watch and hopefully it will help Americans gain more insight into the candidates.

A funny aside...

I work at The Bushnell and most of the volunteers are retirees. Since Palin's speech at the convention at least 20 different volunteers have A) told me that I look like Palin, or B) asked me if I looked like Palin before she became famous. Yesterday, even my grandpa told me that I look like Palin. My sister explained the phenomenon by saying, "To people over 65, anyone under 65 looks like same."

Women with brown hair and glasses were around before Palin. Just FYI.

This morning on Face the Nation, Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm said of Sarah Palin's debate performance, "Michigan is hurting. We don't want to hear 'By golly, oh shucks, dog-gone-it.'"

Throughout the show, it seemed like the two main topics were Wall Street and Palin. Her debate performance, if she's ready to be Vice President, her politics, her style, her female fans, etc.

One of the most interesting questions of the show was, are her fans valuing style over substance or substance over style? How would Republicans have reacted if Hilary Clinton had been winking and mugging for the camera? The earliest criticisms of Obama centered on his preacher-like style. "His speeches sound like he's in a church!" an 80 year old woman said to me. "I can't trust him! "

"His fans are too fanatical!", "He speaks too vaguely!", "He doesn't have any substance - It's all just fancy rhetoric." I'm sure any of Obama's early supporters remember these criticisms. But what now? Why is Palin's style so highly valued now that it's clear that she's been front-loaded her substance? Michele Norris described Palin as "Allergic to complexity." Palin is able to talk about the things she's been told. If there's a surprise, she can't hold her own and use her experience and reason to answer a question.

Also, on Face the Nation, Sarah Palin's gumption was a topic of conversation. Common sense, horse sense, boldness, aggressiveness...Maverick. Do we really want a cowboy or an action star for a president?

Isn't that what got us into this mess?

Gender and the election

While watching Fox News today, there was a segment on Your World Neil Cavuto with an interview with a woman who was a former Hilary Clinton supporter who is now backing McCain. The main question was "Are Clinton supporters now backing Palin?"

Well, I certainly hope not. A) She's the vice presidential candidate, and B) Palin's politics aren't similar to Clinton's.

I'm getting really tired of reporters talking about how women will vote for a woman BECAUSE she's a woman. Perhaps I'm in the minority: I'd love to have a woman president or vice president but her political views need to be similar to mine or I won't vote for her. It's just that simple. I don't feel a connection to a candidate because they're of the same gender.