« The Wisdom of Choosing Sarah Palin
‘The Day the Democrats Finally Grew Teeth’: Nachrichten of Switzerland »



Proof Palin was Panic Pick

August 30th, 2008
By ELROD

Print Print

According to ABC News’ Jan Crawford Greenburg, John McCain did not decide on Sarah Palin until last night. His first choice was, indeed, Joe Lieberman. But when told by GOP strategists that the party base would revolt, McCain faced Pawlenty, Ridge and Romney.

But after the successful Democratic National Convention, which united the Democratic Party behind Barack Obama in soaring fashion, John McCain decided he needed another high risk pick. With Lieberman out, that meant Sarah Palin.

McCain actually flew Palin out secretly to Dayton last night and, after interviewing her, decided on her as his candidate. She was enough of a “maverick” for him, even though nobody in the party expected it. John McCain had met Sarah Palin only once before, in February.

So what does this say about McCain? In a time of political crisis, John McCain panicked, shot from the hip, and made what will likely be a terrible error in judgment. And he is supposed to be ready in a crisis to lead the nation?



This entry was posted on Saturday, August 30th, 2008 at 12:09 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, At TMV. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 8 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Yes, this does seem like a panic pick and I'm not even sure that Palin knows what she is in for, with regards to the national scrutiny she will undergo, the job itself or the family life she will need to give up to meet the job responsibilities. Did she and her husband really have a long discussion about this and what it meant for him? Is he really ready to give up the Alaskan frontier and his job as a salmon fisherman and move to Washington and navigate the diplomatic and social circles of world leaders as spouse of the VP? For that matter, is she willing to meet with world leaders? Or will she be more like Bush and say, "Bring 'em on!" Does she really have what it takes to go after Biden?

    I do not mean to be critical, and if she is willing to give up her life then I wish her all the best. But I sense there isn't just McCain's mistake here with hastily selecting her... but there is her mistake too for jumping into this before looking.

    elrod, you rhetorically ask if he's ready to lead a nation in crises.... I'm not even sure she is. I really don't want two rash decision makers in DC.

    I've been thinking... to sort of get off topic (though not really)... What if McCain changes his mind, or she changes hers? Will this team stick together through the election? (My sense is yes.) Then I'd wonder how long she will last in DC, what her departure would look like and who McCain would pick as a successor... He'd be free to pick Lieberman at last and would truly be a one term president....

    But I'll reserve these questions until after the Republican convention. She may find herself to be at home in all this.
    • ^
    • v
    Elrod, agreed, totally.

    McCain goes with his gut, even when his gut tells him to pander.

    It's a good thing his aids are getting plenty of experience walking back the bosses answers during this campaign, they're going to need it if by some miracle he gets elected. Still one has to wonder, aren't there things a President (as opposed to a candidate) can do or say that might be a tad difficult for aids to "walk back"?

    Now then, Dmitri, you know how we've always talked about the possibility of something going wrong with the Bomb... The *Bomb*, Dmitri... The *hydrogen* bomb!... Well now, what happened is... ahm... one of our base commanders, he had a sort of... well, he went a little funny in the head... you know... just a little... funny. And, ah... he went and did a silly thing... Well, I'll tell you what he did. He ordered his planes... to attack your country... Ah... Well, let me finish, Dmitri... Let me finish, Dmitri... Well listen, how do you think I feel about it?... Can you *imagine* how I feel about it, Dmitri?... Why do you think I'm calling you? Just to say hello?...
    • ^
    • v
    MSNBC reports that he only met her once. Which is a little different than Obama's pick. How can you trust someone you've only met once with the presidency (if something were to happen to McCain)???
    • ^
    • v
    Well first off I would not trust anything that MSNBC has to report. With the loss of Tim Russert, their political coverage is little more than a fraternity public access show of infighting and no buffer between any anchors opinion and news.

    People can call it pandering if they want. I think it is the clearest demonstration of his belief in his message. She is young, fresh, independent minded, strong and most impressive; from about as far way from Washington DC as a person can be.

    As someone who liked Hillary over Obama, I was even surprised to hear my mother and aunt yesterday say that even after Hillary is gone women still have a chance in this election. And i would have to say that the Obama camp got it wrong on their first reaction in criticizing the town of "only" 9,000 response. It is exactly that mentality of ignoring small town America and focusing on large cities that has got them in trouble before.

    I say congrats to Sarah. I hope you truly are the outsider that can shake things up!
    • ^
    • v
    Palin is not all that independent minded. She is a straight-line believer in the messages of the social conservative branch of the GOP. She's an NRA lap dog. Frankly, she's not that different from Bush...much like McCain. She also rejects McCain's policies on those areas where he is different than Bush. Check out which side of the wilderness/resources debates in Alaska that she's on.

    Just because she's geographically distant from DC doesn't mean she hasn't absorbed all the standard RNC talking points.
    • ^
    • v
    Sarah Palin is the first person that has excited me since President Reagan. I hope that She is the next president after McCain. THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT ABOUT PERSONALITY OR EXPERIENCE, IT IS ABOUT CHARACTER. I admire Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Reagan for their CHARACTER not anything else. I was going to vote for Ron Paul irregardless of who was on the ballot because I am TIRED of voting for the lesser of 2 evils. This woman walks her talk. I think she made a mistake with her brother-in-law, so what we ALL make mistakes. Sarah Palin will be the next Vice President BECAUSE WE THE PEOPLE CAN IDENTIFY WITH HER BETTER THAN ANY ONE ELSE IN THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. The media can blast away she has generated excitement in me for the first time since Reagan. I am going to campaign for her!!! I have never campaigned for anyone and I am 58. Finally a politician who practices what she preaches!!!
    • ^
    • v
    That wasn't one of the better puns I've come across, Elrod. But as far as substantial issues:
    I'm not sure about how she's going to appeal to disaffected Hillary supporters. They want Hillary, not just some fat-free Hillary substitute. In other words, it's simplistic to think that sticking just any woman on the ticket will make it O.K. for most of Hillary's supporters to vote Repub. in November. I can't authoritatively speak for them, but I doubt they would like the sexism implicit in this, that just because McCain chose a woman to be his VP, that they should vote for him.
    • ^
    • v
    Sgarza, as a longtime Republican and someone who'd definitely been leaning McCain's way, I initially had the same reaction as you did-- until I actually looked into Sarah Palin. What a disastrous pick! It's obvious that this was not only a panic pick, but that McCain had no idea whom he selected:

    1. Palin is in no way a "reformer" or a "fresh face." She's under active investigation for ethics breaches and misuse of power, both this Troopergate scandal and the abrupt firing of several workers loosely associated with her political opponents upon assuming office-- exactly the kind of nepotistic stupidity that brought us Bush's mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina, among other things.

    2. Palin seems to be generally incompetent. She was the major of a little town called Wasilla, population 5,469 in 2000, and couldn't even get that right. She raised taxes on several occasions, introducing the first sales tax and even hiking it several times (even as business taxes were reduced). This rubs my conservative side the wrong way. Plus she backed the Bridge to Nowhere until the earmarks were taken away, which also goes against every conservative fiber in my body.

    She also ran Wasilla way into debt, over a million dollars with apparently continuing threats of a reduction in bond rating. There was even a coordinated effort to recall her-- in a town of far fewer than 10,000 people.

    3. She lacks basic, grown-up maturity. She has a tendency to get into stupid tiffs with fellow officials and even Republicans, and act in the most puerile fashion. She got into a quarrel with one of the most respected public officials in Alaska, fellow Republican Lyda Green, chuckling in jejune fashion as some idiot radio DJ called Green a bit*h, a cancer (she's a cancer survivor) and too fat for her chair:

    http://www.adn.com/opinion/comment/v-printer/st...

    She just doesn't belong as a running mate.

    If McCain comes to his senses, admits his error and chooses another running mate-- and many choices would do for most of us conservatives, from Ridge, Pawlenty, Dole, Huckabee, Romney, either Whitman, even Lieberman or Hutchison-- we'd be fine with that.

    But no way should Palin be anywhere near such a serious job.

    McCain has just managed to turn us into supporters of Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin. In fact, based on the talk of some of my friends, into contributors to their campaigns as well.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« The Wisdom of Choosing Sarah Palin
‘The Day the Democrats Finally Grew Teeth’: Nachrichten of Switzerland »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given an