WomenCo.

She lacks the experience necessary to be second in line to the Presidency.  I'd worry if anything happened to Senator McCain and she assumed the Presidency.

I think it was a very smart and calculated choice for McCain to make. As overjoyed as I am at the prospect of a women in the White House, I do not think Palin has the experience to be a VP.

Having said that, there is no one running who can match McCain's experience in "years" if that is what the focus is on. It was smart as far as trying to open his voting base to get the women vote in addition to the Hillary voters who are still on the fence. Not so sure how effective it will be but still, a smart choice versus the "norm".

I'm only partially quoting you for space's sake .

What  a well-thought reply. Let me say that I came in to this discussion with a decidedly closed mind. I am NOT a McCain supporter, and I saw this merely as a political strategy, and largely insulting at that. I think you may have pried my mind open a bit. Of course, the comment about Cheney helped!

This is exactly the kind of dialogue I was hoping for! Thank you so much.

bluefly44 says ...

At least with Obama running for President and with Palin runninng for Vice President, no matter what choice America chooses, it represents a big step in changing the paradigm of what constitutes a leader in America.

Blah, blah, blah - I know, too long!  I can't help it - I think long thoughts! :P  Anyway, just my $.02.  Hope everyone has a great, safe week.  :)

I couldn't agree more. I do not know enough about Sarah Palin to make a judgment about her. I do think the media should leave her daughter alone. I believe McCain's choice of her as a running mate is blatant pandering to women, and I find it insulting. Heaven help us if that alone is the reason anyone votes for that ticket. She may be bright and capable, but, John McCain is not a young man and he has had health issues. I would like to see someone a little more seasoned answering the dreaded "3 am phone call"-- certainly there are more experienced women in the Republican party?

I read that Palin remarked that abstinence only education was not sufficient. She believes in teaching both evolution and Creationism in schools.

I do not know much about her except she has little experience, but the media is having a field day. Obama does not have a lot of experience either, and that fact does not seem to bother his most ardent supporters.

The choice of VP is made by the candidates for president. With so many important crises facing the US, I hoped that both men would pick strong candidates. Instead they strayed from the mainstream choices and picked someone else. The coverage of this election becomes less and less about the issues and the strengths of each candidate and more about petty or trite media snippets. I try to dismiss the sensationalism spewed by the press and focus on the issues important to our family and the country. i admit it is difficult.

ImBossay says ...

Am I the only one offended by McCain's choice? I heard today on NPR that McCain only met with Palin three times before deciding she should be his running mate. He chose her to get the Hilary vote, and I ain't biting for some trite scheme. If this is the way he thinks now, then I don't even want to know his thought processes if he gets in the White House.

You're not the only one, Currin, trust me! He's pandering do the "ovary voters," as I like to call them—voters who were voting for Hillary only based on her gender and not for her policy, and who therefore will vote for Palin only for her gender, too. Voters who were Hillary supporters for the right reasons will align themselves with Obama whose policy stances are very closely aligned with HRC's.

someone posted this in a different site:

I’m sure it is no surprise to most that Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin is a proud member of the far religious right, but the extent to which she supports faith-based law and outright theocracy may come as a surprise.



ABC News broke the story of [Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin’s] 1990’s membership in the Alaska Independence Party, which believes that Alaska should consider seceding from the Union… the AIP is the Alaska affiliate of the Constitution Party, founded by Howard Phillips, and has been the political home to leading theocratic Christian Reconstructionism such as John Lofton, Otto Scott, Joe Morecraft and movement founder R.J. Rushdoony himself. (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/2/1938/63427) Palin was a speaker at this year’s AIP conference and expressed intent to politically support and further the aims of the Constitution Party. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI&feature=related)



From the Constitution Party’s site: “It is our goal to limit the federal government to its delegated, enumerated, Constitutional functions and to restore American jurisprudence to its original Biblical common-law foundations.” (http://www.constitutionparty.com/mission_statement.php) The party’s motto is “Honor God, Defend the Family, Restore the Republic: Principle Over Politics.”



Their position on religious liberties reads as follows: “We call upon all branches of government to cease their attacks on the religious liberties of the people and the states, regardless of the forum in which these liberties are exercised. We assert that any form of taxation on churches and other religious organizations is a direct and dangerous step toward state control of the church. Such intrusion is prohibited by the Constitution and must be halted. We assert that private organizations such as the Boy Scouts of America, can determine their own membership, volunteers, and employment based on their oaths and creeds.” As is evident, their platform position is tailored to protect and expand the liberties of the Christian right, potentially at the expense of other social or religious groups. (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpReligious%20Freedom)



Their position on education is even more obviously reactionary: “All teaching is related to basic assumptions about God and man. Education as a whole, therefore, cannot be separated from religious faith. The law of our Creator assigns the authority and responsibility of educating children to their parents …Because the federal government has absolutely no jurisdiction concerning the education of our children, the United States Department of Education should be abolished; all federal legislation related to education should be repealed. No federal laws subsidizing or regulating the education of children should be enacted. Under no circumstances should the federal government be involved in national teacher certification, educational curricula, textbook selection, learning standards, comprehensive sex education, psychological and psychiatric research testing programs, and personnel.” (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpEducation)



On family: “No government may legitimately authorize or define marriage or family relations, as affirmed by the 10th amendment, delegating to the people as our founders understood the family as necessary to the general welfare. We affirm the importance of Biblical scripture in the founders’ intent as eloquently stated by Noah Webster: ‘The moral principles and precepts contained in the Scriptures ought to form the basis of all our civil constitution and laws… All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery, and war proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts in the Bible.’ The law of our Creator defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman. The marriage covenant is the foundation of the family, and the family is fundamental in the maintenance of a stable, healthy and prosperous social order. No government may legitimately authorize or define marriage or family relations contrary to what God has instituted… We stand against so-called "sexual orientation" and "hate crime" statutes that attempt to legitimize inappropriate sexual behavior and to stifle public resistance to its ..http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpFamily)



On the environment: “It is our responsibility to be prudent, productive, and efficient stewards of God’s natural resources. In that role, we are commanded to be fruitful and multiply, and to replenish the earth and develop it (e.g., to turn deserts into farms and wastelands into groves).” (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpEnvironment)



On abortion: “The pre-born child, whose life begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God’s image. The first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments to secure and to safeguard the lives of the pre-born… We affirm the God-given legal personhood of all unborn human beings, without exception. As to matters of rape and incest, it is unconscionable to take the life of an innocent child for the crimes of his father.” (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpSancity%20of%20Life)



On public assistance: “The message of Christian charity is fundamentally at odds with the concept of welfare maintenance as a right. In many cases, welfare provisions by the Federal government are not only misdirected, but morally destructive. It is the intended purpose of civil government to safeguard life, liberty and property - not to redistribute wealth. Such redistribution is contrary to the Biblical command against theft.” (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.phpWelfare)



Republican for Obama offered the following interpretation of Palin’s newfound Republicanism: "Anyone familiar with the theology of ’Christian Reconstructionism’ or as it is sometimes called, ’Dominion theology’ that many adhere to in the Constitution Party is acquainted with the covert efforts to secure positions of power by espousing more mainstream Christian beliefs. It is logical to consider the AIP’s directive to ’infiltrate both parties’ to achieve their goals is part and parcel of the theocratic agenda of the CP." (http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/1908)

AngelaK says ...

I am looking foward to hearing her speak tonight and very curious to see if she will address some of the controversy surrounding her head on. Should be very interesting...

I agree- I am looking forward to hearing her speak as well.

So far, I like her. I like her very much. I do not align myself with most of her platforms and views, but I am thrilled that McCain chose a woman as his running mate.

DianaW says ...

Seriously?  You like her but not her platform and views?  So, you are one of the women who will vote for McCain simply because he chose a woman?  Interesting.

Yes, very interesting.

Question:  Would you expect the President of the United States of America to put the country before his/her family or his/her family before the country?

Absolutely, I would expect the president to put the nation before family. It would be very difficult under some circumstances, but, the welfare of the nation as a whole is more important than any one family. We ask our soldiers in Iraq to put the nation first even if it costs them their lives. The Commander-in-Chief should not be an exception. No one is forced to be president-- anyone who chooses to run should know what the responsibilities are. Anyone who chooses to run for VP should be aware as well and prepared to assume the roll of president should the need arise. If the person in the White House is not able to do this, he/she should resign.

I want to offer you a different point of view, from a former elected official's position. I have almost the same professional background as Sarah Palin.  I hold a degree in Public Relations, but went the corporate route, became a mom and entered the political arena.  I was responsible for a district larger than the state of Alaska.  In Florida, we have a more diverse population and much of the same landscape that makes up the entire United States; so I would say I'm more qualified than Sarah Palin.  Why would she even accept the nomination??????????  Is she kidding?  You have to be pretty arrogant to think you can take on the world.  It was difficult enough dealing with controversial issues locally - but globally, death threats?  How will this affect her five children who looked like they were scared to death to be thrust into the national spotlight - which is a vicious place for any human being.  I'm more angry at her as mom than anything because of what she is  not thinking about - her children.   I am already questioning her personal family decisions. John McCain made a huge mistake and now his credibility is at stake and I'm very unsettled.

Off that rant....taking a breath...if I were to put a woman in office, the best choice would've been Hillary due to her knowledge alone of the process.  And, I'm not a Hillary fan. I do respect her professionally and as a person. Look how long it took her to acclimate to Washington.  Look what the media did to her marriage, ( well Bill didn't help), but you get my point, her relationship with her then young daughter - just read her book!  Thank goodness, from appearances anyway, it seems that Chelsea has grown into a well-balanced, smart young woman.  Hillary was a first-wife though, not a Vice-President and that is how we must think of Palin.  She could assume the presidency and that is troubling to me.

This is so very serious.  I'm glad the question was raised.   Diana W. you've done a lot of research, but any extreme is not good for America right now.  We need a concensus builder moreso than we need another "party" politician.

As Americans we deserve better.  The dominant parties control who we get to elect, not the people!!!!!!!!!.....  I thought we were a Democracy not a Republic which is what we've become.  Enough said. 

P.S..  Please read the Constitution of the United States or the Founding Fathers notes about the intent of the Constitution.

Would someone explain how I can put other's comments in my post, like some of you have mastered?  Last time I tried, I lost my writing which took three hours to compose and I don't want to risk doing that again.

Diana W. - I hope you're right about the husband, but he looked terrified as well.  When people, families are cast into sitiuations they are not used too, as this would be the case, even the best of marriages under normal circumstances are tested.  I don't know how this husband can raise 5 children alone, as she would be gone most of the time , deal with media issues, private schools for the protection of the children, ( can you imagine the SS details?)  the house work....it would be interesting to hear from him.  She's already fighting an uphill battle because she did not have a good PR person helping her craft her message - shame on McCain for not lending his staff.  They should've given everything upfront to the media, instead of piecemeal.  Everyday, something different, not positive in terms of "learning who she is" is revealed and that's what the public and pundits are having difficulty dealing with - not that she's a woman.  That's just my opinion.

DianaW says ...

instead of hitting reply, click on "quote" in the corner of the message you want to respond to.

 

and I hear you loud and clear, don't disagree, it will certainly be interesting if they win.

Like this?  this is a test to see if shows up in your box or mine, then you can delete.  Thanks for the info.... Yes it will be interesting if they win.  I, too, preferred McCain, a man of principle, honor, probably more of the 2002 McCain.  Not sure who he is lately.  The alternative is just scary - the presidential nominee is not-qualified.  At least Palin has had some statewide, budget and controversial constituency issues at home and she is not the presidential nominee.  I'm still waiting to learn more because the media is known for sensationalizing and running stories due to ratings than hard news.  Okay..enough.  It's time to research.  Thanks for you help.

TCompagnet-- Well said and well thought out.