Dolphin’s Dock is proudly powered by WordPress
Original Template design by dolphin ©2008.
I’ve said in the past that if McCain has any sense at all, he’d pick a woman as his running mate (a black woman would have an even better political choice). I didn’t think he’d actually be able to bring himself to do it, but he has. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is his VP choice.
I don’t really know much about the Alaskan governor, but from a demographic standpoint, I think she stands to help McCain out a bit. The biggest plus for McCain is that she’s a female. There’s still alot of Hillary supporters (though a minority of them) who have made it clear that they have no problem abandoning their liberal principles and ideals if going conservative would put a woman in the White House. Even the blind can see that these votes are the primary reason McCain made this selection, and the impact of it will not be small, as I have little doubt a good number will not object to McCain using them that way. The fact that Palin is young enough to be McCain’s daughter (in fact she is years younger than McCain’s oldest child), could be a double-edged sword for him. On one hand, bringing on somebody even younger than Obama onto the ticket could help reduce the criticism that McCain is too old to understand what’s going on in the modern world. On the other hand, when your VP pick cold be your daughter (and isn’t to far of from a granddaughter’s age), it certainly doesn’t make McCain himself look any younger.
As far as the issues go, I don’t know, and haven’t been able to find too much on her. She’s strongly pro-life which will help McCain with the social conservatives he’s had trouble with. On the other hand, while she opposes gay marriage and supported the state’s constitutional amendment to ban it, she also used her very first veto to block a law that would have taken away benefits from the partners of the state’s gay and lesbian employees, and she *gasp* admits to having gay and lesbian friends. That’s gonna take a huge chunk out of her social conservative street cred, while (with the exception of the self-hating Log Cabin crowd) not buy her any votes from gays and lesbians. In my opinion, one of the biggest issues of this election is the energy crisis. Palin seems to toe the GOP party line on energy with her “let’s drill everywhere” viewpoint. That shouldn’t be a surprise though when you find out that her husband is an oil exec with BP. The solution to the oil problem is not “more oil.” Bringing on such an obvious connection to “Big Oil” could potentially hurt.
1
August 29th, 2008 at 12:31 pmKipEsquire says:
I disagree. The only thing progressivist women hate more than pro-life men is pro-life women. They are the feminist equivalent of Uncle Toms.
2
August 29th, 2008 at 2:13 pmdolphin says:
Well Kip, I hope you’re right, but I swear I was shocked at the irrationality coming from some Clinton supporters after Obama first became the presumptive nominee. I actually saw one salivating over the idea that young female Obama voters would die in back-ally abortions after McCain won and banned abortion!!
On the other hand, you gotta love this quote:
3
August 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pmMichaelnotMike says:
Wow. That was beneath you. I’ve long respected and appreciated your analysis of issues (even if I didn’t agree with you) your writing ability and the genuineness of your posts. I was greatly touched by the post addressed to your mother as you eloquently spoke for so many gay men and women who have come out to their families. I have cheered for you and the BF as you got a new house and a new car.
Today, I was taken by surprise. Your use of the phrase “self-hating Log Cabin crowd” was vacuous. I am completely out as a gay man. For the last few years, I have been a member of the Log Cabin Republicans. I attended the LCR convention a couple of years ago in D.C. and was part of a group that went to Sen. Frist’s office to lobby on several issues important to gay people. I was president of Nashville Pride and chair or co-chair the Nashville Pride festival for 3 years. I wrote a column entitled “Conservative Tendencies” for one of the local gay papers. I have supported numerous gay causes. My credentials as an out, gay man who is involved in the community are well established. But, most importantly, I do not hate myself nor have I met any other gay Republicans who hate themselves. We can disagree on issues and disagree on the relative importance of issues without stooping to smears.
Do you really think LCR folks are “self-hating?” Was that just a glib throw-away line? Am I overreacting?
4
August 29th, 2008 at 4:02 pmdolphin says:
I just don’t understand the logic of the LCRs. If LCRs said “I don’t agree with so-and-so’s position on gay rights but I think their position on X, Y, and Z is so important that I’m willing to vote for them in spite of their gay rights position” I might be able to understand it (granted, I wouldn’t agree because, with rare exception, I figure I won’t get to enjoy the benefits of X, Y, and Z if I’m not being treated as a full citizen of the country anyhow). But that’s not what I hear from LCR. What I instead hear is “This Republican hasn’t actually quite killed any gay people in cold-blood (that we know of), so clearly all gay people would be crazy not to vote for them. Meanwhile, this Democrat supports every single gay rights issue except for gay marriage, so clearly they hate gay people and any gay person who votes for them is a moron.”
That’s not logic that I can even begin to understand.
5
August 30th, 2008 at 1:58 pmMichaelnotMike says:
Or you could listen more closely and hear what LCR is actually saying. “We don’t agree with every Republican’s position on gay rights but we think their positions on X, Y, and Z are important as are the principles behind those positions. We are willing to support leaders who take positions that are good for the country as a whole while working to move the party in the right direction on issues important to gay people. We are happy to see progress in the Republican party as even Pres. Bush has publically supported civil unions.” Surprise, but the world isn’t just about Me! Me! Me! On gay issues, the Republicans aren’t as bad as the pathetic caricature that the high priests of gay orthodoxy try to portray. As far as the Democrats “support[ing] every single gay rights issue except gay marriage”, it might be best to recognize that even among gay people there is a wide variety of opinion on those issues. I, for one, do not need or want gay affirmative action in the form of ENDA or hate crimes legislation. “Supporting gay rights” has more than one meaning. (LCR is to the left of me on some of those issues.)
Taking the position that, if you’re gay, you either hate Republicans or hate yourself, is simplistic and not very insightful.
I would hope that gay people would consider all of the issues and vote for the candidate that most closely match their ideology. That makes for an informed electorate casting considered votes. The only morons are those that allow themselves to be used and taken for granted by their party.
6
August 30th, 2008 at 2:51 pmdolphin says:
The thing is I have listened, and that ISN’T what they’re saying. If that’s the message you think is being put out, you guys need to hire a better PR guy. All I see from LCR is Democrats being slammed for any gay rights issue they don’t support and Republicans being promoted and celebrated if they are wiling to simply not publicly bash gays. [Edited to add: See what I mean? When the Log Cabin Republicans and the Family Research Council are both applauding the gay rights record of a VP pick, it says that one of them is way off base. Guess which one?] And for the record, President Bush does NOT support civil unions. He once said that while he doesn’t agree with them, he thought they should be left to the states. Then Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage and he decided that if the states weren’t going to do what he wanted them to, then we needed to amend the Constitution to force them to.
And I’m sorry, but I continue to think that any person who doesn’t believe that they deserve equal protection under the law either hates themselves or the Constitution. If you disagree with non-discrimination, then fight to get rid of non-discrimination, but that’s not what the GOP is doing. They are fighting to keep non-discrimination laws for the groups they are a part of, but only to prevent gay people from gaining the same protection under the law that they themselves enjoy. You’re fooling yourself if you think fighting ENDA is anything other than fighting gay people.
Lastly, I think that most people, gay or straight, consider all of the issues and vote for either the candidate that most closely matches their ideology or at least the closest match that actually has a chance at winning. But for many gay people, a primary issue is whether the government views them as legit citizens. If gay people aren’t viewed as legitimate citizens in the first place, than you can live in whatever world would be a utopia for you and not benefit one ounce because none of it would apply to you.
7
September 1st, 2008 at 9:24 pmHenry says:
I think Dolphin is right on. LCR would be fine if they admitted up-front that they view the (now non-existent) fiscal conservative view of the Republicans as more important than the (ever prevalent) anti-gay sentiments that the Republican base adores.
What happened, and often happens, is that the LCR tries to see pro-gay acts in Republicans when there are none. Palin is a fine example – there is no evidence she is anything but anti-gay rights. Not just against gay marriage, but against benefits for DPs. Yet, the LRC claims she is inclusive – based on what?
Same with McCain. He may be good for ‘core’ republican vlaues, but not for gay rights. So, support him if you want, but don’t try to spin him as good for gays.
He’s not.