![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The McCain campaign has evidently acknowledged that McCain's VP choice is Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. Overall, I'd have to say she's a good choice for McCain. She's known as a reformer who has fought to reform the political abuses in her state, even those of her own party. She's young, thus somewhat negating the "McCain's too old" worries. She's female, an obvious attempt to court some of the Hillary supporters who said they'd vote for McCain. She's pro-life and staunchly conservative, so the Republican right-wing base will be happy.
She does, however, blunt much of the recent McCain campaign strategy of hammering Obama for his "inexperience" and that he's "not ready to lead." Palin has less of a pedigree on the national stage than Obama -- so if he's not ready to lead, neither is she. If he's inexperienced, she's even more so.
She's also currently involved in an ethic scandal investigation herself in Alaska (though, in fairness, from what I've read it appears that this may well be 'payback' for her aggressiveness in her own reform efforts.)
It will remain to be seen how this plays out, and whether it helps, hurts, or makes no difference at all. But -- I'd say McCain has made a better choice for himself than the 'frontrunners' all the pundits were touting.
What do you think?
She does, however, blunt much of the recent McCain campaign strategy of hammering Obama for his "inexperience" and that he's "not ready to lead." Palin has less of a pedigree on the national stage than Obama -- so if he's not ready to lead, neither is she. If he's inexperienced, she's even more so.
She's also currently involved in an ethic scandal investigation herself in Alaska (though, in fairness, from what I've read it appears that this may well be 'payback' for her aggressiveness in her own reform efforts.)
It will remain to be seen how this plays out, and whether it helps, hurts, or makes no difference at all. But -- I'd say McCain has made a better choice for himself than the 'frontrunners' all the pundits were touting.
What do you think?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
Creationist and pro-lifer, is my feel. Takes "experience" off the table. McCain is old and has had cancer, so ...
Bleh. I hate everybody today.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Abortion is the third-rail in the down syndrome community - it rips us apart to talk about it. Tough times ahead. Or silence and pretending not to talk about it.
From:
no subject
That's certainly understandable.
From:
no subject
Is that simply because of the abortion issue, or are there parents of kids with DS who would vote for her just because she has a baby with DS (the way some women supported Hillary just because she is a woman)? I have never understood that; I sure wouldn't vote for someone just because he/she had adopted kids, or even kids from Korea. What does the candidate offer my kids for their future, that's my question. Given the Republicans' stand on health care, I would think parents of kids with chronic conditions requiring medical care would be wary.
From:
no subject
And I get it - the idea that someone would abort a baby because they thought it might turn out like Nicholas ... it's not something I can handle rationally (which is separate from supporting choice and the rights to abortions generally).
But Palin has a baby with DS and has publicly built her profile with the evangelical fanatic right by saying, "see, I had this horrible diagnosis and I didn't get an abortion, see how anti-abortion I am!"
And then it gets complicated, because the reason she didn't get an abortion is because she's anti-abortion, not because having an abortion because of a diagnosis of DS is not, by itself, a good reason to terminate a pregnancy.
But there are some numbers that a large majority of people who get a pre-natal diagnosis of DS do, in fact, have abortions (these numbers are out of date).
From:
no subject
K.