Saturday, September 27, 2008

Being a Maverick or Mad Man?

Watch the clip below and ask yourself if the response is one of a maverick or a mad man. The seething disdainful nature of Senator McCain's words and tone is alarming.

Maverick or mad man? The question is not meant to be disrespectful to a venerable vet. But it is meant for us to clearly see our choice in deciding on a Commander in Chief.


John O'Leary said...

I'm reading that more and more of the GOP strategists are worried about Palin sinking the McCain ticket. Some think she should find a way to gracefully resign. But it raises the all important "judgment" question about McCain (which he's trying to raise against Obama). What was he THINKING to invite a complete neophyte onto the ticket? Here's a question for the next Gallup poll: Are you comfortable giving Sarah Palin the nuclear code?

judith ellis said...

That is most certainly a question to ask of Palin. Another one to ask is if we want to give the nuclear code to McCain who has so little control of his own temper as is evident in the video above and seen in his utter disdain and disrespect for his American running mate, Obama. McCain seemed to say, "if I do not look at you, you do not exist." Imagine the destruction of millions worldwide based on such contempt. It becomes easier to nuke them.

It is obvious the GOP has great concern. They should. But why did they take so long? It seemed so obvious to most of us immediately. Instead, they went along with the charade, the fascade. Is this Country First? With the Palin choice, I questioned the patriotism of many. Where was the love of country so espoused? The choice deeply saddened me.

The conservative Washington Post columinst, Kathleen Parker, asked Palin outright to step down for the good of her country in a recent article. But why so late? Where were the question before now? Besides Palin, McCain himself seems too risky to me; this choice infuriated me. It was so disrespectful to America and its citizens--not to mention women everywhere.

- A - C - said...

Oddly enough, the NY Times says Obama appeared "too cool" in several occasions and the electorate would rather go with a more temperamental man... WHAT??? Haven't they followed McCain' speeches? Is the electorate more comfortable to give the highest command to some who just follows his guts because the "average man" can't tell the difference between hitting his neighbor with a punch and hitting a country with a nuke ???
On top of this, his "second in command" is somebody whose education barely allow her to run a state (albeit a remote one.. I'd like to see what she'd do in california) and whose vision for the future of the country would need a whole team of optometrists.. (and I'm being gentle)

sorry for the outburst, dear Judith.

judith ellis said...

a-c-, your mild mannered rant (or any others) are accepted here. Pop in anytime! I find it strange the difference you clearly make. I also find it strange that it appeared in the New York Times. The New York Times is pretty accurate from where I sit most of the time. Generally, I pay little serious attention to papers and pundits, as they have a mission themselves to be seen and to sell papers. Every poll that I have seen gives Obama the edge and women now seems to have chosen Obama as their candidate of choice. I wonder why? We are generally unmoved by derision and disrespect, even if it appears to be strength. I did not take McCain's performance during the debate as strength. I saw it as weakness. While it was apparent he understood foreign policy, the kind of policies he would implement concerned me more. Disrespect and disdain for others who think differently from you is not a quality in a leader I personally admire.

judith ellis said...

And...Sarah Palin? Well, she's disintergrating before our very eyes. Poof!

John O'Leary said...

Astute comments, - a - c -, and Judith. Of course there are many voices on the NY Times. One impressionable NYT reporter apparently parroted what she was told by White House insiders and helped persuade us to go to war in Iraq. The NYT also mistranslated the words of the Iranian President about "wiping Israel off the map" which has been repeated endlessly.

But I expect a better prepared Palin for the VP debate on Thursday. Even given all of her shortcomings she COULD still win over middle America. We have short memories. George W was equally overmatched by Gore 8 years ago but the public was beguiled. In response to a question about Saddam Hussein, Bush quipped "I'd take him out." WHAT??

I would argue that Bush was less qualified for Prez than Palin for Vice Prez but half the voters were actually comfortable with him. So...while I feel better about Obama's chances now, I STILL wouldn't bet my car on it. After 2000 and 20004 (and 1972 and 1980 and 1984 and 1988) ANYTHING is possible with attention deficit American voters.

judith ellis said...

John, thank you. You make some great points here. I have no doubt that Palin will be better prepared on Thursday. But she will have a great uphill battle, as the learning curb is so steep in such a short time. She also has the glare of millions of people worldwide to contend with. But ignorance is often bliss and arrogant. Biden will have to be most careful in the way that he "handles." And, it will be a matter of handling, as she is most certainly not a worthy opponent, one on equal footing.