mushinnoshin

The conventional wisdom seems to be that Palin’s pick was affirmative action in action, a transparent ploy to play for Clinton’s voters. I don’t think it’s so simple.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure her ovaries helped put her over the top, but I don’t think the Republicans are so deluded as to actually believe she’ll swing anything more than a handful of dead-enders. I think to whatever degree her sex played a role, it was simply to try and keep the disunity illusion alive, to give them a reason to keep Clinton’s name in the discussion. More of the same “peeing in the other party’s pool” type of petty disruption tactics that they’ve fallen to repeatedly this year since they know they can’t win a clean fight.

No, I think she actually was picked because she was the best choice (from their perspective), for the sum of a number of reasons, including the above but also:

• Oil.
• She’s a “movement conservative”, the sort of hard-right blend of social conservatism (anti-choice, creationist) with squishy pseudo-libertarian mercantilist economics that reassures the Fred Thompson crowd. In other words, she’s like Marsha Blackburn, except she’s a woman.
• Oil.
• The pseudo-libertarian economics works with the fact that she’s moderately tolerant of Teh Gays to let them spin her as someone for the beltway libertarian / libertarian-republican circles, which is a crowd they can potentially lose to Obama on war and civil liberties, if they don’t think the GOP is giving them anything else. (Of course she doesn’t think homosexuals should actually be treated as equals, but whatever, right? Neither do a lot of those so-called libertarians. And with Obama also stopping short of supporting marriage rights, it’s a hard point to press.)
• Oil.
• “Rising Star”. She’s sort of like their Obama circa 2002 or so. They want to get her on the national stage. They know it’s going to take a miracle to win this election, and unless it turns out Obama is the Antichrist, 2012 will be as out of reach as 1984 was for the Democrats. They’re grooming her for 2016. I’m thinking they’ll maneuver her into Ted Steven’s seat in the meantime, and probably let someone like Huckabee or Romney take the fall in 2012.
• Oil.
• Let’s face it, she’s kinda hot. Nooo, surely the red-blooded red-state NASCAR males they need to rally, who don’t like McCain and might have been tempted to just sit this one out, well that type of guy never thinks with his penis, right?
• Oil.
• McCain probably actually likes her. At the very least, her anti-corruption / party-reformer image meshes well with his own (without regard to the degrees to which either of those images may or may not be genuine). And that he made such a “shocking” choice based on his commitment to this image helps him continue to play maverick. Though how it’s “shocking” that he picked one of the top three contenders according to the political bookies is beyond me.
• Have I mentioned oil? Look, she has an atrocious environmental record, to the right of Bush. She’s popular in the state over which Big Oil has drooled for years. She’s married to a BP exec. We all know who controls the purse strings in the GOP, and she’s their girl.

Well the good news is, I think she does help Obama more than she hurts him. She absolutely takes the experience theme off the table, while simultaneously marking McCain’s age and health issues with a big yellow highlighter.

And when I see “McCain / Palin” close together in a sentence or a logo, my eyes tend to jumble it into “McPain”, which for some reason makes me giggle.

Well, overall, I’d say a very good night. Even Kerry didn’t suck. Of course I was disappointed not to see Richardson (who I still hope to soon call “Secretary of State”), but it looks like they moved him to tomorrow, so it’s all good.

They really hammered home the military thing tonight. I suppose that’s good and necessary. Even though it does creep out us conscientious objectors, I do realize we’re a freakish minority.

Biden? Home fucking run, I think. I still wouldn’t pick him first for president, but his tenacity and spirit speak to why he really is a pretty good choice for number two. And, well, this is going to get all hokey, but you wanna know why I really feel okay about Joe Biden for veep? Jill Biden’s eyes. I saw in her eyes a pride — not a superficial powerlust like that which I saw in Laura Bush’s eyes eight years ago — but the genuine pride one must feel when seeing a loved one succeeding at doing the good they’ve always hoped to do. I saw a woman who would not marry anyone but a good man, and must assume by extension that Joe is exactly what he seems.

Heh. I just noticed the title of that previously linked story —

“Richardson won’t get shot at the convention podium til Thursday”

Damn. So the AP thinks Richardson will get shot Thursday?

Well I think the quote of the night goes to Mark Warner —

… this election is not about liberal versus conservative. It’s not about left versus right. It’s about the future versus the past.

…with a close second place (and a win for best snark) being:

Just think about this. In four months, in just four months, we will have an administration that actually believes in science.

Which I mention because I think there’s some relation.

But before I get there — yes, he’s right on, this is not about liberal or conservative but about the future verses the past. That’s why you’ve got so many independents for Obama, Libertarians for Obama, and even Obamacons.

Which speaks partly to my favorite snark — you can’t seriously expect to speak for the future if your perceptions of physics and metaphysics are both hopelessly mired in two thousand year old mythology — but more so, it points I think to why the dead-enders have become so desperate.

I mean, as I’ve watched the propaganda pushed out by the goopers, whether it be the unsanctioned race baiting of Hobbs and the TNGOP, or the almost worse “vote for McCain because Obama’s a celebrity and might be The Antichrist*” message from national — what I’ve seen is fear.

Not just a mere fear that the Republicans are going to lose, but a real and disturbing fear that the world is changing.

And really, what is conservatism — in all but the fiscal libertarian senses at least — but fear? Fear of change, fear of people who are different, fear of anything that might challenge one to see the world as it is rather than how we might have been told it should be?

It’s something that resonated with me as I watched Michelle Obama (about whom I must rightly credit my friend Jason for coining her the first “FLILF”) deliver her fantastic speech across YouTube. The world is changing. WASPS are no longer the American majority. Whites in general won’t be much longer. Blaming all the world’s problems on gays and Mexicans is no longer flying — and even the believers are starting to smell the bullshit.

When intolerance was merely offensive it could survive. Not once it became gauche.

Yes, the world is changing — permanently, and the petty, small minded slimebags who fear a world they don’t understand don’t like it.

But what can you tell them, except — pull yourselves up from your bootstraps and don’t expect anyone to help you adjust. That is what they expect from others when things change, right?

A few side bullets –

• Fantastic speech by Clinton. I know the goopers are already saying, “But.. but.. she didn’t say Barack was “ready to lead”!!!!”. Well, look, I know you folks need people to speak slowly and forgo anything that might require you to think — but clearly she wouldn’t call for him to be elected if he wasn’t. At least it’s clear to anyone with an IQ anywhere above the freezing point of water. And besides, if Republicans are looking to Hillary Clinton as their champion? Fear.
• Brian Schweitzer I think inadvertently — by simply discussing that which actually mattered — nailed what no one has explicitly articulated — this election is not about Foreign Policy, nor is it about The Economy. Rather, it’s about that thing which brings those two to intersect — Energy. Every other single policy aside, this election rightfully goes to the better plan on this one issue which touches every other. Of course that takes us back to believing in science…

* Or were they trying to suggest Obama is that Jet Li character who traveled across dimensions killing his other selves in order to absorb their power?

So it’s to be Joe after all, eh? Well, this is why I never bet, I’m too fond of twists and surprises to trust conventional wisdom even when it’s right.

Of course he wasn’t my first choice, but we could do a lot worse. And the good part is “Obama / Biden” will be one of the more fun ticket names to try and say ten times fast, though still not as fun as would have been “Obama / Sebelius”.

I suppose I’ll leave my $0.00 bet on Romney for the other side, though I’m probably wrong on that one too. Especially since Obama’s choosing an old white guy may have increased Sarah Palin’s stock a bit. And then there’s still that Cantor guy who seems to have some of the neocons drooling. He’s my favorite on the “ticket names” front, as “Yes We Can, No McCain Can’t-or!” just flows.

So all the talking heads are saying Biden now. I don’t know, I just don’t feel it. Of course a lot of folks are also still saying Hillary, but I don’t feel that one coming either. Then there are the ones who for some reason think it will be Gore, which just seems retarded — the number one nod was his for the taking and he didn’t want it, why the hell would he want number two?

Kaine or Bayah? Maybe. Just not sure I see him going quite so bland.

My completely unscientific guess right now is Wes Clark. I don’t have anything solid to base that on, just a gut feeling I’ve had for a few weeks now. My top two preferences remain Richardson then Sebelius, of which Sebelius seems more likely, but, eh. At the end of the day I pretty much agree with GoldnI, there aren’t many on the shortlists that are deal breakers. Hillary wouldn’t be enough to lose my vote, but she’d probably kill any remaining enthusiasm. I suppose Nunn would be out of the question, but I’ve never bought the idea that he was really in play anyway.

On McCain’s side? I think Chuck Todd had it right last night when he said something to the effect of if he plays it safe it will be Pawlenty, if he thinks he needs a Hail Mary it will be Lieberman. That said I think he’s not going to do either one. Palin seems to be the smartest choice, but I’m not sure he’s that smart. At the end of the day I’m still thinking it will be Romney. Why? Because of things said and deals made in smoky back rooms to which I’m thankfully not privy.

Just another brain dump…

• Dude, how did I make it some 13 years without having seen or heard of Mr. Show??? Funny funny stuff. I can see why Miss Lesley is so enamored with David Cross.
• Speaking of things I’ve recently Netflixed (if that’s not a verb yet, it should be), The Lives of Others was phenomenal. This is why I watch so many damn movies, because every now and then you’re lucky enough to stumble across something this powerful. In gratitude.
• Another great film I’ve recently seen is Notes on a Scandal — Cate Blanchett and Judi Dench really did a masterful job, and kept the film from ever dipping to its downside potential as a highbrow Single White Female.
• I was particularly intrigued by the Dench character’s obsession with class, calling the working class students “proles” and remarking with disdain on the Blanchett character’s “bourgeois bohemianism”. I don’t know that I grokked any great insight from this, I just found it interesting as the intersection of these two classes is such a recurring theme in my own life.
• In politics — well what can I say about John Edwards? A perfectly coiffed plastic politician, the Democratic answer to Mitt Romney, turns out to be a phony — and people are shocked? Good riddance I say. I think this is turning out to be a good year. With him down for the count and with the wind knocked out of Hillary, maybe we really are on the verge of seeing a great evolution in the Democratic party. Not holding my breath, just saying maybe.

And finally, rest in peace Mr. Hayes.

You’re daaaaaaamn right.

Despicable:

Dear Jonathan,

You have to read this front-page story from today’s Wall Street Journal:

“Wal-Mart Warns of Democratic Win”

According to the article, Wal-Mart is holding mandatory meetings with supervisors and managers to warn them that if Senator Obama wins the presidential election, Democrats will pass the Employee Free Choice Act to unionize their stores.

Why is Wal-Mart so worried? Because workers who have the power to stand up to their employers have higher wages, better health care, and fairer work places.

You and I both know that Wal-Mart will do anything to get out of treating its employees with the dignity and respect they deserve.

Not only are Wal-Mart’s actions morally despicable, they also raise legal concerns. Tell Wal-Mart to stop intimidating its employees into voting against Senator Obama:

http://action.walmartwatch.com/voters

Wal-Mart is notorious for its union-busting tactics. As the Wall Street Journal article states:

Through almost all of its 48-year history, Wal-Mart has fought hard to keep unions out of its stores, flying in labor-relations rapid-response teams from its Bentonville, Ark., headquarters to any location where union activity was building.

With weakened workers’ rights, Wal-Mart can bully its employees to skip breaks and work “off the clock” for no pay. Wal-Mart has received numerous fines for violating the Family and Medical Leave Act – firing employees for taking federally protected medical leave. They’ve also received fines for violating child labor laws and hiring undocumented immigrants to clean stores after hours.

We’re not talking about one or two violations at rogue stores – we’re talking about calculated, systematic business decisions made at Wal-Mart’s headquarters that have resulted in millions of workers’ rights being violated.

It’s no wonder why Wal-Mart doesn’t want to have to listen to its employees. That’s why our work is more important than ever right now.

Show Wal-Mart that the country is listening – and we want workers to decide for themselves how to vote:

http://action.walmartwatch.com/voters

Thanks for spreading the word about this breaking news story.

Sincerely,

David Nassar
Wal-Mart Watch