Print Article(I previously published most of this essay, but was taken to task over my use of language by Dr. David Gruder, an integrity guru. Like any good writer, I welcome criticism and use it to hone my word skills. Thanks, David! The following analysis reflects my opinions...)
John McCain shocked the world Friday when he selected Gov. Sarah Palin, the relatively obscure governor of Alaska, to be his vice presidential running mate. The response was immediate and polarizing -- possibly McCainīs intent -- but Sarah Palin may become the catalyst that shakes America out of the political coma that has kept the Congress and the Presidency from addressing those issues that are gradually reducing our nation to a dependent of the Third World.
Among the most virulent criticisms leveled against Palin is that she has no experience, which is to say no relevant experience. I did some research and found that her experience compares favorably with that of the Democrat presidential nominee...
Gov Palin has 7 years 8 months as an elected chief executive. An executive's responsibilities, regardless of the size of the organization, are far different than are those of a legislator. An executive must solve problems and initiate action; he/she is responsible for people, facilities, and resources. She has reformed the largest bureaucracy in her state and successfully prosecuted corrupt officials at all levels of government. She successfully renegotiated a new tax structure on energy companies and initiated construction of a new natural gas pipeline that will provide trillions of cubic feet of Alaskan gas to the lower 48.
Mr. Obama has spent 3 years and 9 months (Actually 143 legislative days) in the US Senate and left no significant legislative footprint. He was appointed to chair the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs, which has never actually conducted business under his leadership. Here is a site that lists all 37 bills he sponsored or cosponsored: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3132998. Note that he "introduced" only a handful of bills and few of them passed. Also note that most of the bills he worked on were about internal processes. He rarely exposed himself to controversy, contrary to the expectations for a reformer. And, even a cursory examination of the last two years of Senate activity validates the assertion that his emphasis has been on campaigning for president.
Neither Palin nor Obama can claim any significant foreign policy or wartime leadership expertise. Anyone who has not led a nation has such experience. The relevant question is: "Does this person have the skill set to undertake such responsibilities?" She has demonstrable expertise in energy, conservation, and government cost containment. He has showed up to vote.
Another area of criticism is her fitness to become Commander-in Chief of the Armed Forces, should John McCain become incapacitated. As a governor, she exercised command authority over the Alaska National Guard, so she is more familiar with the military/command relationship than either Democrat candidate. Gov. Palin also has spent more time in the Iraq and Afghanistan war zones than has Sen. Obama. Also with a son in the Army on the ground in Iraq, "I support the troops" will be far more than political rhetoric to a VP Palin.
A third criticism is her "lack of a national standing." Given the sorry lot of candidates with national name recognition in this election cycle, the criticism should be an accolade. For nearly four decades, American politics has been deadlocked by the same personalities in both parties. Positions on issues are the results of telephone polls, focus group research, and media interview opportunities. Nobody know what politicians really believe except their secretaries, wives, and girlfriends. Sarah Palin is a true outsider with a real record of attacking wasteful government spending, reforming government processes, and prosecuting those who violate the public trust.
Then, there is what is referred to as "womenīs issues," traditionally including childrenīs welfare and abortion rights. As a middle class working mother, she is far closer to those issues that impact children than any other candidate offered by either party. Additionally, the fact that she has a special needs child means she will be sensitive to the needs of the millions of Americans who have special challenges; as a Parkinsonīs Disease patient, that is a huge plus to me.
As for abortion rights, the issue has been shrouded in political untouchability for a generation. Perhaps a woman candidate who chose to give birth to a child with what many would classify as a defect may become a definitive referendum that finally determines how strongly Americans support abortion.
Finally, we come to the question of her political and personal credibility. Sarah Palin came into politics by grass roots organizing. Once there, she was appalled by the corruption she found, overthrew an entrenched state administration, and prosecuted some of the most corrupt officials in the state. As far a personal credibility goes, when you live in a small town in the far north, you get to really know your neighbors because you may have to rely on each other to survive. The mere fact that she was elected mayor twice attests to her integrity and the respect of her peers; you canīt pretend to care when the temperature is 40 below.
So now we are back to the question: Why not VP Palin? I canīt come up with a single reason!
Đ Copyright 2008, Gary Loftis. All Rights Reserved.
John McCain shocked the world Friday when he selected Gov. Sarah Palin, the relatively obscure governor of Alaska, to be his vice presidential running mate. The response was immediate and polarizing -- possibly McCainīs intent -- but Sarah Palin may become the catalyst that shakes America out of the political coma that has kept the Congress and the Presidency from addressing those issues that are gradually reducing our nation to a dependent of the Third World.
Among the most virulent criticisms leveled against Palin is that she has no experience, which is to say no relevant experience. I did some research and found that her experience compares favorably with that of the Democrat presidential nominee...
Gov Palin has 7 years 8 months as an elected chief executive. An executive's responsibilities, regardless of the size of the organization, are far different than are those of a legislator. An executive must solve problems and initiate action; he/she is responsible for people, facilities, and resources. She has reformed the largest bureaucracy in her state and successfully prosecuted corrupt officials at all levels of government. She successfully renegotiated a new tax structure on energy companies and initiated construction of a new natural gas pipeline that will provide trillions of cubic feet of Alaskan gas to the lower 48.
Mr. Obama has spent 3 years and 9 months (Actually 143 legislative days) in the US Senate and left no significant legislative footprint. He was appointed to chair the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs, which has never actually conducted business under his leadership. Here is a site that lists all 37 bills he sponsored or cosponsored: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3132998. Note that he "introduced" only a handful of bills and few of them passed. Also note that most of the bills he worked on were about internal processes. He rarely exposed himself to controversy, contrary to the expectations for a reformer. And, even a cursory examination of the last two years of Senate activity validates the assertion that his emphasis has been on campaigning for president.
Neither Palin nor Obama can claim any significant foreign policy or wartime leadership expertise. Anyone who has not led a nation has such experience. The relevant question is: "Does this person have the skill set to undertake such responsibilities?" She has demonstrable expertise in energy, conservation, and government cost containment. He has showed up to vote.
Another area of criticism is her fitness to become Commander-in Chief of the Armed Forces, should John McCain become incapacitated. As a governor, she exercised command authority over the Alaska National Guard, so she is more familiar with the military/command relationship than either Democrat candidate. Gov. Palin also has spent more time in the Iraq and Afghanistan war zones than has Sen. Obama. Also with a son in the Army on the ground in Iraq, "I support the troops" will be far more than political rhetoric to a VP Palin.
A third criticism is her "lack of a national standing." Given the sorry lot of candidates with national name recognition in this election cycle, the criticism should be an accolade. For nearly four decades, American politics has been deadlocked by the same personalities in both parties. Positions on issues are the results of telephone polls, focus group research, and media interview opportunities. Nobody know what politicians really believe except their secretaries, wives, and girlfriends. Sarah Palin is a true outsider with a real record of attacking wasteful government spending, reforming government processes, and prosecuting those who violate the public trust.
Then, there is what is referred to as "womenīs issues," traditionally including childrenīs welfare and abortion rights. As a middle class working mother, she is far closer to those issues that impact children than any other candidate offered by either party. Additionally, the fact that she has a special needs child means she will be sensitive to the needs of the millions of Americans who have special challenges; as a Parkinsonīs Disease patient, that is a huge plus to me.
As for abortion rights, the issue has been shrouded in political untouchability for a generation. Perhaps a woman candidate who chose to give birth to a child with what many would classify as a defect may become a definitive referendum that finally determines how strongly Americans support abortion.
Finally, we come to the question of her political and personal credibility. Sarah Palin came into politics by grass roots organizing. Once there, she was appalled by the corruption she found, overthrew an entrenched state administration, and prosecuted some of the most corrupt officials in the state. As far a personal credibility goes, when you live in a small town in the far north, you get to really know your neighbors because you may have to rely on each other to survive. The mere fact that she was elected mayor twice attests to her integrity and the respect of her peers; you canīt pretend to care when the temperature is 40 below.
So now we are back to the question: Why not VP Palin? I canīt come up with a single reason!
Đ Copyright 2008, Gary Loftis. All Rights Reserved.
view author's RSS feed
