Saturday, October 4

More politics

+ Tom has turned me on to Fareed Zakaria, who I quoted in a recent politics post (the one about worldview, scary or not?). I just saw his Palin pan from before the debates today. It's a little dated, but his argument still makes sense to me. Sample:
Can we now admit the obvious? Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president. She is a feisty, charismatic politician who has done some good things in Alaska. But she has never spent a day thinking about any important national or international issue, and this is a hell of a time to start.
+ Charles Krauthammer says Obama's calm, cool and collected and McCain's a gambler, so Obama will win.


Dan tdaxp said...

Seems consistent with Zakaria's book... generally well-done, except for pro-Obama hackwork.

All you need to do is contrast his tone in, say, his analysis of Indian politics, or his "GPS" show CNN, with the profanity-laced DailyKos wannaba character of the snippet you quoted, to see this.

Jim said...

The media has been hard on Palin, but they have not explicitly stated this fact, except Tom. (No one could dispute his statement, with any credibility.)
Why? Could it be that the McCain campaign has successfully branded the media as the enemy? They are effectively intimated. Also, note George Bush has intimated the media as well on occasion.
I still don't understand why he chose her to be his running mate. Womens vote? Religious right? Revenge on those who axed his friend Joe Lieberman from consideration? Attractiveness? I have no idea, but it was not a choice based on qualifications.
She appears emotionally, and relationally detached to me. Which is also a problem, at least in my view.

Anonymous said...

I'll defer to our Founders. Natural Born Citizen and 35 years of age. Listing any other disqualifiers is opining or advocating on behalf of our political criminal class. ;~)