Girl Trouble

David Weigel | August 29, 2008

Matthew Yglesias complains that the press is talking about Sarah Palin in purely political terms, and not asking how she could help John McCain govern.

It’s striking listening to the commentary about why this is a smart pick for John McCain that the arguments are all about how this will help him politically — attract women voters, get attention, disrupt Barack Obama’s “change” message, etc. What I haven’t seen is any conservatives making arguments about why Sarah Palin will help President McCain govern. He’ll call on her insights about... what?

Well, maybe oil.

Kudlow: Senator McCain says [ANWR is] too pristine to drill. Senator Obama says the drilling won't work. What is your response to this? How do you fight back?

Palin: Well it will work. And Senator McCain is wrong on that issue. He’s right on a whole lot of other issues, so thank goodness that he’s understanding and evolving with his position on OCS [Outer Continental Shelf]. So that’s encouraging.

Or drugs.

Palin has said she smoked marijuana but didn't enjoy it and doesn't smoke anymore.

"I can't claim a Bill Clinton and say that I never inhaled,” she told the Anchorage Daily News in 2006.
At the time, marijuana was legal under Alaska's liberal drug laws.

She now says she's against decriminalization, but with Obama on one ticket and her on the other, I suppose the "youthful drug use" taboo has been broken for all time. And she probably isn't going to talk to McCain about abortion, but she's brought the religious right completely on board for him, having given birth to a son with Down Syndrome whom she's called "perfect."

The Palin pick is secondarily about government reform, and she's been steel-spined in attacking fellow, corrupt Republicans in her state. But that's only secondary. John McCain would have never looked at Gov. Sam Palin as a running mate, just as black Democrats and guilty white liberals would have never caught fire for white Irish senator Brian O'bama. This is an identity politics election, with independents who don't agree with anything Obama says asked to vote for him to install the first black president, and Democrats now asked to support John McCain to shatter the glass ceiling.

I don't know how I feel about that. As Kerry Howley argued this year, of course the first credible non-white male candidates can be minimized with cries of identity politics or nepotism or affirmative action. But that's how the barriers get broken. Team McCain has understood, and found, that large slice of the electorate that looks at voting as sociological validation. They were tired of Obama having it to himself. I can absolutely see the Palin choice backfiring: she hasn't been vetted by national media, who now have expense-paid trips to Alaska to book, and she could get obliterated in the VP debate with Biden. But if McCain wins this thing, we'll point to the Palin nomination as why.

Now, Jason Zengerle with the zinger:

I suppose that if McCain continues to make the argument that Putin wants "to restore the old Russian empire," then he can also argue that Palin has been playing a key national security role by preventing a Russian expeditionary force from coming across the Bering Strait.

One more thing about identity politics: It's going to be awfully, awfully tiresome to hear conservatives whine about Palin attacks being sexist. One, it's in bad faith: I challenge them to take a polygraph and say they never visited SlapHillary.com or giggled when a voter asked McCain how he could "beat the bitch." Two, it minimizes Palin by portraying her as a hapless female, and comparing her to Clinton. Clinton was and is a feminist icon. Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|8.29.08 @ 1:24PM|#

But if McCain wins this thing, we'll point to the Palin nomination as why.

And it will be true.

BakedPenguin|8.29.08 @ 1:28PM|#

...of course the first credible non-white male candidates can be minimized with cries of identity politics or nepotism or affirmative action...

Even though I disagree with most of his policies, Obama is certainly as qualified to be president as, say, George Bush or John McCain. Of course, that's not exactly the highest bar to hurdle.

|8.29.08 @ 1:28PM|#

Does the choice of Palin seem transparently cynical to anyone else? An inexperienced, little known governor from a backwater state who would have had no shot at the nomination if another woman hadn't run so hard and the opposing ticket didn't have a minority? I wonder how many people will fall for it?

BakedPenguin|8.29.08 @ 1:35PM|#

An inexperienced, little known governor from a backwater state who would have had no shot at the nomination if [insert different circumstances here]...

Jimmy Carter, 1976
Bill Clinton, 1992

|8.29.08 @ 1:35PM|#

I wonder how many people will fall for it?

Lots. Every right-wing monkey will be spinning her harder than a Federer forehand.

|8.29.08 @ 1:36PM|#

Interesting that Palin has more executive experience than McCain, Obama, and Biden combined. She was the Mayor of a town of 6000 before becoming Governor.

I think her selection is either inspired or insane. McCain's stickin' it to the Hillary diehards. One big plus for Palin -- she finally killed the bridge to nowhere.

robc|8.29.08 @ 1:39PM|#

Calvin Coolidge 1920

|8.29.08 @ 1:40PM|#

Palin has said she smoked marijuana but didn't enjoy it and doesn't smoke anymore.

Didn't enjoy it? Well that's more credible than slick Willie claiming he was too stupid to get high. But not by much.

The only way I can see someone not enjoying pot is if they've got a lot of secrets, cause that paranoia will totally amp up any guilt you're carrying.

BakedPenguin|8.29.08 @ 1:45PM|#

Warren - it's not just guilt. Any old baggage can come back to bother you after smoking pot. I quit twenty years ago just for that reason, and trying it again a little over a year ago produced the same result.

|8.29.08 @ 1:50PM|#

Throughout middle America a great cry was heard

"Sarah who?"

Good thing Alaska's not real far away or anything. Why, everybody knows what is going on there.

But, on the plus side, it's a women, that did give MCain's side some points for lots of reasons.

If only there was someone I could actually vote for, instead of against. Oh well....

Smappy,

The term "cynical" implies that there is a serious standard he should be using, and picked someone unqualilfied while pretending she's qualified. I think we'd have to get down into Quayle eye-candy territory before that description applies.

Best Dem Strategy for Palin|8.29.08 @ 1:53PM|#

Ignore her. Pretend she doesn't exist.

|8.29.08 @ 2:01PM|#

BakedPenguin,

Wouldn't that make you "StraightPenguin" then?

|8.29.08 @ 2:02PM|#

I think libertarians, even they are not going to vote for McCain ought to be happy about this pick. Regardless of the outcome of this election, Palin is going to be an up and coming star in the Republican party. Think about what she is not. She is not Southern. She is not an evangelical or overtly religous that I can see. She is from the West and from her record as governor seems legitimately committed to small government. Palin as a national candidate represents a shift away from the evangelical compassionate conservatism of the last eight years back towards the western, small government, Goldwater Reagan variety. It is a small step granted. But it is a step. I don't see how a libertarian can complain about a small government western governor being on a national ticket.

Warren,

I know a lot of people who smoked pot a few times and couldn't stand the stuff. They say it just makes them tired or gives them a headache. I think her answer on it is pretty believable.

|8.29.08 @ 2:07PM|#

Snappy,

delaware is the backwater state

f|8.29.08 @ 2:08PM|#

The only way I can see someone not enjoying pot is if they've got a lot of secrets, cause that paranoia will totally amp up any guilt you're carrying.

That's like saying "The only way I can see someone not liking gay sex is if they have a lot of hangups." Perhaps they just don't like it and prefer to leave it to others.

|8.29.08 @ 2:12PM|#

Holy crap, I agree with John.

|8.29.08 @ 2:19PM|#

Yeah, this a slap to the fundie voters. I wonder if they'll bail, or hold their noses and vote against that Muslim feller?

|8.29.08 @ 2:22PM|#

Don't worry Marcvs, I won't tell anyone.

|8.29.08 @ 2:25PM|#

She is not an evangelical or overtly religous that I can see.

Well, she supports teaching creationism in public schools, and she's pro-life.

Wikipedia (which I would regard as less reliable than usual right now, it being a hot topic) suggests that her church is the "Assemblies of God," which is a Pentecostal denomination, and is evangelical.

|8.29.08 @ 2:28PM|#

I also see this as primarily a strategic move; then again, what VP choice isn't one of those? Palin's executive experience, though somewhat limited, is worth something, and I also think the oil angle is worth a little, too. However, I think McCain picked her mostly due to her strong reputation as a reforming maverick, something he likes to think about himself. In that respect, she appears to be the superior of all of the candidates.

SIV|8.29.08 @ 2:30PM|#

Yeah, this a slap to the fundie voters.

Quite the opposite, she will turn them out in droves.McCain covered his ass with the base.

|8.29.08 @ 2:31PM|#

I think his timing of his announcement was perfect. Last night my dad who is a Republican called to to say what a great speech Obama gave last night.

Today everyone is talking about McCain.

|8.29.08 @ 2:35PM|#

I think Obama's best move right now is to compliment McCain on selecting a woman (maybe indirectly, saying how this all signifies a new direction for all Americans, yadda, yadda, yadda), then go silent until the convention ends. After that, he can abuse McCain and her on whatever grounds he thinks most appropriate. If he's smart, he'll keep his focus on McCain and more or less ignore Palin.

John McCain would have never looked at Gov. Sam Palin as a running mate, just as black Democrats and guilty white liberals would have never caught fire for white Irish senator Brian O'bama.

QFT.

|8.29.08 @ 2:38PM|#

"Well, she supports teaching creationism in public schools, and she's pro-life."

Being pro life doesn't make you an evangelical. Moreover, she has a kid with down's syndrome and chose to have him after being told he would be born that way. She has some street creed on the issue.

The creationism bit is more of a problem. I would like to know more about that. As far as the church goes, Assembly of God is pentecostal but the rate of nuttiness depends on the church. Protestant churchs are not like the Catholic church. One church is not like all the rest even within the same denomination.

|8.29.08 @ 2:39PM|#

she could get obliterated in the VP debate with Biden

I don't know much about her manner or affect, but if he's his usual self and she remains dignified, I'm sure it's just gonna make him look like a blowhard.

Clinton was and is a feminist icon. Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin.
Why is Clinton a feminist icon again? Mostly because of all the injustice she's suffered at the hands of men, I imagine. That, plus she's a Democrat.

Palin is governor of Alaska! Libertarians should be elated. If there's any state where more stuff is legal than Alaska, it might be Nevada. The culture up there's not exactly female-dominated, either.

she finally killed the bridge to nowhere no $hit? That is kind of encouraging.

|8.29.08 @ 2:42PM|#

"Clinton was and is a feminist icon. Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin"

Palin got to the top on her own. Hillary only is where she is because she married her husband and put up with his phalandering all these years. For all of Hillary's formidible powers and they are formidible, Palin is a much better example for women than Hillary.

|8.29.08 @ 2:43PM|#

One church is not like all the rest even within the same denomination.

Yeah, but Assemblies of God is pretty far over on the wackiness meter. I also don't know how devout she is, but that creationism thing is disturbing:

"Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides."

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles_of_faith/2008/08/sarah_palin_on.html

There's no way to spin that. Evolution and creationism aren't "both sides of the subject". One is a subject, one is bad theology. ick.

armchairpunter|8.29.08 @ 2:43PM|#

I don't suspect you'll hear a lot of conservatives whining about sexism unless it really transpires, little lady.

I do expect you'll hear a lot of doctrinaire identity politicians of the left at a loss for words. You'll also hear the sound of hands being clapped over mouths that would otherwise be quick to blab on about experience. There going to have to work hard for their talking points.

|8.29.08 @ 2:45PM|#

I think Palin is going to destroy Biden in the debates. Biden is angry nasty guy. Palin is going to come accross as down to earth, geniune and charming. Biden will win on points and lose all to hell on style and walk away shaking his head saying "how the hell did I lose to her".

|8.29.08 @ 2:47PM|#

Biden is angry nasty guy.

You think so? I've always thought he came across as a perfectly nice and intelligent guy on Meet the Press. He just doesn't shut the fuck up. I'm not sure who will win the VP debates, but I think they should be interesting (probably more so than the Presidential ones).

|8.29.08 @ 2:48PM|#

Markvs,

That is a lousy quote for sure. I wish people would just stand up against that crap. The only thing I can say is that it could have been worse. She didn't advocate for it, just said that people should get both sides. That strikes me as a cop out answer. Either she really beleives that crap and doesn't want people to think she is a wingnut or she thinks it is nuts but doesn't want to offend the nuts in her party. If her dad was a scientist, I would bet on the latter, but I could be wrong.

|8.29.08 @ 2:50PM|#

"I've always thought he came across as a perfectly nice and intelligent guy on Meet the Press."

That is true. He was really good on there. But the not knowing when to shut up is a problem. The more you talk the more you are likely to look stupid or offend someone.

Warren,

I know a lot of people who smoked pot a few times and couldn't stand the stuff. They say it just makes them tired or gives them a headache. I think her answer on it is pretty believable.

John

The stuff your friends smoked was either ditch weed or not even pot at all.

DannyK|8.29.08 @ 2:50PM|#

Palin is literally married to the oil industry, and she's got an ongoing investigation against her in her home state.

I honestly don't know how it'll turn out, but McCain gets points for guts with this pick.

|8.29.08 @ 2:53PM|#

"But the not knowing when to shut up is a problem. The more you talk the more you are likely to look stupid or offend someone."

Awesome. The lack of self-awareness...

|8.29.08 @ 2:54PM|#

"John

The stuff your friends smoked was either ditch weed or not even pot at all."

Maybe that is what Palin got? The fact remains that a lot of people try pot and end up not liking it. I know people who are commited drug users and won't touch the stuff. It is taste like anything else.

Douglas Gray|8.29.08 @ 2:57PM|#

Of the four, Obama, McCain, Biden, and Palin, I'd actually prefer Palin as President

|8.29.08 @ 2:57PM|#

"she's got an ongoing investigation against her in her home state."

Fluffy made a great point about this in another thread. Basically, she had an ex brother in law who was an asshole cop. She called the chief of the state police and told him to fire him and when he refused she fired the chief. I would hope every governor would have the balls to fire some asshole cop and the dickhead superiors who are covering up for him. The whole thing is a big nothing.

|8.29.08 @ 2:58PM|#

Mantooth,

I am fully aware and fully intend to offend you. It is not by accident.

Maybe that is what Palin got? The fact remains that a lot of people try pot and end up not liking it.

I don't know about "a lot", but point taken.

Seitz|8.29.08 @ 2:59PM|#

It really is hilarious watching John spin away the fact that yes, she does in fact belong to an evangelical church, and supports teaching creationism in schools. Should have saved that "not evangelical that I can see" bit until you'd done some actual research, John.

|8.29.08 @ 3:02PM|#

Palin is literally married to the oil industry

Actually, Palin has a great record of going against big oil. She shutdown a pipeline project that was corporate welfare for the oil companies. From a libertarian perspective she's great on energy all the way around.

The creationism is more problematic. Speaking out in favor of teaching creationism is like getting STUPID tattooed on your forehead.

|8.29.08 @ 3:03PM|#

John, the "asshole cop" was/is in a custody dispute with her sister...

The Governor's office should have steered clear...precisely for that reason. That they did not...figure it out.

|8.29.08 @ 3:04PM|#

Alright, John. God bless you and your important work. Don't let me keep you, I'm sure you've got about a thousand more comments to post today. The National Keyboard Vendor's Association is counting on you.

SIV|8.29.08 @ 3:04PM|#

How much influence does the Vice President have on local school curricula?
Unless the answer is "some" to "a lot" I don't think her position on creationism matters.

|8.29.08 @ 3:06PM|#

Yes Seitz eveyone who is a member of the Assemby of God Church is a fundie bent on creating an American theocracy. Good thing you are not a prejudiced bigot or anything. I know at least two people, one of whom was raised in that church and both of whom attend as adults and I would not consider them fundementalist and are both quite reasonable people. Maybe she is to.

Tell you what, I will agree that she is a fundie because she goes to that church, if you will agree that Obama is a black supremicist because he went to Wright's church for 20 years. Deal?

|8.29.08 @ 3:10PM|#

"John, the "asshole cop" was/is in a custody dispute with her sister..."

Who beat the shit out of her sister. I don't see the thing having legs. Did Hillary firing the travel office ever have legs?

|8.29.08 @ 3:15PM|#

How much influence does the Vice President have on local school curricula?
Unless the answer is "some" to "a lot" I don't think her position on creationism matters.

Like Warren said, it's like having "STUPID" tattooed on your head. It goes to intelligence. I'm not saying it's a deal breaker (i.e. maybe it's just GOP politics) but it is certainly not heartening.

|8.29.08 @ 3:16PM|#

Actually "deal breaker" is a bad term since there is very little chance I will vote for McCain.

I'm sure ya'll have heard people claim the mary jane doen't work the first time you try it. Anybody here experience that? On my first time I don't think I got enough to judge. That was, of course, a long, long time ago in a time or place where it was legal. Maybe Palin should try again. You should never give up after only a single failure.

Seitz|8.29.08 @ 3:21PM|#

I know at least two people, one of whom was raised in that church and both of whom attend as adults and I would not consider them fundementalist and are both quite reasonable people. Maybe she is to.

Evangelical =/= Fundamentalist, dipshit. It's like you get dumber with every post.

John: She's not an evangelical!!!
Me (and others): She belongs to an evangelical church, and believes in teaching creationism.
John: But that doesn't prove she's a fudamentalist!!! And if you think she is, Obama's a poopyhead!!!

Seriously, dude, you're devolving into self-parody. It's both comedic and tragic, and perhaps a little intriguing, to watch.

Elemenope|8.29.08 @ 3:23PM|#

Anybody here experience that? On my first time I don't think I got enough to judge.

That actually is precisely the issue. Unless they have some experience smoking *something* beforehand, many people are reluctant to breathe smoke deeply. Hence, they get a suboptimal dose.

Shitty weed can also be a factor, as well as confounding effects from alcohol (I know my first time was complicated by being somewhat buzzed, so that I couldn't be sure what was pot effects and what was just psyching myself out.)

Elemenope|8.29.08 @ 3:26PM|#

Evangelical =/= Fundamentalist

That's true, but if you believe in YE Creationism, and you *aren't* a Fundamentalist, then you automatically are fifteen times dumber for lacking, at least, an excuse.

not that i\'d really know or a|8.29.08 @ 3:26PM|#

Maybe that is what Palin got? The fact remains that a lot of people try pot and end up not liking it.

I suppose I'm a little skeptical on both her response and that "a lot" of people end up not liking it, but perhaps.

Now, if she's said she snorted a line once and didn't like it I'd have to call total bullshit.

|8.29.08 @ 3:32PM|#

It's going to be awfully, awfully tiresome to hear conservatives whine about Palin attacks being sexist. One, it's in bad faith: I challenge them to take a polygraph and say they never visited SlapHillary.com or giggled when a voter asked McCain how he could "beat the bitch."

I am a conservative. I never visted SlapHillary.com (and in fact just learned of it from you) and never giggled when a voted asked McCain how he could "beat the bitch." Where do I sign up for the polygraph?

|8.29.08 @ 3:34PM|#

Biden is angry nasty guy.

Not sure why, but Biden reminds me of Spiro Agnew. Guy looks like an organized crime boss or something.

Johnny Nowhere|8.29.08 @ 3:34PM|#

Speaking out in favor of teaching creationism is like getting STUPID tattooed on your forehead.

Perhaps she speaks in favor of teaching creationism because she realizes many parents in the US believe in Biblical creation. Perhaps she also believes that parents should be allowed input on what their children learn. It might not have anything to do with her intelligence or belief system.

|8.29.08 @ 3:39PM|#

She named two of her children after television witches. "Willow" was Buffy the Vampire Slayer's best friend and "Piper" was the eldest sister on the series Charmed played by Shannen Doherty.

I'll say one thing for Palin: she may be an evangelical and may support the teaching of creationism - but damn, at least she's not that gawd-awful Huckabee. That's got to be some consolation.

LarryA|8.29.08 @ 3:39PM|#

McCain's stickin' it to the Hillary diehards.

Then there's the "We need to elect a woman, but why did it have to be Hillary" vote. Liberal feminists might not vote Palin, but women will.

Life member, National Rifle Association. Real world hunter/fisherman. 80,000,000 gun owners.

She's got the balls to disagree with McCain on ANWR and other issues. Obama nominated an Obama clone.

|8.29.08 @ 3:48PM|#

"Evangelical =/= Fundamentalist, dipshit. It's like you get dumber with every post."

Why do you feel the need to hurl obscenities and insults? Is your penis really that small? Evangelical and fundementalists are innerchangable terms in political debate in this country. I would love to see someone try to claim they are an "evangelical" but not a "fundementalist" without getting laughed off the stage.

I notice you didn't respond to my point about Wright's church. Instead, you just insulted me and started swearing. That one must have really left a mark.

|8.29.08 @ 3:52PM|#

It's been proven time and time again that people vote for President, not for VP. I mean GHWBush got elected with Quayle in tow. Edwards couldn't help Kerry win NC, etc. Obama sealed the deal yesterday I'm afraid. And the solid bounce in the polls is proof. He's up by 8 in gallup and that doesn't even include the night of his speech. This is just noise at best and McCain's Harriet Meiers moment at worst.

|8.29.08 @ 3:53PM|#

There's no way to spin that. Evolution and creationism aren't "both sides of the subject". One is a subject, one is bad theology. ick.

Last thing we need is a Darwinist litmus test.

I have met to many lefties who hold this up as a holy grail yet can't even explain how natural selection works.

|8.29.08 @ 3:55PM|#

One thing about the Assemblies of God is that they are declared pacifists. I wonder how that fits in with the McCain message. My guess is that it doesn't matter one bit; Bush courted plenty of their votes while he was ready to declare war at all comers.

Pentacostals are about as fundamentalist as American Christians get. Ever heard of "Left Behind?". Listening to someone argue that said views are "mainstream" is like listening to communist students rail against the "system".

Seitz|8.29.08 @ 3:56PM|#

Evangelical and fundementalists are innerchangable terms in political debate in this country.

So basically what you're saying is that you don't know the difference between the two, and YOU use them interchangeably. Why am I not surprised?

I notice you didn't respond to my point about Wright's church.

Because you didn't have a point about Wright's church. You had a complete non-sequitur in which you proved that you didn't know the difference between evangelism and fundamentalism, and proceeded to try and deflect from your own stupidity by changing the subject.

|8.29.08 @ 3:56PM|#

All the woman said was teach it, not beleive it. I don't care if they teach my kid that crap. If I can't teach him otherwise and to call bullshit on most of the stuff he or she learns in school, I have failed as a parent anyway. I really don't get to worked up over it one way or another.

Dodsworth|8.29.08 @ 3:56PM|#

Dave:

Why is Palin's comment on the fact that she doesn't know what the veep does, a problem? Nobody knows that. The Constitution says that the veep presides over the Senate but since then, most veeps haven't bothered about that useless job. The veep is Captain Dunzel in that sense.

|8.29.08 @ 3:58PM|#

Franklin Harris|8.29.08 @ 3:58PM|#

She's got the balls to disagree with McCain on ANWR and other issues. Obama nominated an Obama clone.

It's all about perception. McCain and Palin are both seen as mavericks (she actually is; him, not so much). Obama and Biden may both be machine pols, but from a perception standpoint, Biden undercuts Obama's whole "change" message and makes Obama's foreign policy an ever bigger muddle.

"Because you didn't have a point about Wright's church"

No, you just won't see the point. If you are going to run Palin down for being a member of the Assembly of God, then how can you give Obama a pass for being a member of Wright's church? The Assembly of God are just kooky. Wright is a outright bigot and hate monger. Why does Obama get a pass for his church but Palin not?

|8.29.08 @ 4:01PM|#

Palin/Coburn 2012.

|8.29.08 @ 4:02PM|#

You won't have to worry about Palin playing the victim card - she can't. She already called HRC a 'whiner' on that matter...gone. Now the 'boys' may call it for her, but something tells me she won't play it herself and might not like the boys messin' in her business.

|8.29.08 @ 4:03PM|#

"As for that VP talk all the time, I'll tell you, I still can't answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day?" - Sarah Palin, a month ago.

All likelihood pointed her to not being VP pick...how would she look to Alaska voters if said her life's dream was to be VP?

Anyway I can tell Sarah what the VP does....runs for president.

Seitz|8.29.08 @ 4:06PM|#

No, you just won't see the point. If you are going to run Palin down for being a member of the Assembly of God, then how can you give Obama a pass for being a member of Wright's church?

Good Lord you are dense. I wasn't running Palin down for being an evanglical. I was:

1) Running her down for favoring the teaching of creationism; and
2) Running you down for making the ridiculous comment that she's not an evangelical when it took all of about 10 seconds to find out that she belongs to an evangelical church.
3) Then I made fun of you for changing the subject to fundamentalism when you got called out for being wrong the first time.

I don't care what church she belongs to. I don't care if she belongs to any church. If she advocates the teaching of creationism in school (outside of a philosophy or religious theory course of some sort), she's a fucking idiot regardless of what she believes or how (of if) she chooses to practice religion.

|8.29.08 @ 4:06PM|#

To respond to Johnny Nowhere's comment: If a parent wants to have influence on their child's education at a public school, then they should join the school board. If they were to join the school board they would quickly realize how unconstitutional it is to teach creationism (as well as intelligent design) in a public school science classroom. Look up the court case in Dover, Pennsylvania for a perfect example of exactly what I'm talking about.

|8.29.08 @ 4:07PM|#

Those of you arguing about Palin's take on creationism, can you please remember that in a representative democracy such as ours, you're not supposed to insult people and say that they believe in a myth? To me she shows class.

All the woman said was teach it, not beleive it. I don't care if they teach my kid that crap.

There are people out there who think the Earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. You think schools should "teach both sides" of that "controversy"? What's the difference between that and evolution vs. creationism?

|8.29.08 @ 4:08PM|#

PS There's a difference between "evangelical" and "Pentecostal" - the Assemblies of God is (are?) in the latter.

|8.29.08 @ 4:10PM|#

Pentecostal, now that's how I roll.

|8.29.08 @ 4:12PM|#

Everytime you say dense or stupid Seize or swear on here you penis gets a little smaller doesn't it Seitz?

She said they should teach "both sides". That doesn't make her an evangelical or a nut. That was cop out answer on her part. Further, just because she belongs to the Assembly of God doens't make her an evangelical anymore than Obama going to Wright's church makes him a black liberation theologist.

If Darwin and Darwin alone is your test to vote on, have fun.

|8.29.08 @ 4:16PM|#

"Those of you arguing about Palin's take on creationism, can you please remember that in a representative democracy such as ours, you're not supposed to insult people and say that they believe in a myth? To me she shows class."

You have to understand since she didn't launch into an obscenity ladin rant about dumb hillbillies, she clearly is a fundie nut.

"There are people out there who think the Earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. You think schools should "teach both sides" of that "controversy"? What's the difference between that and evolution vs. creationism?"

They already teach global warming which is just as much of a fantasy as any of that. Further, 90% of the history texts are written by people left of Arthur Schlesenger and Howard Zinn. In some ways, the things you mentioned would be an improvement since they wouldn't have quite the impeter of seriousness. I will kick out creationism if the schools also agree to kick out ghia worshiping with it.

|8.29.08 @ 4:21PM|#

"How natural selection works."

Simple:

1) establish a selective condition (i.e. food scarcity or microbial drug resistance)
2) beings that have the appropriate traits to survive and reproduce in aforementioned condition will grow more populous compared to their competitors.

Natural selection is completely uncontroversial and is proven every single time a bacteria gains resistance to penicillin or other beta-lactam antibiotics.

Maybe you had something else in mind.

You should come back when we the subject comes up....the bat shit crazy stuff lefties here derive from that simple mechanism is mind blowing.

Such as it is well understood that bacteria will share genetic material to convey immunity to penicillin through various means yet such means used by Motecelo to convey immunity to herbicide is unprecedented in the natural world and will create supper weeds.

Then you have the whole Marxist progress = evolution thing.

Then you have the whole DDT does not work and if you disagree you are a creationist.

The list goes on.

|8.29.08 @ 4:23PM|#

I have met to many lefties who hold this up as a holy grail yet can't even explain how natural selection works.

So what? The average person likely lacks even a rudimentary understanding of the physics of flight, yet I should hardly fault him for it when he refuses to vote for a believer of levitation and flying carpets.

Seitz|8.29.08 @ 4:25PM|#

She said they should teach "both sides". That doesn't make her an evangelical or a nut.

You still don't get it. I DON'T CARE IF SHE'S EVANGELICAL OR PENTECOSTAL, OR MUSLIM, OR JEWISH, OR A GODDAMN SNAKEHANDLER!

I made fun of you for making claim you had absolutely no basis for which turned out to be dead wrong. I think that's hilarious, seeing as how you're using a computer and could have used said computer to find the answer before making a fool of yourself.

She said they should teach "both sides". That doesn't make her an evangelical or a nut.

It most certainly does make her a nut. Creationism or ID is not a "side". It's not science. If they want to teach it in Philosophy classes, that's fine (hint: not too many high schools teach philosophy or religious studies). Should they also teach creation myths for every other religion? By calling a "side" of a controversy, she's calling it a valid challenge to science. It's not.

Tell me this, John, if your kid came home with a textbook that said "some people believe 2+2=4, while others believe 2+2=37", would your response be "I don't care what they teach my kids all day, because I can just straighten them out when they get home", well, good luck with that.

"Those of you arguing about Palin's take on creationism, can you please remember that in a representative democracy such as ours, you're not supposed to insult people and say that they believe in a myth? To me she shows class."

It shows she doesn't know what she's talking about. Creationism is not a side of the controversy, and it's not science. If she was just being nice, she could have said "I think evolution is for science classes and creationism is for philosophy classes or church."

|8.29.08 @ 4:32PM|#

There are people out there who think the Earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. You think schools should "teach both sides" of that "controversy"? What's the difference between that and evolution vs. creationism?

Nothing...it would be a huge improvement to public science education if science was taught as a system based on proof rather then rote memorization of tables.

Would you rather have your children "believe" in Darwinism or to actually understand the science behind it?

Holding a debate between the various scientific merits of Darwinism vs creationism, i think would be great platform, to help children understand the science of natural selection.

|8.29.08 @ 4:40PM|#

Local Alaskan tv report nails Palin lying about firing scandal. What was McCain thinking?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UojMnCgqVA

Elemenope|8.29.08 @ 4:44PM|#

Holding a debate between the various scientific merits of Darwinism vs creationism, i think would be great platform, to help children understand the science of natural selection.

Sometimes a great notion, but I have to ask how that worked out for those communities and school districts that actually tried it. Was the students' appreciation of the process of science enhanced by the addition of a sticker on their textbook that said: Evolution is only a theory?

You know, like gravity.

Sometimes we confuse enforced fairness for objectivity. Sometimes, motherfuckers are just *wrong*.

|8.29.08 @ 4:47PM|#

Tell me this, John, if your kid came home with a textbook that said "some people believe 2+2=4, while others believe 2+2=37", would your response be "I don't care what they teach my kids all day, because I can just straighten them out when they get home", well, good luck with that.

I remember my math teacher in public school telling class that the US had a plane that could fly at mach 100. I think the confusion here is that some people (mostly left wingers) actually think public schools are not broken already.

|8.29.08 @ 4:51PM|#

Sometimes a great notion, but I have to ask how that worked out for those communities and school districts that actually tried it. Was the students' appreciation of the process of science enhanced by the addition of a sticker on their textbook that said: Evolution is only a theory?

You know, like gravity.

Sometimes we confuse enforced fairness for objectivity. Sometimes, motherfuckers are just *wrong*.

You are just a left winger who thinks the government has the right to dictate what other peoples children should learn in school. Really nothing else to see here.

Daily Kos is that way -------->

|8.29.08 @ 4:57PM|#

re Clinton the feminist icon - You mean Clinton who was on various boards in AR because she was married to the governor; Clinton who tried the revamp the medical system (and made a hash of it) because she was married to the President, Clinton who ran for NY senate seat because she was married to the President. I've never been able to understand why this woman has been given a bye (except expediency on the part of her liberal constituency.) Clinton the feminist icon has always been a weak arguement. And yes, I could take that polygraph test. There are plenty of reasons to have dislike and contempt for Hillary Clinton as a feminist example, indeed as politician, without the sexist labels.

Nick|8.29.08 @ 4:58PM|#

The funniest thing to me is hearing the Democrats arguing that because she has a newborn child with Down Syndrome that as VP she won't have time to be a "good mother." WTF? Isn't that the sort of sexism women have been fighting since suffrage? The thing I love about this appointment, like the appointment of Clarence Thomas is that it reveals just how onesided the Left's ideal of identity politics is. They don't believe in Affirmative Action for advancement of minorities, just for pushing through social control of schools and employers. If you black or a women and you don't support socialism, you're an "Uncle Tom" as the NAACP called Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice, or you're "not devoted to women's issues", a "token choice" and "not a good mother" as they've said about Sarah Palin. They would have said something similar about Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Christine Whitman too. It's sickening.

Also, I'm pleased with the choice, which puts me closer to wanting to vote for McCain than I've ever been (and I probably never will). She IS a small government conservative, for real. Let's just hope that, like McCain, she's not too huge on the social issues, and if elected they can end pork barrel politics, cut spending and taxes and push realistic energy, healthcare and immigration reforms. As a libertarian, it's looking like that's the best we can possibly expect out of the major parties. If the Dems control Congress, we can hope that they'd fight McCain's foreign policy at best. Probably still voting for Barr, though. Texas is going to McCain anyway.

|8.29.08 @ 4:58PM|#

joshua...are you the one who defines what a L/libertarian is?

If you are, then that explains why the party doesn't reach more people.

jkp|8.29.08 @ 5:15PM|#

HRC is a "Feminist icon"? Really?

Someone who owes her career to the man who she was sleeping with?

|8.29.08 @ 5:28PM|#

It doesn't matter if libertarians who hate feminsm think that Hillary *should be* a feminist icon.

She is, for better or for worse.

BakedPenguin|8.29.08 @ 5:41PM|#

Marcvs, it would, but my avatar still smokes. Also, I still occasionally use legal drugs.

BakedPenguin|8.29.08 @ 5:45PM|#

I actually wish I still enjoyed pot. It's so much less deleterious to the body compared with alcohol and most pharma drugs (benzodiazepams, for example).

This is one of the main reasons why the WoD is almost my "single issue".

Paul|8.29.08 @ 6:00PM|#

SlapHillary.com

Navigating there now.

Btw: it's over for McCain. And we're a better nation for it.*

*I hope.

|8.29.08 @ 6:24PM|#

"The funniest thing to me is hearing the Democrats arguing that because she has a newborn child with Down Syndrome that as VP she won't have time to be a "good mother.""

Umm...which "Democrats" said that?

Names?

Links?

|8.29.08 @ 7:18PM|#

...Bueller? ...Bueller?

|8.29.08 @ 8:15PM|#

Probably referring to John Roberts' remarks (CNN, so it's fair to assume he's a Democrat). Also showed up as commentary on Daily Kos, which would be typically described as Dem netroots.

ed|8.29.08 @ 10:12PM|#

how she could help John McCain govern

Forgive me for not fully understanding the Constitution, but how again does the VP help govern? By going on the Daily Show? Letterman? (I'm referring here to the U.S. Constitution, not the Comedy Constitution.) Anyone?

Lefiti|8.29.08 @ 11:05PM|#

McCain just wants some younger snatch at hand. Cindy's getting on.

Jim Treacher|8.30.08 @ 2:14AM|#

David Weigel: It's going to be awfully, awfully tiresome to hear conservatives whine about Palin attacks being sexist.

Lefiti: McCain just wants some younger snatch at hand. Cindy's getting on.

You were saying, David?

Weigel: Clinton was and is a feminist icon. Sarah Palin is Sarah Palin.

And the McCain campaign just got a new bumper-sticker slogan.

Kevin: She named two of her children after television witches. "Willow" was Buffy the Vampire Slayer's best friend and "Piper" was the eldest sister on the series Charmed played by Shannen Doherty.

Neat trick, considering Willow Palin was born 2 years before Buffy the Vampire Slayer premiered. Piper (b. 2002) may very well have been named for the Charmed character, though. And presumably that's a bad thing?

|8.30.08 @ 11:19AM|#

She IS a small government conservative, for real.

Her position on creationism does creep me out. But if she were to say that whether it is taught should be a decision made by local school boards and stated AGAINST a federal imposition of teaching creationism, then that is someone I could vote for.

Oh, and Joe, if you are still listening, yes, I guess O boy did get a bounce. Good for him.

I think if Palin can hold her own in the VP debates and the firing scandal in Alaska doesn't have legs, this will be considered brilliant decision by McCain.

Jim Treacher|8.30.08 @ 11:27AM|#

If you look at her words in context (crazy, I know), she said that she's fine with both creationism and evolutionism being taught in schools. Which I'm not wild about either, because creationism is bunk, but it's a different argument than "She's a creationist and she's demanding that your children be taught creationism." Well, no she isn't. She did give a pretty weaselly answer to a hot-button question. By all means she should be called out on that, but these panicky petes are taking her out of context and making themselves look silly. Relax, guys, you've got two whole months.

|8.30.08 @ 12:46PM|#

Of course he did, troy. Everybody gets a campaign bounce. And now McCain will get one.

I think he needs to at least take the lead for a few days on that bounce, or he's toast.

I'm now going to try to figure out how accusing John McCain of sexism is sexist.

|8.31.08 @ 12:55AM|#

I think its funny that Palin says that kids should have all the information then debate the issue. I think what she means is that the schools teach both sets of information and the parents tell their kids which one is BS.

|8.31.08 @ 2:34PM|#

Hilary Clinton is a feminist icon.

Now consider what that fact implies about modern feminism.

|9.1.08 @ 12:20PM|#

There are people out there who think the Earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. You think schools should "teach both sides" of that "controversy"? What's the difference between that and evolution vs. creationism?

Actually, I think it would be a great idea to teach kids the strongest evidence possible for a flat earth and for a faked moon landing, and then show them the evidence for the contrary views, so that kids could see for themselves why one point of view has come to be accepted by the mainstream, rather than being told just to accept it on authority.

I don't see why creationism can't be taught the same way. We "teach the controversy" about such unscientific theories such as psychoanalysis in psychology classes and such as Marxism in economics classes.

|9.2.08 @ 3:13AM|#

I can't believe the Conservatives on these lists defending this as a "brilliant decision". John McCain didn't give much thought to this one at all---and as a result we may be stuck with a dangerously inexperienced, ignorant woman in the number one spot. You are deluded and you're putting us all in danger. Haven't you people done enough harm? Look at the economy!! Look at the thousands of young people who've died in your unnecessary and stupid war. We need two countries--one for the intelligent ones and another for Republicans.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements