Okay, I cannot resist. It is no secret to readers of this blog that I am one of those rare breeds in education....a Republican school teacher (talk about your endangered species!!). Well I just watch Sara Palin give her acceptance speech at the RNC and was totally blown away. Everybody always talks about what a great orator Obama is but he has definitely met his match in this feisty governor from Alaska.What I found very funny was that all the talking heads pretty much unanimously mentioned something to the effect of "that was not her speech as she had somebody write it for her". Who in the world actually believes that Obama writes his speeches? Few can touch Barak in his delivery of reading off of a teleprompter but he certainly does not write his own material.
But what a great story she has and there is no doubt that she embodies the whole concept of "change" because she is not like ANYBODY that is already there.
John King of CNN actually said it best when he described this as a "how dare you" speech - how dare you disparage small towns, how dare you discount the executive experience of a mayor and governor, how dare you attack my family. And she did it all with poise and a smile.
We always hear that the vast majority of jobs in this country come from small businesses. Well it is also true that this country is supported and has its soul in small towns throughout this country. Obama better watch his step if he dares to down play the importance of small town America.
I am very excited for this ticket!
And now back to our regularly scheduled educational program....
[Photo from the AP]
9 comments:
I have not decided who to vote for this year and enjoy reading political posts. Thanks for sharing your enthusiasm.
As a fiscal conservative who is unaffiliated, I have not made a decision in this election, though I often vote third party out of dissatisfaction with both parties. In regards to the speech, I would agree that she delivered a great speech to her crowd. That, however, is what bothers me. She gave an extremely socially conservative speech, and there is no way to argue that those positions make her an agent of change. In fact, anyone who watched that speech would be surprised that conservative Republicans have been in control of the White House for eight years and Congress for six and a half. This did not appeal to independent voters who question the current state of the nation.
While I think my small town mayor has done a fantastic job - and she's a heck of speaker, too - I wouldn't choose her for vice-president. That position is a valid concern for voters. I was also surprised to hear her disparage the work of community organizers, and Republicans may have to distance McCain from that comment. I would also disagree with you on Barack Obama's speechwriting abilities. People like Clinton and Reagan were great speakers because they did write their own speeches that were then vetted and tweaked by policy specialists. This is true for Obama as well. However, Palin's was admittedly written for her. That shouldn't qualify her or disqualify her, but it is worth noting.
In the end, I was disappointed by the divisive attacks, but I will admit she spoke to her crowd. That is the tactic that Karl Rove used quite effectively - to energize those who will vote for you anyway. However, in this election that means McCain will need to track to the center if he wants to win.
Michael,
I would say, first off, Palin's attacks on the Dems were no more than what Biden did last week. This is the role of the VP candidate - they are the bulldog that attacks the other side leaving the high road to the top of the ticket.
But overall regarding change, Bush is not running this time and as much as many would like to tie McCain to Bush he is as far from him as you can be and still be in the same party.
You say that McCain has to move more into the center - I have to assume you are joking if you think that Obama is closer to the center than McCain is. Obama is not able to give one solid example of where he went against his party to do what he felt was right. McCain has done this all the time which is why many Republicans are not overly excited about McCain - he does straddle that center line to get things done.
Dems like to say that McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time. Well Obama has voted 100% of the time with the Democratic-held Congress which has a a MUCH lower approval rating than Bush.
I sooo love political discussions....believe me, my comments are not attacking, just countering. I do appreciate your post Michael!!
I'm glad you posted about Palin and the Republican side of things. I'm glad I'm not alone :-)
Teachers for McCain/Palin!
I completely agree with you about Palin's comments being similar to Biden, not to mention both Clintons and numerous others. Her speech was an excellent speech to her supporters, which is exactly what the campaign wanted it to be. McCain, on the other hand, will need to move to the center to secure voters who, knowing Obama's positions, are still on the fence. I hate to say it's a repeat of "It's the economy, stupid," but there is evidence of that argument being relevant.
One of the issues where this matters the most is fiscal policy, and voters can rightly criticize the policies and the tax cuts of the last eight years. Cuts on the supply side, which is a conservative position, haven't been as helpful as they are billed, and voters could be reasonably interested in cuts on the demand side, which are things such as predominantly middle class tax cuts and the Earned Income Tax Credit. For me, the budget/debt is a huge concern, and I'm on the side of former comptroller David Walker and the Concord Coalition who argue that our long term problems will only be alleviated with tax increases AND spending cuts.
Thus, I would again assert that while McCain has an independent streak, the speeches last night and the choice of Palin do not represent change.
Well this is where we will have to agree to disagree. History has proven time and time again that tax cuts have ALWAYS resulted in higher governmental revenue.
Cutting taxes = higher revenue
The problem with these last 8 years is that Congress has been on a massive spending high and Bush has refused to veto any spending bill. It has been the equivilent of giving a teenager a credit card with no limit and dropping them off at the mall.
Only with tax cuts AND spending cuts, will the deficit come under control. When people have more discretionary income, they will spend more which will result in more production from business and more taxable revenue.
And people always yell and scream about corporate tax cuts but the same thing applies, when business are able to have more money, they not only make more products but they hire more people which then increase the revenue cycle.
Fred Thompson pegged it perfectly last night...Obama claims that he is not going to raise taxes on the middle class but he will on any business with more than $250,000 in revenue. Well that would be a true statement as long as nobody is buying any food, putting gas in their car, buying clothes or making any other purchases. When business pay more, they charge more...that is simple economics.
Interesting points, however, in terms of agreeing to disagreeing with me on tax cuts, you are also disagreeing with the majority of economists, including Yale professor Gregory Mankiw, who was Bush's chief economic advisor. Mankiw, whose "Principles of Economics" is a seminal work has referred to supply-siders as "charlatans and liars," as he notes there is no viable evidence that tax cuts increase revenue. In fact, while he supported the Bush tax cuts, he pointed out that they will return, at best, one-quarter of the lost revenue.
If you check the records and his analyses, you will note that Reagan's first tax cuts showed negligible revenue increases, and the revenue increases in subsequent years coincided with the five times between 1982 and 1986 that Reagan raised taxes, including the corporate income tax. Reagan's greatest benefit (and I am a supporter of the true, not mythical, Ronald Reagan) is that he was a pragmatist. In fact, I think history will show that our greatest leaders have always been our most pragmatic.
Spending cuts are certainly a necessity, but voters shouldn't pretend that the Republican party of the past twenty-years have offered that. Joe Scarborough, for example, has noted with great derision the direct actions of Newt Gingrich to subvert the Contract with America almost immediately after passing it. Who else can explain the return of the mohair subsidy added back in by Gingrich. Note: I am a fan of Newt's in many ways, but I am critical of much that he is trying to sell lately.
Your comments of business taxes are valid, I concur. However, like most of what I've experienced from the last eight years, I think those positions over-simplify the economy, as well as a myriad of other issues such as foreign policy. That said, I do enjoy discussing this, and I was pleased to find your blog.
I am excited about the entrance of Sarah Palin on the Washington political scene....I usually vote Republican myself, but I do understand your comment concerning being a rare breed. :)
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,1
Post a Comment