The New York Times has a story up chronicling the journey of Sen. John McCain’s Vice Presidential selection.
I still stand by my decision to not post my full opinion on the choice until after Palin’s speech this week, so I’ll let you all take the story as you will in the comments.
Depending on who you support, John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin for his Vice Presidential running mate is either the best or worst thing since sliced bread. The truth, I think, may not be so clear cut.
It’s been about 36 hours since John McCain made his announcement that he chose Palin. While she definitely has pros and cons, I’m not sure we know enough to make an educated decision yet (sound familiar?). We’ve had 18 months to get to know Obama, and while you can make the argument that we still don’t know enough, I think we do. This just isn’t the case with Palin.
I’ve think I’ve pretty much read every argument for and against Palin that is out there from bloggers and news sources left, right, center, and outer space. I’m not sure that’s enough. Therefore, I will reserve my judgement until after she makes her speech (hopefully) next week. That means Gustav, you can go ahead and dissipate now so the Republicans can have their convention as scheduled.
As if.
(Cross-posted from Poligazette)
Amongst all the hoopla about whether or not Sarah Palin was the right choice for John McCain’s running mate, I have yet to see one sentiment expressed.
When Barack Obama secured the Democratic nomination in June, it was said to be historic. Yet, at that time, and up until this morning, changing the face of the two top positions in this country was not guaranteed. Then John McCain chose Sarah Palin for his running mate, and that sealed the deal.
No matter what happens on November 4th now, how we see the the country’s two top leadership positions has changed forever. And whether or not you agree with Barack Obama’s or Sarah Palin’s political views, that change can only be a good thing for the country.
If the stakes were high for the Democrats - what with having to unify the party and all - the stakes are undeniably higher for the Republicans. Why?
John McCain’s selection of Vice President could have the effect of creating disunity among the Republicans. The Republicans can’t chance that, seeing as how they’ve been relatively unified for some time now. Even many of those who were starkly against McCain at the beginning are beginning to shelve their pride (publicly at least) and are backing McCain.
So, it is a fine line that John McCain walks as he decides on his running mate. The wrong choice could cause him major headaches.
Ads like these are why I remain an undecided voter in this election:
I meant to write this yesterday, but I’m glad I waited until today, since I now have more material to reference.
Basically, Jon Stewart sat down on Monday morning for breakfast with a bunch of journalists from all across the media spectrum and spoke about his disdain for cable news, and offered a warning to newspapers that they shouldn’t follow their lead.
There were several different reports filed about the speech, but the one I like the best comes from Comedy Central blogger Daniel DiClaudio (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). Just a warning that it is a bit long winded, and reeks of Stewart fanboyism in some parts (DiClaudio claims to not work for or represent The Daily Show), but I also think it’s the most extensive coverage of the breakfast.
Other media reports fill in the gaps DiClaudio missed, such as this one from the WaPo and this one from the Wall Street Journal. I’ll provide some key quotes after the jump, and some brief analysis.
It’s possible. The Politico is reporting that the Architect himself, Karl Rove, was the friend referred to in a column Robert Novak wrote today about Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.). The column says a friend urged Lieberman to call McCain and withdrawal himself for consideration for running mate.
The “he’s an elitist” story of the day is all about Barack Obama’s plans to give his acceptance speech tomorrow in front of a replica of a wall of an ancient Greek temple, column, lintel, and all.
Besides the fact that the entirety of Western culture largely owes its existence to the Greeks, those people who were paying attention in 2004 noted that the setup seemed oddly familiar to one they had seen before.
Oh yes: the stage set up at the Republican National Convention where George Bush gave his acceptance speech.
When blasting someone for doing something, it would do well to make sure your side hadn’t done it before.
Down and down, a much better speech than the one Mark Warner gave. I was a little worried the whole thing was going to be about her when she spent eight minutes or so talking about herself. Yet, in context, it does make sense, I guess. Her goal was to convince her supporters to support Obama, and it may have worked in some cases.
Basically, she gave a bottom line that eerily channels George Bush: Are you with us, or are you against us?
Perhaps my time would be better spent further analyzing John McCain’s VP prospects like I did last night. Although, what little I did see of Michelle Obama’s speech last night sounded pretty good (more on her in the next entry).
Tonight, the three biggies were Bob Casey (who I didn’t get to see), Mark Warner as the keynote speaker, and Hillary Clinton headlining after him. I’m not going to say much on his speech, because there’s not much to say. I don’t agree with one network’s pundits that he should have been an attack dog for McCain. Lets be fair. Warner mentioned McCain not that much less than Clinton did, and she got little flack for it. Yet, while he mentioned some things I like, such as looking toward the future, and the end of partisanship, I found the speech pretty uninspiring. That’s a bit of a let down to me, since I’ve seen him speak before, in person.
