OK, here we go. She's poised. She looks fearless. You give 'em hell, girl!
UPDATE.1 To special needs parents: "I pledge to you that if we're elected, you'll have a friend and an advocate in the White House."
Bless her. You know that's true.
UPDATE.2 On small town folks:
"I grew up with those people. They're the ones who do some of the hardest work in America. They grow our food, they [work in] our factories, they fight our wars." And: "They're always proud of America."
Unlike some people. Hey, Mrs. O said it!
UPDATE.3 "I guess a small town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except you have actual responsibilities." Cha-ching!
FANTASTIC! The line about not knowing what to make of a candidate that flatters small town folks to their face, but trashes them as embittered Jesus-freak gun nuts behind their backs.
"We tend not to like candidates that talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco."
UPDATE.4 Very effective passage slamming the media elite, and saying that she's not going to DC to be part of the insider status quo. She speaks with such steely conviction. It's inspiring.
"Sudden and relentless reform never sits well with entrenched interests and power
brokers."
UPDATE.5: After what this woman and her family have been put through since Friday, who would have imagined that she'd be able to get up and deliver such a confident, poised address? It's remarkable. I think she's making a terrific impression.
UPDATE.6: Barack has written two memoirs, but not a major law or reform -- "not even in the state Senate."
"...and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot, when that happens, what exactly is our opponent's plan? What exactly does he seek to accomplish after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?" Hilarious!
UPDATE.7: She's having fun with this! And she's really bringing it home, the campaign's theme that McCain is about substance, and Obama's about style. Even if you think this is nonsense, you have to admit she's selling this line effectively.
UPDATE.8: "The American presidency is not a journey of self-discovery." And: "Let's face the question squarely: there is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you in places where winning means survival, and defeat means death"
This. Is. Amazing. Who can doubt this woman's effectiveness now?! She's knocking 'em dead. John Podhoretz calls it the equivalent of Obama's 2004 convention speech. And also "perhaps the most dazzling national debut speech in American political history."
UPDATE.9: That's it. It's over. But it's really just begun. That woman is it<! She has turned this thing around.
History just got made! Awesome. Awesome. American politics has a new rock star. She comes from a small town. Joy!
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
"Compassion for the poor and those in need is an important part of Christian life. But sometimes the most compassionate thing we can do is say, "After this date, this money may not be available any more, so let's see what sort of work you might qualify to do and help you get started in something productive." I think helping people believe in themselves and climb out of poverty can be more compassionate than keeping them in it."
The trouble is, too many people, conservatives in particular, seem too
anti-tax to be willing to sufficiently fund programs to help those
who need it. I have written here before about my autistic sister. It
takes $3-4K per month to pay for the services she needs and the 24/7
care she requires. It costs money to help people like her, money
most families do not have; I certainly don't have that kind of funding, so
she receives from the government Social Security and Medicaid and Medicare as well as what is called a "developmental disability waiver" .
And those who tout volunteerism as the solution to the problem of people like her are being naive. God bless all volunteers, but the fact is, few volunteers are up to the task of caring for her for any length of time, with her violent tantrums and bizarre behaviors such as smearing excrement on walls when she is angry. (Sorry if this offends some of you, but it's the God's-honest truth).
The role of government in social welfare programs can best be justified
by a quote from James Madison: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary."
But you see, Sis2lis, I'd be all in favor of tax dollars going to help your sister. I'd be all in favor of public conversations about disabilities like hers and what we should do, and charitable fund-raisers too to help increase the level of care she gets.
The trouble with a "big-government" approach to *everything* is that too often our priorities are skewed. Perfectly healthy, public-school educated, fully-employable people walk around with their hands out for "assistance," and someone like your sister who actually needs it doesn't end up with an adequate amount for her needs.
Or look at the rising health-care toll of the illegal immigrant situation. I'm not opposed to amnesty efforts etc., but I hear stories about public hospitals in some areas shutting their doors because of the high volume of illegal immigrants they must provide care for (by law) without receiving enough money to stay operational. Again, people like your sister end up being the ones hurt most by our mandates in favor of paying for health care for people who aren't here legally--there are real social costs to a too-open immigration policy.
"That said, by actually introducing her entire family during her acceptance speech, isn't she begging for more of the same?"
Sure, and the libs are taking the bait, hook line and sinker!
Erin Manning @ 11:38 AM writes:
"You render her daughter and future son-in-law as objects to be reviled instead of people created in the image and likeness of God and fellow sinners who we ought to forgive as we hope to be forgiven. Your position actually encourages abortion, because only by hiding and covering up "her wayward daughter's" shame by a quick and private abortion would Sarah Palin remain eligible in your eyes for public office--because how would you then ever know she had this "lack of character and personal/family discipline" you find so terribly disqualifying, coarse, and hideous?"
Please read what I posted at the end of the "Liveblogging Tuesday's Republican" thread. (I posted it at 10:30 or so this morning.) I believe that post explains what I believe more than adequately. I'd copy it and re-post it here, save for the fact that it would be far too long when added to this.
Sigaliris @ 12:13 PM writes:
"I also have a question for Mr. Karth: you've heaped shame on Governor Palin, but you haven't said anything about her husband. What would his proper response be? Shouldn't he be committing seppuku with a fish knife? After all, he's the father of a fallen woman. Or do we just blame the mothers here? Suppose this--or something similar, like a gay son--occurs in your family? Will you voluntarily withdraw from public life as a failure? Or will you put the blame on Mrs. Karth? Please expatiate further on your principles."
I commend the same post to your attention that I did to milady Manning.
It's simply too long to repost in its entirety here. Suffice it to say that I do believe the father has committed the same failing as the mother; the difference being that it is Mrs. Palin that is seeking an office of high public trust.
It boils down to a matter of standards for holding office. I believe that public office is a trust. Holding office requires higher-than-normal standards of conduct for those who aspire to it than for the average citizen. Technical competence is not enough; since the office-holder potentially wields authority over many others, as well as the public fisc, additional assurances of high and correct character are in order. Senator McCain, for example, cites his conduct while being held prisoner in North Vietnam as an assurance of his quality as a potential President. Should not the same principle apply in the consideration of his deputy as well ?
In Governor Palin's case, she takes great pains to hold up her wayward daughter's conduct and her (Gov. Palin's) handling of it as exemplary. She also claims to be a firm adherent to Christian principles. Oddly enough, I do not recall teenage fornication being described as a Christian principle worthy of emulation.
Again, this is NOT to say that the wayward Bristol should be "cast out". Her conduct (and that of her parents in not merely accepting what has happened but in actually publicizing it) was a grave error, to be corrected by her marrying the father of this child---an extremely merciful position by the family, historically speaking---and raising it quietly. Were her parents not involved in public life, that would end the matter.
It is her parents' failure to ensure adequate supervision for their daughter, as well their failure to inculcate adequate self-control in their daughter, that renders Mrs. Palin (or Mr. Palin, were he the one occupying the governor's seat) unfit for higher office. What could be considered a tolerable failure on this level would be unacceptable in a matter affecting the welfare of millions---and the Vice Presidency is an office whose holder is in a position to affect the welfare of an entire country. The Palins' lapse in judgment in the matter of their daughter is simply too serious to ignore.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
"The trouble with a "big-government" approach to *everything* is that too often our priorities are skewed. Perfectly healthy, public-school educated, fully-employable people walk around with their hands out for "assistance," and someone like your sister who actually needs it doesn't end up with an adequate amount for her needs."
This makes me ask the question, if the money isn't coming from big government,
where is it to come from? In the case of autism alone, if the statistics
of its increasing incidence are even half correct, there are going to be a lot more people like my sister coming down the pipeline, and it seems to me, that
only the federal government has the resources to deal monetarily with
that crisis. Yes, entitlement money goes to people who are crooks, or
who are lazy, or who really don't need it for as long as they are getting it.
But the question remains: where are the resources to come from to cover
a problem of such a magnitude? Private charity, whether secular or
religious just cannot do the job. So by all means cut out waste, and fraud, but
don't think that the need for such services from the government is
going to go away when and if the abuse of the system is corrected.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.