Saturday, September 20, 2008

Cutting Slack

A.K.M. Adam is correct, in my opinion, that the media can go overboard in crucifying candidates during an election. So it is clear - I could support either Obama or McCain but Palin makes the McCain ticket unpalatable to me. I'm not out to find the dirt, simply to say that she would make a horrible president.

My friend John has an interesting post about voting (since Canada is also having an election). Clearly our systems differ but there are enough similarities. Party platforms will form the core of any particular candidates stump speech and stock answers. These are immutable. What does give some room for original answers though are the intangible character traits that emerge during someone's governing. That is, the particular decision is not as important as the process of the decision.

I don't trust Palin to make the right decision regardless of her party's platform.


burnlikestars said...

so are you going to post a reason of some sort, or you just dont trust her?

if we are going off of gut feelings then fine, but if we want to go off of concrete reasons than that is better.

if you need about half a million concrete valid reasons why you cant trust Obama to run our country then please let me know and I will be happy to supply you with them.

blair said...

I wasn't planning on posting reasons but as you note burnlikestars, I did open myself up to the legitimate question.

First off, I'm not sure if people need more than a "gut feeling" about candidates since that is often as much as they are able to get given the party machinery that dictates that all candidates stick to talking points. I'll put up another post about how this trend hurts democracy and the ability of voters to act on anything but "gut feelings."

That doesn't really answer your question though. My objection to Palin does have a foundation in something other than feeling, if opinion based on her response to a taped interview is distinct from feeling. It is my opinion that anyone nominated by one of the two major parties in the United States of America for the position of Vice President should be able to clearly articulate her understanding of the Bush Doctrine. I take special note on issues of foreign policy as I am a foreigner living in the US. It seems to me that the international community would like to know that the VP of the US understands that not only does the largest military power in the world believe that it has the right to a preemptive strike but a preventative one as well. This leaves aside my opinion about the justness of such a policy. It was her simple ignorance that causes me to doubt her ability to govern one of the most complex and powerful countries in the world. I believe that she would make decisions too quickly with too little information and knowledge and thus jeopardize not only her own people but the international community as well.

As a side note, I'd be interested in seeing 500 000 "concrete" reasons why Obama shouldn't lead the US. Perhaps you could blog about on your own blog at a rate of approximately 12 500 a day until the election? By this I mean to point out that in politics there is never a good candidate, only candidates who are less bad than others. This is especially true in the US with such a binary system in place. I believe that I could find many reasons not to vote for every candidate, Obama included. I happen to believe that the ignorance that Palin displays as a significant enough reason for me to not trust her as Vice President. You can attempt to point out a case of Obama/Biden displaying a larger amount of ignorance if you would like. I just haven't found one yet.