Colour me unimpressed
Aug. 29th, 2008 12:18 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
patgundWas looking over John McCain's running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin. And other than the fact that the two of them together looks like Saul Tigh and Laura Roslin, I can't see what she brings to the ticket, except a sop to the fundamentalist wing of the GOP and a cynical attempt to court the disaffected Clinton PUMA.
In terms of courting the "Hillary" vote, it really depends:
Anyone who really supports what Clinton stands for won't be overly attracted to a woman who stands in direct opposition to everything Sen. Clinton stands for.
Anyone who was supporting Clinton due to gender only would go for Palin.
Same goes for those who were supporting Clinton due to hatred of Obama.
It undercuts the experience card, two years as governor of a sparcely populated state undercuts the the whole "Obama isn't experienced" arguement.
She's got ties to big oil.
As for the sop to the Fundamentalists? Well, Palin is not just anti-choice, but anti-evolution as well.
Intelligent Design and the Alaska Governor's Race
I noted a couple things over at![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
dark_christian about her as well.
According to reports, Palin's a member of Assemblies of God, which has been agressively targeted by Dominionists with many churches "Steeplejacked" and brought over to a very hard line fundementalist viewpoint.
Palin's views on Abortion and Creationism are very much in line with Dominionist belief.
In addition, she was also a member of the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes", which has heavy dominionist ties.
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/8/23/142836/277
"At least one member of Bearing Fruit's board of directors (T. Ray Grandstaff) is a former Senior VP for Fellowship of Christian Athletes. FCA has been linked to dominionism in numerous ways; they are well known for "bait and switch" evangelism (in fact, they and Athletes in Action are among the two groups most frequently banned from public school campuses due to bait-and-switch "altar calls" marketed as anti-drug talks to the school administration). More info here. (Such tactics are a favourite of dominionist groups explicitly targeting youth.) It's also well known (and, apparently, explicitly by design) that Fellowship of Christian Athletes rather aggressively "dominionist-ises" any team they are let into (this tends to be bad even within the NFL, but even more so within FCA groups run in colleges and high schools)."
In addition, her pastor, Mike Rose, has ties to Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries, which has been "listed as influential in spreading dominion theology"
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2005/12/19/155228/97
The selection of Palin looks like an attempt by McCain to make nice with the fundamentalist wing of the GOP and at the same time try and court disaffected Clinton supporters with a cynical "see, my VP has lady bits too, so vote for her."
On edit, absolutely no doubt they're trying to court Hillary supporters:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/us/politics/29text-palin.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1
"I think -- I think as well today of two other women who came before me in national elections. I can't begin this great effort without honoring the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and of course Senator Hillary Clinton, who showed such determination and grace in her presidential campaign. It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America but it turns out the women of America aren't finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all."
In terms of courting the "Hillary" vote, it really depends:
Anyone who really supports what Clinton stands for won't be overly attracted to a woman who stands in direct opposition to everything Sen. Clinton stands for.
Anyone who was supporting Clinton due to gender only would go for Palin.
Same goes for those who were supporting Clinton due to hatred of Obama.
It undercuts the experience card, two years as governor of a sparcely populated state undercuts the the whole "Obama isn't experienced" arguement.
She's got ties to big oil.
As for the sop to the Fundamentalists? Well, Palin is not just anti-choice, but anti-evolution as well.
Intelligent Design and the Alaska Governor's Race
I noted a couple things over at
dark_christian about her as well.According to reports, Palin's a member of Assemblies of God, which has been agressively targeted by Dominionists with many churches "Steeplejacked" and brought over to a very hard line fundementalist viewpoint.
Palin's views on Abortion and Creationism are very much in line with Dominionist belief.
In addition, she was also a member of the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes", which has heavy dominionist ties.
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/8/23/142836/277
"At least one member of Bearing Fruit's board of directors (T. Ray Grandstaff) is a former Senior VP for Fellowship of Christian Athletes. FCA has been linked to dominionism in numerous ways; they are well known for "bait and switch" evangelism (in fact, they and Athletes in Action are among the two groups most frequently banned from public school campuses due to bait-and-switch "altar calls" marketed as anti-drug talks to the school administration). More info here. (Such tactics are a favourite of dominionist groups explicitly targeting youth.) It's also well known (and, apparently, explicitly by design) that Fellowship of Christian Athletes rather aggressively "dominionist-ises" any team they are let into (this tends to be bad even within the NFL, but even more so within FCA groups run in colleges and high schools)."
In addition, her pastor, Mike Rose, has ties to Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries, which has been "listed as influential in spreading dominion theology"
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2005/12/19/155228/97
The selection of Palin looks like an attempt by McCain to make nice with the fundamentalist wing of the GOP and at the same time try and court disaffected Clinton supporters with a cynical "see, my VP has lady bits too, so vote for her."
On edit, absolutely no doubt they're trying to court Hillary supporters:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/us/politics/29text-palin.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1
"I think -- I think as well today of two other women who came before me in national elections. I can't begin this great effort without honoring the achievements of Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and of course Senator Hillary Clinton, who showed such determination and grace in her presidential campaign. It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America but it turns out the women of America aren't finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 07:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 07:57 pm (UTC)http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmNhYzgzM2Y1Y2QzZjhmZmM0OTIzMmE0YTg2OGY5NDA=
GERALDINE FERRARO: It’s going to be a very interesting campaign. I must say that several months ago I said that it would be great if there was a woman on the ticket, that I felt that John McCain would have to pick someone, especially if Hillary was the nominee, but without Hillary being the nominee it’s really quite equally as important, because people are looking for a historic campaign, and I think this might do it. There are a lot of women who are disaffected by how Hillary was treated by the media, by how she was treated by the Obama campaign, by how she was treated by the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean not speaking up when sexism raised its ugly head in the media. (Inaudible)
Ferraro has gotten a lot of heat since her ""If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is." comment. And she's said she may not vote for him. So she's all for it.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 09:06 pm (UTC)One makes me wonder what woman these people wouldn't vote for: Margaret Thatcher? Anita Bryant? Josef Stalin in drag (or did I repeat myself)?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 09:13 pm (UTC)And my thought is ANY Hilary supporter could never vote the new McCain/Palin ticket just because the possible VP has lady-bits. She stands against everything and anything a Hilary supporter would stand for, specifically she's NOT pro-choice. (Heck, with 5 kids (one entering college and one recently born), I'm not sure she's even pro-birth-control, if you know what I mean?)
So... yeah I really can't seen a true Hilary supporter voting for McCain thinking "Hmm.. his VP is a woman..." Maybe if they swapped places?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 09:23 pm (UTC)Anyone who really supports what Clinton stands for won't be overly attracted to a woman who stands in direct opposition to everything Sen. Clinton stands for
Anyone who was supporting Clinton due to gender only would go for Palin.
Same goes for those who were supporting Clinton due to hatred of Obama.
As for experience, two years as governor of a sparcely populated state undercuts the the whole "Obama isn't experienced" arguement.
(on another note, is this the same Dieppe I've seen on the Caid list??)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 10:54 pm (UTC)What the hell are "Dominionists"?
(That's a new one by me...)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-29 10:58 pm (UTC)They're known for "Steeplejacking", or taking over less conservative churches and remaking them into their model. They're associated with the "Joel's Army" movement as well.
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/joels-army-and-call
no subject
Date: 2008-09-01 06:10 am (UTC)And I just *love* how she completely forgot to mention Elizabeth Dole's run for office. She didn't get nearly as far as Hillary did, but she did get a significant amount of national coverage when she ran.
Edited to fix typo