I don’t think that boiling down Palin to just another ‘pretty face’ is doing her justice. Yes she was in beauty pagents but then again how many beauty contestants then go on to be the Governor? She is not following in the footsteps of her husband, she is the exact example of feminism – a successful woman working outside the home and still holding down the family life.

Yet I can’t help but think of a typical feminists’ opinion of beauty pageants.

Anyway, I suppose I should amend my post and clarify that I’m not sure if that particular aspect of the pander will be successful. PUMA’s aside, most women aren’t stupid. But the attempt seems pretty transparent to me.

Palin risked making enemies to clean up Alaskian government in her own party and lives the Conservative lifestyle. She is her own woman.

McCain made a wise choice, the female voting block is like 57% of the American voters, so picking a Conservative female with a good record as Governor is not a crime, or pandering….it is giving the people what they want. And the definition of pandering is recruiting people for sexual means.

I’m just waiting for Palin to use the phrase “world peace”. Then it’ll come full circle.

You would fare better to use a very basic tactic in argumentation. Bring up valid counter points and then try to at least neutralize them.

Well, I have my own style, I suppose. I’m just going off my first impressions here. Besides, that’s why I have a comments section on this blog, and why I call it the Chamber. I offer up my own take to be challenged, and in doing so I shape my own understanding and my readers’.

Surely the fact she walks it like she talks merits comment. Pro life woman who knowingly gives birth to a retarded baby. A Mom who supports the war while seeing off a son to Iraq.

Strange to think of such things as being exceptional. You’ve just described most women.

Does 4 years in the senate somehow automatically trump two years as governor?

Of course this aspect is going to be brought up. Please understand that I don’t think we’re on the same page here. Obama is in the position he’s in because he received votes from millions of people. a real cynic would pose the argument that he’s there despite his thin resume because of elements of white guilt, media shilling, the perceived need to be involved in something historical, etc. So the underlying question the cynic is asking is “what were 18 million people thinking?”.

I’m certainly playing the role of a cynic in this post, but in the context here the question is “what was McCain thinking?”. All things considered, I think I did a decent job dissecting it.

Why would obvious pandering to the swing vote state Michigan with a pick of Romny be perfectly normal but pandering to women with a pick of Palin be heretical?

Whatever electability gains the Romney would give McCain in MI would undoubtedly be offset by the anti-Mormon factor that exists out there. I don’t know if I’m sold on that “home state” rationale as equating to pandering anyway, at least in the magnitude that I’m talking about here. Everyone has a “home state”, after all. Plus I think my “pandering” argument is further bolstered by the fact that, like the rest of us, McCain barely knows this person.

And I’m certainly not using the word “heretical”. I guess what I’m getting at is that McCain really outta reevaluate the whole “country first” slogan, ’cause this pick appears to be motivated by self preservation. And don’t get me wrong, from the perspective of (a), I don’t think that this is a dumb move on McCain’s part. In fact, I think what I’m arguing here is that it might actually work. Good for McCain, bad for the rest of us, basically.

Although I suppose it’s always possible if he doesn’t like what she does or says, she’ll just be sent around the world on talks and appearances in place of the president. Somehow, I don’t see her as merely getting delegated as a spokesperson, as she’s a pretty no-bull person…and that could backfire for the Republicans if she’s let out on her own.

Am I wrong Chen?

You would fare better to use a very basic tactic in argumentation. Bring up valid counter points and then try to at least neutralize them.

Surely her rise to power in Alaska merits comment. A Republican who goes up against the entire Republican party in Alaska, cleaning up corruption. Her story is remarkable and deserves honorable mention by partisan Chen.

Surely the fact she walks it like she talks merits comment. Pro life woman who knowingly gives birth to a retarded baby. A Mom who supports the war while seeing off a son to Iraq.

Surely her approval ratings in Alaska merit comment. 80%

Does 4 years in the senate somehow automatically trump two years as governor?

Why would obvious pandering to the swing vote state Michigan with a pick of Romny be perfectly normal but pandering to women with a pick of Palin be heretical?

I honestly don’t know what to make of her until I see her debate Biden.