By David Terhune

Republicans are rushing to the defense of Sarah Palin in outrage over a perceived slight by Barack Obama when he referred to John McCain's economic policies as putting "lipstick on a pig," and somehow interpreting the remark as a swipe at his running mate. No matter that Obama was clearly referring to the theme of change that McCain appropriated from the Obama campaign.

 

No matter that John McCain used the phrase himself when referring to Hillary Clinton's healthcare plan in 2007.

Fragile Sarah, the moose killer, was wounded by Obama's words, and GOP supporters are demanding an apology.

The heat of the political season must make some people crazy. Governor Palin uses the word "lipstick" in her speech at the Republican National Convention (we've all heard the pitbull joke too often by now) and suddenly any reference to the make-up product is directed at her? Is Alaska receiving some kind of earmark from L'Oreal? As quick as they could, McCain's campaign released a commercial to memorialize their utter and intentional misreading of Obama's speech. If McCain was truly a maverick, he would eschew these traditional dirty tricks and lead a respectable campaign.

But I don't think that dignity or respect will reign in the McCain campaign. The swift boat tactics of the 2004 election were too successful and the presidential stakes are now too high for the Republicans to take a chance on virtue. I fear that McCain will continue to accuse Obama of whatever fabrication his team of smear experts concocts - playing the "race card," being sexist, raising taxes - all the while chanting, "change is coming, change is coming," until he hypnotizes the American people into believing they can actually transform the policies of the Republican administration by electing more Republicans.

But hopefully the electorate will not allow itself to be distracted by half-truths and untruths, and both campaigns will be held accountable to the topics that truly matter to the country. Or in other words, you can put lipstick on the voters, but it doesn't mean they'll believe what you make up.

by David Terhune

Prepare to be assimilated! The McCain/Palin craze that is "sweeping". the nation is becoming reminiscent of the Borg from Star Trek's Next Generation. These half-machine humanoids claim the minds and bodies of their conquered prey and add the victims to the Collective, a unified and controlled intelligence. The press and polls seem to be supporting the mission of Borg operatives McCain and Palin as their popularity and percentages are reported to grow with every campaign conquest. Are these beings unstoppable?

 

The Democrats have never encountered anything like the Borg before. When the McCain Borg assimilated Palin into the Collective, the Democrats responded with confidence that her weak credentials would in turn make her a weak Borg. But they underestimated the power of the Collective. Once assimilated, the Palin Borg unleashed her unexpected powers of persuasion and convinced her willing audiences that references to hockey moms and pitbulls were compelling arguments to join the Collective as well.

But the McCain/Palin Borg is only a distraction. The Collective boasts a leader who, though lacking the popularity of the Borg Republican team, is nonetheless the center of the Borg crusade in this country and abroad. Wisely, the Borg keep their leader under wraps, limiting his visibility at Borg assimilation events like the Republican National Convention. But with their commander's mind and policies firmly ensconced in the Collective, the Borg can continue to absorb unwitting citizens who think that McCain and Palin represent a change in the Borg supreme authority.

But are the Democrats truly feeling apprehensive about the Borg invasion as the media indicate? That message itself may be part of the Borg plan. If the Palin Borg continues to say she never supported the Bridge To Nowhere, the Borg believe that fantasy will become truth. If the McCain Borg repeatedly claims that his opponents will raise taxes, that pretension will become substance. However, those who have not been fully integrated into the Collective have the ability to withstand the Borg machine. The Borg count the repetition of misinformation among their most successful weapons. But awareness of the Borg scheme can help immunize the mind against this powerful strategy. Otherwise, when the Borg approach with their steely gaze and mechanical arms outstretched, be prepared. Resistance is futile!

By David Terhune

Is it any surprise that Sarah Palin "electrified" the Republican convention with her acceptance speech as John McCain's running mate? Her public speaking skills were surely a major attraction for the Republican ticket, skills honed not only during her years of public service but also as a beauty pageant contestant and local television sportscaster. But beneath the polish and poise are her words, and on those we must focus. For me, two portions of her speech stood out - her belittling of Barack Obama's community organizing experience and her questioningof the Obama family's patriotism.

 

Governor Palin likened her government experience to Senator Obama's community organizing, except that Palin had "actual responsibilities." Community organizers have been the foundation of many great American movements, not the least of which was the Civil Rights movement. It certainly wasn't local politicians who inspired the brave acts that brought civil rights into the American and world spotlights. Palin's barb demonstrated a troubling lack of knowledge of the value of community organizing in this country. Palin also pointed out how small town people are "always proud of America," a not-so-subtle reference to Michelle Obama's quote concerning her being proud of America "for the first time" as her husband's candidacy began to blossom. While Ms. Obama no doubt regrets this remark, the fact remains that the African American experience in the United States is markedly different than the white experience. With the record of community service and support the Obamas possess, questioning their patriotism and pride as a political maneuver is nothing short of insulting. But it sure was a nice speech, wasn't it?

Please continue to Full Story

By David Terhune

Two recent slips during speeches by Republican presidential candidates John McCain and Sarah Palin can be seen as more than just the innocent tongue-tripping that occurs with people who engage in frequent public speaking. At a campaign speech in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Governor Palin referred to how small businesses will prosper under the "Palin and McCain administration." The day before, Senator McCain tried to bolster Palin's national security experience by touting her command of the Alaska National Guard and her son's recent deployment to Iraq.

 

Unfortunately, McCain identified Palin's son as a part of the National Guard, when he is actually a member of the Army. In addition, the governor of Alaska has no authority over her National Guard when it is deployed overseas. If Sarah Palin was not significantly eclipsing her running-mate in popularity, her inversion of the names on the Republican ballot could be seen as merely careless.

However, I fear the governor may actually believe the hardcore fans who are saying that she's the one who should be on top of the ticket. There is no doubt that the charisma and vitality that Palin demonstrates are not traits that are shared by McCain. I hear that crowds dwindle once Palin's speeches end and McCain's begin. This must have some effect on the governor's ego. Palin has said that she is ready to take over the presidency if necessary. She may be a little too ready.

McCain's mistake is no less revealing. One fear expressed over his decision to add Palin to the ticket was that their non-existent relationship prior to his invitation demonstrated that the move was more political than it was responsible. Critics charge that she was chosen for her back-story, her appearance, her gender, and her evangelical appeal and not for her ability to be a trusted confidante and worthy successor to McCain. In short, she's a ready-made campaign commercial. McCain's attempt to reinforce Palin's credentials by exploiting her son's deployment and switching his affiliation from the Army to the National Guard signifies that McCain sees his running-mate as a convenience and a tool for his campaign. I have a hard time believing that a man who has spent as much time in the military as McCain has would actually confuse the two.

So we have a presidential candidate who will twist and distort facts to reach his political ends, and we have a vice-presidential candidate who is chomping at the bit to take over his job. Their slogan may be "Country First," but their behavior seems to say "Me First" instead.

By David Terhune

If only briefly, Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, the mum hockey mom, was allowed to speak extemporaneously following her recent trip to New York City and the site of the 9/11 attack. She was limited to four questions - due perhaps to her rush to assist John McCain in saving the American economy - and she made this heartfelt opening statement: "I wish every world leader would come through here, and understand what it is that took place here, and more importantly, how America came together and united to commit to never allowing this to happen again."

 

Incredibly, the next in line for the presidency should the Republicans take office was inviting any world leader to the United States, apparently without preconditions, to "feel the pain" of the American people embodied in the destroyed World Trade Center towers. Leaders of countries torn apart by war and poverty, under Palin's plan, will visit the 9/11 site, see the empty lot, the cranes, the fences and suddenly realize that all of their problems and grievances "pale in" comparison. This is truly a maverick's approach to diplomacy. Make the world feel sorry for us.

But this was a rare opportunity for Palin to exercise her foreign policy credentials. Complaints abound over Palin's unavailability for questions and comments. The strict control placed over the governor prompted CNN anchor Campbell Brown to protest the sexism in the McCain camp. Ms. Brown called the shielding of Palin "chauvinistic treatment," and prodded the Republicans to allow Palin "to show her stuff." From the team of McCain staffers sent to Anchorage to spin the Troopergate scandal to the exclusion of Palin from commentary after the first presidential debate, it certainly seems that McCain has no confidence in Palin's ability to stand on her own.  Of course, with visionary proposals like the 9/11 sympathy summit, we might be able to forgive the desperate McCain handlers' sexist overtones. If a man was offering the same daffy declarations, the Republicans would certainly limit his access to the press. Just examine the media availability of their presidential nominee.

When Sarah Palin was first introduced nationally as the Republican VP pick, she placed herself in the ground-breaking company of Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton. And for a moment, she did stand with them. But she soon allowed herself to be dominated and directed by John McCain's advisors, who prefer that the governor look pretty in photos and speak from a script.  Her own words, whether august or absurd, are suppressed. Is this the same woman who proudly fought the "old boy's network" in Alaska? Is this the same woman for whom death is sport? She may appear in the record books with Clinton and Ferraro, but they would never have accepted Palin's second class role.

 

By David Terhune

Early in his campaign, Barack Obama predicted that if he did not win the presidency, it would not be due to his color but that he was unable to convince the American people of his vision and competence. To say that race would not play a role in the first presidential election featuring a major party black candidate is at best optimistic.

Given studies, such as Project Implicit, that show Americans more often than not associating negative descriptions with people of color, Senator Obama’s battle is most assuredly an uphill one. And yet, despite facing what many have called the dirtiest campaign ever waged, Obama has remained true to his ideal of how a candidate should present him or herself to the electorate. And in an anomaly rarely seen in American politics, integrity seems to be winning.

 

The presidential debates allowed Obama to demonstrate his civility and intelligence, even as John McCain increased his attacks with every face-off. Time and again, when the bait was offered, Obama took the high road, much to the frustration of his supporters who wanted Obama to show more fire. During the first debate, I cringed every time Obama said, “Senator McCain is right, but…” And in the final debate, when he was given the opportunity to assess Sarah Palin’s presidential qualifications, Obama said he would leave that up to the voters to decide. What? Waste this golden opportunity? But Obama was right. He was polite, and his composure and the content of his responses came off as much more presidential than McCain’s angry snipes (“That one!”) and frequent grimaces.

The McCain campaign has in essence portrayed Obama as an elitist, inexperienced, unpatriotic friend of terrorists. These politics of fear and falsehoods have helped put many recent Republicans in the White House. Strategy-wise, Obama could have taken a page from their dirty tricks playbook and hoped for the same results the McCain team desires. But Barack Obama has defined his campaign on his own ethical terms. Win or lose, he ran the campaign he set out to run, unlike McCain, who once eschewed underhanded political chicanery until he realized (or was convinced) that his future depended upon those same despicable deceits. An Obama victory will ultimately be a victory for the character and decency Americans can show. A McCain election will confirm that cynicism and suspicion drive the country. I will be voting for respect and virtue. I will be voting for Barack Obama.

By David Terhune

I submit for your consideration four thoughts and observations...

 

 

The Underdog Advantage

John McCain has revealed a campaign strategy that is as puzzling as his odd behavior of late. Instead of reversing his sagging poll numbers, he is embracing them. "We've got them just where we want them," he announced. "I love being the underdog." How an advantage is gained by making a questionable VP choice, spreading falsehoods, and playing to fear and biases in order to reach this precarious position right before the election is anyone's guess.

Country First?

It seems that the Republican's "Country First" slogan is actually aimed at a special portion of our country, or "the real America" as Sarah Palin calls it. Joe Six-pack, his cousin the plumber, and their hockey-mom wives are now the new American elite. Unfortunately, when politicians reduce their constituents to stereotypes, they also diminish the rich diversity of culture and thought that defines America.

Everything But The White Sheet

One thing is clear about John McCain's campaign strategy. Without blatantly making race an issue, it embraces the trappings of racism - the other ("That one!") and the outsider ("He doesn't see America like you or me!") - and masks the slurs as character issues. But some of his supporters are clearly getting the message and are attending his rallies with everything but the white sheet. As McCain tries to calm the same people he and Sarah Palin have intentionally frightened, I hope he reflects on the damage his hate-fueled tactics cause.

Palin's Free Pass

When considering the popularity of Sarah Palin, the culture of female beauty in America must be seen as a contributing factor. Glamour magazines, advertisements and the catwalk have conditioned many to see a certain feminine appearance as powerful and admirable. And those, like Palin, who possess that model-like beauty are more likely to be forgiven their foibles and failings. If Hillary Clinton (no offense to her own natural beauty) spoke the same words as Palin during the Katie Couric interview and winked and you-betcha'd during the VP debate, rest assured that she would be dismissed by both parties and the electorate.