http://biguglymandoll.livejournal.com/ ([identity profile] biguglymandoll.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] doc_strange 2008-08-30 07:49 pm (UTC)

Rant Response

Doc, your post made me review mine on the topic. On retrospect, I think I was a lot less respectful of McCain than of Palin, although her (very!) good looks are obviously the foil I used.

I decided to write it the way I did based on an admittedly quick survey of her stance on *my* key issues. She seems to be a rabid antiabortionist and against gay marriage, as well as less tolerant of non-mainstream lifestyles (although less fanatically). Looking at those issues, I wouldn't care if she were a purple Martian with three heads and a tail, or a shoe-in for Ms. America, or had the longest resume for world politics since Winston Churchill. If Churchill was running today, and was a rabid antiabortionist, I wouldn't vote for him either.

Based on that, I stand by my post. I bet Palin's a great person to sit down and have a beer with, and I like her sense of style - selling Murkowski's jet on eBay? Pure Win. She seems to have integrity, competence, and charisma. But with her views, I don't want her in the White House, under any circumstances.

SOBUMD and I went around for a while on Clinton's run; the bottom line is that we *really* don't care about the gender of the President. Could it be a women? Sure. The conclusion with Hillary Clinton: Wrong woman for the job, wrong person for the job. I feel the same way about Sarah Palin.

The better question is, to what extent do the ends justify the means? How low can, and will, and should, one side go to keep the other from being elected? You and I have limited readership, but we *do* have readership, and this is a (very) public forum. Is it OK to make jokes about McCain's age? Is it *fair* to disguise the pathos of an emotional appeal as a logical, reasoned argument? Most Americans can't think worth a damn these days, and the big-name political consultants know that. The election has been a popularity contest since the dawn of television, and it's getting worse. There's a reasonable chance that we get a hard-right conservative in high office for *no better reason* than because she's nice to look at. That's not going to prove that we're not misogynists, and it's not OK.

So those of us with forums face a dilemma - can we hold to the moral high ground of Aristotle and Cicero's Rhetorical schools, while doubting that the other side will do so? At the end of the day, the only person I have to be able to look in the eye is the guy on the other side of the mirror while I'm shaving. If I haven't done what (little) I can to keep *the wrong people* out of the White House, I won't be able to do that. Because I think those wrong people are out to win, and they won't hesitate to grab an advantage.

The funny part is, I'd be willing to bet - and I have no real idea, but I'd be willing to bet - that McCain and Palin personally would prefer to maintain that moral high ground. I just don't believe they're ultimately in control of enough of the campaign to do that.

Whaddaya think? I'm leaving you on my friends list. You're right about the tone of the media coverage so far, and I think you're right about the general American misogyny. However, "You won't rescue Lotho, or the Shire, just by being shocked and sad, my dear Frodo," and I'd be willing to use that American misogyny (since it's there anyway) to prevent a worse evil. If McCain had picked someone who leaned closer to center, I'd've thought harder before voting for Obama (I'm not thrilled with him, but I think he's smart enough to surround himself with good people). However, abortion is a driving factor in my choice, and I can't let the current Republican ticket - regardless of gender - win.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting