We've come to expect politicians to shade the truth on occasion and we've seen some recent high profile examples of outright lying. For example, John McCain's repeated claim that Sarah Palin sold the previous governor's luxury jet on ebay and even "made a profit". Every part of that claim is a fiction and McCain had to know it. George Bush, of course, lied as a matter of policy, with deadly consequences. At least Clinton's lies were essentially harmless to lie and limb. Then there's Sarah Palin. She lies, too, principally about herself and her record. The list of her lies is getting pretty long. But of all the things Sarah Palin has said and continues to say, perhaps the most despicable is condescending way she refers to "community organizers" as being the same as small town politicians but without any responsibility.
Neither Sarah Palin nor John McCain, both of whom are politicians, care if politicians get a bad name. That's part of the game they are playing. To purposely denigrate public service (their own public service is fine, of course, and a reason to elect them). They don't want anybody to trust government. Cynicism is one of their most effective weapons and one of the reasons they find Obama's message of hope so threatening. It strikes at cynicism about government. If people think smearing of an opponent is just part of the political game and all politicians do it, including them, that's fine. They get a twofer. They hurt their opponent and they hurt the ideal of service to our fellow citizens.
Which brings me back to the condescension about community organizing. The immediate target, of course, is Obama, who was a community organizer. I won't repeat the Obama campaign's narrative about what he could have done with his career at that point but chose not to. If you don't get that, then you don't get it. But a lot of people are community organizers who aren't small town politicians and don't work on the south side of Chicago. Many churches try to do good works using paid staff who work in the community. They are community organizers. If you try to get people off alcohol or drugs and into rehab, you are doing community organizing. Community organizers are mostly people who are doing a service. That service is to get people to help themselves and to show them how to do it. Sarah Palin was doing community organizing when she worked with others (whom she later stabbed in the back) to get a police force for her small town before she was elected to the city council. Even political campaigning is community organizing. Maybe that's not a recommendation for community organizing, but it at least shows the stupidity of the idea as part of a political campaign.
A mayor or city council person or governor are engaged in community service, too. These are all positions that Sarah Palin has held. And the last thing we should be doing is looking down our nose at community service. Being a mayor or governor is not the problem. Sarah Palin and how she is the mayor or governor is the problem.
Since Ronald Reagan (no Pearl of Great Value in my book) a certain kind of politician has been running for office on a platform that denigrates all public service. John McCain and Sarah Palin are that kind of politician. It is a tried and true formula and a very cynical one. They make a rhetorical exception for the military, to whom they pay lip service but then feel free to abandon them as soon as a soldier's role as cannon fodder is over. John McCain, himself a veteran, has been one of the crassest practitioners of this cynical art of shedding crocodile tears for the wounded and impaired veteran while turning his back on their needs. People are only horrified when they find out his record on veterans affairs because they assume that as a veteran he should care. But caring about wounded and impaired veterans isn't on his agenda. The people who care are the ones who work with veterans to help them get the things they were promised under a social contract with the American people. The people who help veterans get these rights are community organizers. So John McCain and Sarah Palin look down their noses at them.
We have become so inured to this kind of cynical politics we think all politics is like this and has always been like this. It hasn't. There have been periods in the recent past -- and I have lived through them -- when being a public servant was not looked down on as a kind of parasitic activity. One of the things this election is about -- there are many things, but this is one of them -- is whether we are going to continue to perpetuate this attitude toward helping each other that has characterized the entire period since the Reagan years, including the Clinton years, or if we are going to move into a new century with a new generation who see things in a more clear eyed way than their jaded and cynical elders.
I don't want to see my grandchildren grow up in a world seen and constructed through the lens of people like John McCain and Sarah Palin. I hope they'll grow up in a world where helping your neighbor is seen as a good thing. I grew up in a city but I always thought that was considered a Small Town Virtue. According to Sarah Palin it isn't.
- Log in to post comments
Wasn't it Bush,Sr. that came up with the 1,000 points of light campaign to do community service? I guess they forgot about that.
I used to work teaching parenting classes to teen mothers. My budget was slashed so much I had no money for staff. If it wasn't for volunteers my classes wouldn't have been possible. These teens were often court ordered to attend. Volunteers are very important.
Thanks for this post. This, more than any of her other lies and insults, really angered me. My hope is that come November 5th, Sarah Palin will no longer make the mistake of underestimating the power of community organizing.
This slander usually goes along with the "Obama never sponsored a single bill" line, which you'd think would have no legs at all, given how easily it can be refuted.
But facts don't matter, unfortunately. All that matters is attacking strengths by making it seem like straightforward policies or accomplishments are somehow controversial.
Of course, saying this reveals my "elitism" (much like arguing that people who live in trailer parks should have the same access to healthcare as the members of Congress and their families...I'm a regular Marie Antoinette!)
Gov. Palin is becoming more frightening day by day ie
link: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/51940.html
"...McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking in Colorado Springs, Colo., said Fannie and Freddie had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers."
The companies, however, aren't taxpayer funded but operate as private companies. The takeover may result in a taxpayer bailout during reorganization...."
Yeah I'd want HER hand on the economy..............
The reality is that Obama could have spent his life doing anything at all, and no matter what it was, these two would slime it.
Sadly, this kind of poison makes up a lot of public "discourse" these days. As a public employee, I'm treated to all manner of insults about how I'm ripping off the taxpayers, performing a useless function, don't deserved my deferred compensation for my past 23 years of service, don't deserve medical insurance, blah blah blah, when every day I come home bone tired after working hard for less money than similarly educated private sector employees. Community organizers are accorded even more insults, presumably because they're paid even less, and as with public employees, their "product" does not pass through a cash register. As we all know, everyone is defined these days by the profit they generate for their employer, and nothing matters in this country except material profit.
Others have suggested that we have begun a "dark age" in which ignorance and divisiveness reign, and intellectual pursuits draw only intense ridicule, and believing that one can dedicate their life to the good of the whole is seen as the height of elitist idiocy. When kids no longer yearn to be firemen but instead say they want to be celebrities (as reported on news today), we know our culture is in its death throes.
In McCain-Palin world, greed rules, along with dirty fighting. Too many people see this as strength and pragmatism, and unfortunately, its probably impossible to prevail against them unless you take up the same tactics, in which case youve utterly lost anyway.
I thought the point of their sneering at "community organizers" during the convention was another way of transforming the term in just another euphemism for "uppity Negroes."
John, you've really hit the C21 cultural nail on the head.
Now that "faggots" and "niggahs" have re-appropriated "back in the day" terms, the "damaged darlings" (psychologically arrested schoolyard bullies) are searching for new sneers -- "That's soooooo gay!" is one (usually meaning you are soft for feeling, because "real" men have no emotions other than sociopathic joy at the death of a flower:*) or a few Iraqi kids blown apart by Bush administration fuck ups!
Barack Obama did community organizing work in his years between college and law school. (http://tinyurl.com/comorg )
What exactly did Sarah Palin do during the spring of 1983, during her semester off between two of her four college transfers? (http://tinyurl.com/transcollege -- the article has a few calendar errors, but it captures Palin's peripatetic collegiate career)
I don't know why, but I'm amazed that a vast majority of people who frequent this site (and perhaps the scientific community in general) are so liberal.
Just for a moment, is it possible to find at least one good quality of Gov Palin? How about the Republican platform?
As conservative and Republican as I am, I think Obama is likable guy who doesn't lash out. He maintains his composure,dignity and manners in all situations. I may not agree with all his ideas, but I don't think he's a monster. He truly believes he's doing what's best for his country. And I respect that there are many people who agree with him.
Why is it, that everyone here thinks that McCain/Palin and the Republican party are out to destroy the world as we know it. Neither are they monsters.
Surely you can argue a point without slamming someone's character.
As a side note, I'm constantly amazed in a world (scientific world) that is so...wonderfully intricate and complicated yet beautiful, that the people who understand it best (you and your fellow scientists) don't believe in intelligent design.
Patch: How about you finding something good in the Republican platform. I'd like to see it and discuss it. How about the Choice plank. Or take your pick. Other than a platitude.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/516967.html
Is this only for Alaskan's or are We One Nation who Own this?
If it's on our soil why aren't All the People in the U.S.A getting checks?
Try looking at Alaskan's News Paper for info
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/517135.html
Why is this being swept under the Rug? Now that she is above the law running for VP...
Well folks read the local Alaskan new's for yourself and decide, Good Luck.
Point taken Revere.
The Choice plank in my mind is based on my Christian belief in the sanctity of life. Depending on which Revere you are, I believe you have already identified yourself as an Atheist. Therefore, we'd have to first argue that. I'm not sure we could arrive at any agreement there.
I'm trying to find some common ground and I'm struggling.
Perhaps racial quotas? Do you think they are good?
Patch, something that seems inconsistent to me about the GOP plank is that it would allow a woman to use lethal force against a potential rapist, but not allow her to use a morning after pill to prevent a pregnancy following being raped.
Could you explain what it is that makes sperm in a potential rapist's body non-sanctified, but it suddenly becomes sanctified once it is put by force into an unwilling woman's body?
Why is it, that everyone here thinks that McCain/Palin and the Republican party are out to destroy the world as we know it. Neither are they monsters.
I don't think they're monsters. I think they represent more of what we've had for eight years, which has done very few Americans any good, and a lot of people here and elsewhere a great deal of harm.
I also think they're liars. Granted, all politicians lie, to some extent. But saying that Sarah Palin is against earmarks, for instance, is lying above and beyond the call of duty.
Since I'm not a social conservative, the attempt to deny gay couples the constitutional rights they should have as citizens is abhorrent to me, and there's no way I'm going to find any common ground with someone who disagrees with me on that. That's a case of being wrong on a basic issue; it's comparable to supporting segregation or denying women the right to vote, and I'll make no apologies to anyone, in this world or the next, for rejecting these stances as inhumane and misguided.
As for abortion rights, I support them wholeheartedly, but I concede that people can have sincere moral grounds for being uncomfortable with abortion in some or even most cases. Therefore, finding common ground seems to me to involve reducing unwanted pregnancies. If people want to preach abstinence as part of that effort, fine; that's their right. But statistics show that the only realistic tools we have for doing so are sex education and contraceptive use. Sarah Palin is staunchly against both, as far as I can tell, and McCain is not far behind her.
Monsters? Nope. More like Pharisees, who "outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness."
As for intelligent design, I think the reason most scientists don't believe in it isn't the lack of evidence, so much as the fact that it's completely irrelevant to the practice of science. It'd require making a huge philosophical leap, without conferring any advantages in their field. Hell, there are plenty of scientists, and philosophers of science, who'd question the ontological status of observable phenomena, let alone ones that are immeasurable by definition.
Even Michael Behe allows for a "materialist escape-hatch" in his ID theory, so it's not like intelligent design solves any theological problems, either. And even if the designer were a god, we'd still have plenty of room to disagree and/or kill each other over the nature of that god. So what's the point?
Good question!
First, in the case of rape, I admittedly struggle with the abortion issue. The psychological scarring of carrying a baby to term from a rape is potentially unbearable.
Carl Sagan suggested that perhaps we define the beginning of life the same way we determine it's end, brain activity. I'm not sure if the moment of conception is the start of life and in fact, I lean towards some point later in development.
With these things in mind, while I may not "support" it, I would find it difficult to argue against it.
At some point that baby does becomes "a life". And at that time, it also acquires a soul. Killing a helpless baby at that point is wrong in my book.
Is killing the rapist with a legal gun during the attack morally wrong? I don't know...some day, I hope to. I would have reservations about killing any other human being because of my religious beliefs. But having the "choice" to protect myself is surely something you can understand?
I know that "choice" allows me to carry a gun, or not have an abortion. And that my "choice" to carry a gun is not so much different than your "choice" to have an abortion. In either case, lives other than ours are effected by our judgment, rather than theirs.
So again, it's a good question. I think, simply because it's a defenseless, innocent baby rather than a violent rapist that I'm able to draw the distinction.
The Choice plank in my mind is based on my Christian belief in the sanctity of life.
...adding that unless the GOP has transformed into a party of Tolstoyan pacifists, what you actually believe in is the sanctity of "innocent" life, so long as it doesn't happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (e.g., a womb in downtown Baghdad).
It's been a while since I read the Bible, but I seem to recall it casting some doubt on the human ability to judge innocence and guilt. Come to think of it, I seem to remember some guy getting unjustly accused and executed....
Another for your Palin series, Reveres: Wasilla used to charge rape victims for their own rape kits. The linked article features the police chief she appointed complaining about the cost to the taxpayers in 2000 when the then-governor signed a law saying they couldn't do that anymore.
Patch, I was talking about the morning after pill, high doses of hormones that prevent implantation. The current administration wants to define that as "abortion". The GOP platform wants to ban all abortion with a Constitutional Amendment with no exceptions for rape, incest or to protect a womans health, or even to protect her life.
The only life that is present in a womans body after she is raped (other than the woman herself) is the rapists living sperm. Why the GOP considers that that life is more important than the life of the woman who has been raped is not something that I understand.
I appreciate that you seem to not understand the reasoning behind it either. That is ok, but how can you support a position that you dont understand? Because the GOP leaders couch it in religious language that you dont understand? If I dont understand something, adding more language that I dont understand doesnt help me understand it.
I don't understand the reasoning that puts a rapist's sperm ahead of a raped woman's life. I have extremely serious concerns about the judgment of people that do put the value of a rapist's sperm ahead of a raped woman's life.
I couldn't vote for someone if I couldn't understand their thinking process to such a degree.
Another blogger noted that, "Jesus was a community organizer"
I think, simply because it's a defenseless, innocent baby rather than a violent rapist that I'm able to draw the distinction.
I wonder when you think babies develop "free will"? Because it seems clear that they don't choose to be born into some ghetto tenement where they'll be undernourished, poisoned with lead (assuming they weren't poisoned with it in the womb), and undereducated. Nor do they choose to be born into the Bush family, for that matter.
Given where they can end up when they're born, it doesn't seem surprising that some of 'em go on to become criminals, and I think a lot of people on my side of the issue find it difficult to understand how conservatives can simultaneously be anti-contraception, anti-choice, anti-social programs, and pro-death penalty. A cynic might even see the first three positions as providing a steady stream of victims for the last.
Putting that aside, I wonder what punishment you'd favor for women who abort, assuming it were actually made illegal? Would a few years of jail time in a women's prison be sufficient, or should they be put into some sort of re-education program where they'd be taught to conform with the current thinking of the dominant religious/political authority?
Maybe they could be artificially inseminated and forced to go through the pregnancy they tried to avoid? Should there be a "three strikes" law, where you get life after your third illegal abortion? Or should procuring an abortion be a milder offense, where you'd simply get a fine, or maybe be forced to do some community service (or, if that sounds too socialistic, nine months of low-wage piecework for a private corporation)?
I assume the punishment would depend on a variety of factors, like the age of the fetus, and whether the abortion was committed behind the father's back (and therefore amounts to theft as well as murder). I realize that this is an inexact science. But maybe you could give us a rough idea of the appropriate punishments?
Susan; Yes, I saw that. And someone added, "And Pontius Pilate was a governor." But i'm not the religious type. Another understatement.
Jet That Helped Defeat an Alaska Governor Is Sold
David J. Sheakley/Associated Press
The Westwind II, which symbolized former Gov. Frank H. Murkowskis troubles, has found a buyer in Valdez, Alaska.
By WILLIAM YARDLEY
Published: August 25, 2007
It grounded one governor and did not exactly fly off the shelf on eBay, but the jet that came to symbolize the troubles of the former Alaska governor Frank H. Murkowski has landed with a new owner.
A businessman from Valdez, Alaska, Larry Reynolds, paid $2.1 million this week for the state-owned Westwind II jet that Mr. Murkowskis successor, Gov. Sarah S. Palin, promised to purge from the state inventory when she ran against Mr. Murkowski last fall in the Republican primary.
Mr. Murkowskis office tried to obtain money from the Homeland Security Department to buy the jet, saying it would help defend, deter or defeat opposition forces. He was denied. Later, in 2005, against the wishes of the Legislature, Mr. Murkowski used state money to buy it for $2.7 million.
Ms. Palin, a former mayor of an Anchorage suburb, was among many critics who said the move showed that Mr. Murkowski was arrogant and out of touch after decades as a top Alaska official, including more than three terms in the United States Senate. Ms. Palin defeated Mr. Murkowski soundly in the Republican primary and won the general election last November.
In December, barely a week after being inaugurated, Ms. Palin said the plane would be sold on eBay. One serious offer was posted, for a similar price, but the deal fell apart when the state hesitated on the terms and the prospective buyer found another jet, said Dan Spencer, director of administrative services for the Public Safety Department.
Mr. Reynolds learned of the plane through Speaker John L. Harris, Republican of Valdez, Mr. Spencer said.
He picked it up this morning, Mr. Spencer said yesterday. He had a couple of pilots.
Ms. Palin said in a statement: If the Department of Public Safety decides at a future date that it needs another aircraft, we will invest in something more sensible that can land on Alaskas rural airstrips. Any purchase, if deemed necessary, will go through the normal legislative budget process.
Sold, but not on eBay and not at a profit. $600K below purchase price through an airplane broker. And not just used by Murkowski. Used to ferry convicts around because Alaska is short of prison space.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/newsreader/story/520577.html
New "Sarah" Jet with her name on it seats 100 !!!
She going to to hand it back?..... or has the power has gone to her head and arrogance set in.
Come on Sarah a True Alaskan would take a commercial fight to get to the homestead, So much for roots and what you use to stand for.
Excuse me... Pathetic.
Sarah Palin never said she sold the jet on eBay, she said she put it on eBay, here is the quote from her speech at the RNC, "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay." Which she did.
Revere perhaps you need to attend that community college you so graciously referred me to. I'm sure they have courses devoted to improving listening skills. See ya there!
By the way what is the depreciation of a jet once it rolls off the lot so to speak? What is the blue book value of a used luxary jet?
pauls: Please re-read that section of the post. I am well aware that Sarah Palin said she auctioned it on eBay. But as I wrote, very clearly, in plain English (please read it again) was that John McCain said she sold it on eBay and for a profit, both lies. So the remedial reading class is still in your future. And you can start now by going back to sentence number two of this post. Enjoy.
As for the depreciation, note that Gov. Rendell of PA sold their 16 year old jet for a profit:
Just sayin' . . .
Phila,
The fact that babies have no control over their destiny is what makes abortion wrong. Are you suggesting being born into a ghetto is worse, or better than being killed?
I would not propose punishment to anyone who has an abortion.
Patch, if you say there should be no punishment for anyone who has an abortion, then are you saying that abortion should be legal. Why are you supporting McCain/Palin who want to make it illegal?
Facts Folks! It's called responsibility for your actions Educate the children in schools give them the right and "use" to have birth control before its too late, make them aware of the life changing job they will face should they have and keep the baby.
Education is a must! Teach them how to be Good parents before they have children and sex, something this world greatly needs. Raising and taking care of a child is not an escape from schooling and/or working a full time job outside the home, living off the Govt or their parents, if we educate them that Children Are a full time job for the rest of their lives maybe they will take better precautions or not have sex.
Then the only discussion is a rape victims child or drug users and i think we can agree on the answer there maybe.
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/521329.html
Enough of "family travel" "She has a job to do" let the kids stay home and go to school, Why are we paying for any of the extra's it's really not necessary.
Shera, the only thing that Sarah Palin will agree to is no abortions. There are no exceptions in the proposed constitutional amendment that the GOP wants to enact.
She also wants no sex education that includes information on contraception. Her approach is "abstinence only". An approach that didn't work for her daughter, but she expects it to "work" for everyone else.
The GOP wants to define many types of contraception as abortion and make them illegal. That includes birth control pills and IUDs.
Phila,
The fact that babies have no control over their destiny is what makes abortion wrong. Are you suggesting being born into a ghetto is worse, or better than being killed?
I'm suggesting, primarily, that control over one's destiny depends to a great extent on factors like being well-fed, being protected from neurodevelopmental toxins, getting an education. And being loved, wanted, and prepared for.
Is it better to be "killed" than to do without those things? I don't know. Judging from the number of kids who kill themselves, or other people, or wind up on death row, at least a few of them would probably say that it is. Which I'm sure you'll agree is pretty sad.
But what I'm ultimately saying is that if certain conservatives want people to "choose life," they should probably stop fighting tooth and nail against sex education, pollution remediation, and social programs like Head Start.
I would not propose punishment to anyone who has an abortion.
Why not? How is it not comparable to a contract killing, by your own logic?
You can't have it both ways. You're either murdering a human being with a soul, or you're not. If you yourself draw a legal distinction between a newborn baby and a fetus, then stop using rhetoric that blurs that distinction.
Thank you Daedalus2u I agree with you, your right about her daughter and i add that she herself should have been more careful at her age then to get pregnant also.
She just doesn't apply her own thinking to herself and her family ie: Troopergate.
I fear her being VP and the fact McCain is not a young man, She would be president if something happened to him should they be elected... God Forbid.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/newsreader/story/521635.html
Now the "Pit bull with Lipstick" needs a "West Coast Promo Man" to filter her access.
There is a lot of good stuff over at progressivealaska.
Apparently the police chief that Palin appointed when she was mayor required victims of rape to pay for their own rape investigation kits.
http://progressivealaska.blogspot.com/2008/09/what-do-rape-gurney-joe-a…
As the blogger points out, "you can't make this stuff up".
A feminist requiring a victim of rape to pay for her own investigation?
daedalus: I have it in the queue. Not only can't you make this stuff up, you can't keep up with it. At some point I'll probably give up. Too much stuff. Been reading about the rape test thing. I guess Alaska passed a special law just to deal with this issue in Wasilla, since it was the only place doing this in the state.
Palin scares me much more than Bush. At least with Bush we knew that Rove and Cheney were pulling his puppet strings. While Rove and Cheney are evil, they are not delusional.