3rd
Why the Palin pick is driving the left nuts
Do you remember back around, oh, the mid to late nineties, somewhere in that time frame? Do you remember just how much Republicans hated…HATED…Bill Clinton? I didn’t think much of it at the time (I was in middle school, after all), but looking back on that time once I got to college it never made a ton of sense. Clinton was putting cops on the street; he was reforming welfare; he was balancing the budget. He was doing a lot of things that the GOP wanted, and getting praise for doing so.
And this is what the GOP hated. It drove them nuts. Here was a Democrat stealing all their signature tactics and achieving no small measure of success as a result. The gall!
John McCain has just done the same exact thing to the Democrats and the media: He’s played a perfect game of identity politics bingo, a game that liberals are unused to losing. “But … But we’re the ones who are supposed to be making history this cycle” you can almost hear the Democrats shriek. “We had the woman candidate! We had the black candidate! We were the ones breaking down walls! How dare this old white guy maneuver us into a corner where we have to lambaste the choosing of an unqualified, under-represented group.”
That’s how you end up with the “New York Times” criticizing the Palin pick even when, in 1984, they wrote“where is it written that mere representatives aren’t qualified, like Geraldine Ferraro of Queens?…Where is it written that governors and mayors, like Dianne Feinstein of San Francisco, are too local, too provincial?…Presidential candidates have always chosen their running mates for reasons of practical demography, not idealized democracy.”
Do liberals really feel that a.) attacking this woman helps Barack Obama, or b.) that McCain’s going to take her off the ticket? I don’t see the first, and the second’s never gonna happen. But keep at it. Turn this into 2004 redux. Tell the voters that they’d have to be provincial redneck idiots to support this candidacy.
