Friday, October 17, 2008

Dems, Do Like Obama: Ignore Palin Entirely


The moment Sarah Palin walked into the presidential race, everything went haywire. That's precisely her purpose: to confuse, distract, rile up, titillate, and exasperate the American public to the point that they might just, in one mindless moment at the polls, vote for John McCain/Sarah Palin. All we need, right? in a political campaign is more pitbulls - described loosely as animals bred to fight to the death, mindlessly, on "guts" alone. Killer instinct. They may be nice on one side, but don't press them...they don't need minds, they need revenge. Sarah Palin's not all that, but she tries real, real hard, which is in some ways worse.

John McCain's actual message is a repeat of George Bush's message. Insofar as he is a "Maverick", it's really only an image thing, not a substance thing. At best, it means he'll gamble more often. As in "...Maverick is his name...luck is his companion, gambling is his game..." And if that's "best" in times like this with the economy melting down like a terminated cyborg, what's worst?

So with a message - "tax breaks for the rich, tough breaks for the rest" - that doesn't resonate, and with a delivery style that resembles that of a depressed person, he needs someone so manic, so mindless, that all messages, all issues get sucked into some crazy vortex.

That's Sarah Palin.

Unless we ignore her. Completely. Not a single damn word. No comment. Let her rant, rave, be cutesy, folksy, show off her incontrovertible ignorance and incompetence for the job she's trying to be a shaky heartbeat from. She makes that point.

I believe there are enough intelligent people who understand she's not going to help the economy, the war in Iraq, the bloated Pentagon, the healthcare system, or even, for that matter, Joe the Plumber. She's only going to help poll numbers for John McCain if enough white guys like her legs. And that has nothing to do with helping women, most of whom are for Obama on issues. I agree with John Cusack who said,

McCain won't just be more of the same -- it will be worse than Bush-Cheney -- using the disasters of the past eight years and the actual crises we face to double down on the American Enterprise/Heritage Foundation vision of government that desires, as Grover Norquist said, to shrink government until "we can drown it in a bathtub."

I would recommend a return visit to the groundbreaking Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

McCain, who said he knows nothing about economics, will surely hand over the reins to the Friedmanites and neoconservatives who have sent the country on a path to ruin. Anyone looking at his team could tell you that. Palin and the interests she represents are even further to the right.

Now, no one in their right mind -- including reasonable independents and Republicans -- wants to double down on neocon ideology, but here comes the "maverick" and his economic advisers to use the crises we face to implement more "change" and "reform" to the system by privatizing everything in sight. Is this what the American people want? When they are aware of it, the answer is always no. It's the same bullshit re-branded.


Great point, Kusack! McCain is a neocon in fake "Maverick" clothing, and needs to be exposed. Palin is being used as a sexy "libertarian" draw, but in reality doesn't have the slightest idea what's going on, let alone what she would do about it.

Ruin the government you are purporting to run and turn it over to privatization frenzy, creating a shadow government of private corporate rule. That's the whole idea.

So let's brand bust this maverick gibberish but understand the coded language that belies their true mission... we should take them at the true meaning of their words.

Not just more of the same -- worse than the same. Times of crisis are great opportunities to implement the radical agendas we usually reject.


Even conservatives, true conservatives, don't wish death to America. By "less government", do we mean the Department of Homeland Security or surveillance of regular Americans? Or being "served" by Blackwater? Let's gut taxes so we don't "spend" in fixing crumbling infrastructure or health care or education or even alternative energy? So where's the money for the Republicans' beloved war supposed to come from, if most of the budget is tanked in bailing out the robber barons you didn't want to "spend" a dime regulating or at least holding accountable for their actions? Is that the Republican "take" on, say, the morals of the ten commandments?

Obama is no extremist or even particularly "liberal", as painted falsely by the lying McCain/Palin team. But McCain and Palin ARE extremist, right-wing extremist, and America can't endure another year of this trash, let alone four. So let's all ignore the much-hyped story of Palintology and vote by conscience ... for the children who'll have to live with our decision.

No comments: