Oh, wow!

After watching Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s speech last night - oh, wow! Incredibly good. Governor Palin is going to be tough to run against. She did confront the question of her experience head-on but in ways far, far more clever than any I could have come up with.

I have to admit, I would have done the whiny thing:

that mean old Senator Obama keeps talking about how I’m just the mayor of a little town. Doesn’t he know I’ve been governor for almost two years?

I might even have stamped my little foot just for good measure. But Governor Palin is a lot smarter than I am. She claimed her time as mayor proudly and in a way that should resonate in every small town in American - even the blue ones.

As for foreign policy experience, oh my. She didn’t claim the National Guard or the negotiating table with Canada. Nope, she took us on a whirlwind tour of at-risk oil production sites (Abqaiq! - I wonder if Senator Obama knows where that is) winding up with a reference to Russia, the Caucasus, Europe, and oil as a weapon.

She also claimed her family - her whole family - proudly and forthrightly. The most priceless moment of the evening came when the camera cut to a shot of Piper, the seven- or eight-year old, holding Trig and trying to get his hair to lay flat by licking her hand and rubbing it over her head. My husband’s reaction was, “Eew”, but I had a little brother and I can tell you: that’s what not-so-big big sisters do.

All in all, a speech even better than the one her most passionate supporters were hoping for - and far, far, far better than the one her opponents were praying for. I haven’t sat down yet with a transcript of the speech - although I did have to look up how to spell “Caucasus” - so I might have more to say after I do so, but for right now “Oh, wow!” sums up her performance quite nicely.

Really, darling, not our kind

Some people seem to find the names of the Palins’ children odd, even cause for hilarity. Now, I enjoy a Website like Baby’s Named a Bad, Bad Thing as much as anyone but making fun of the names of actual children who are actually going to hear about you doing so is pretty cruel. (Yes, it’s possible that my own first name - extremely unusual when I was a child - has made me rather sensitive about this matter.)

Plus, the names of the Palins’ children don’t seem all that odd to me. Okay, “Track” is an odd name. On the other hand, Track is over 18 and in the military so he can take care of himself. For whatever reason, “Bristol” doesn’t sound odd to me - naming children after places seems reasonable (well, not “New York City”, perhaps) - but I have to admit I can’t easily find references to it as a first name.

The names of the other two girls are uncommon but not unheard of: Piper Laurie and Piper Perabo are both actors; the wife of Walt Disney CEO Robert Inger is named “Willow Bay”. “Trig” is certainly an unusual name but ethnically understandable (again, see my first name and realize I’m half-Norwegian).

However, I suspect that the people who are getting their kicks making fun of the kids aren’t really thinking about the names at all: they’re using the names to point out how “really, darling, not our kind” the Palins are. Therefore, I strongly suspect they would sing quite a different tune if only Todd Palin hadn’t been so honest in explaining the names and had, instead, played his ethnic diversity background card. Unfortunately, he probably blew that opportunity once and for all in the People interview, but perhaps the campaign could consider his explanation null and void and put out a release that goes something like this:

Among the First Americans from whom Todd Palin is descended there are very strong naming conventions. The Palins wanted to honor those conventions in naming their children while also honoring the contributions of the non-Eskimo people in their lineage. Thus they took traditional tribal naming conventions and translated them into English.

Among Todd Palin’s grandmother’s people the man who could track game most effectively was highly honored. The whole community’s survival depended on him and he was given the honorific name, “The one who can track the bear” once his abilities were seen to surpass those of the other trackers. The Palins wanted to honor this vital part of Todd’s history and so gave their first son the name “Track”.

The rivers and bays where the tribe fished were considered female, maternal and it was common for girl children to be named after those bodies of water. Thus the Palins honored Bristol Bay, the body of water where they fished for a living, by bestowing the name “Bristol” on their first daughter.

The willow tree forms an important part of the ecology of Eskimos since it is a vital food source for moose which are, in turn, a vital food source for the people. Furthermore, the willow is considered extremely lovely by all the tribes in Alaska so “Willow” is a common name for Eskimo girl children.

Pipers are small birds found by the shore. Because they are small and well-loved by First American children, “Piper” is a usual name for later Eskimo children, especially fourth or fifth children.

With Trig the Palins took a slightly different approach. In addition to her Eskimo ancestry, Todd Palin’s mother is also of Swedish descent. The Palins have long admired Roald Amundsen who was able to be the first to reach the South Pole because of what he learned from the First Americans he met during his Northwest Passage expedition. In addition, they admired Trygve Lie for his work as the first Secretary-General of the United Nations. “Trygve” seemed like the perfect name to honor these men but the Palins also wanted a name that would be easy for their son to say and to spell so they shortened it to “Trig”, a Norse word that means “strength”. This name also represents the strength Trig has brought to the family.

All this is nonsense, of course. The Eskimo do have naming conventions but from what little I’ve read they are far more interesting than what I’ve described above.

All the same, I’m willing to bet that if Todd Palin had come out with the kind of multicultural, mystical, supposedly Eskimo explanations I’ve made up out of whole cloth, no one on the Left would think the names were “strange” - and no one would be trying to claim the Palins named their children after witches.

And by the way: does anyone know how the Obamas picked their children’s names? Or care?

Wait a few years

Kathryn Jean Lopez says:

A number of people have suggested to me Bristol introduce her mother tonight.

There’s a part of me that thinks this is a lovely idea but most of me believes this is way too much to ask of a pregnant seventeen-year old whose life is already being shredded in the press.

I say wait eight years and let a 25-year old Bristol introduce her mother when Sarah Palin being nominated for President.

Head-on: Hillary Clinton

[In my previous post I said there were two issues I believed Sarah Palin should tackle head-on: the extent of her experience and Hillary Clinton. I outlined what I thought Palin should say about her experience in that post. Here I provide a draft of what I believe Palin should say about Hillary Clinton.]

I was speaking at a rally a few days ago and mentioned my appreciation for Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton. When I mentioned Senator Clinton a lot of people in the audience booed. I was sorry to hear that because I both appreciate and admire Senator Clinton. I’d like to tell you why.

You may be aware that after Senator McCain introduced me as his running mate, a lot of people attacked me as a woman and as a mother. Senator Clinton did not. Her response to Senator McCain’s announcement was to briefly note the historic nature of the decision, welcome my voice to the conversation, and say my policies would take the country in the wrong direction. In other words, she said about me exactly what I would say about her and exactly what either of us would say about any other political opponent. It seems a shame that Senator Clinton’s attitude would be unusual in this day and age but it is and I appreciate it

I admire Senator Clinton as a strong campaigner. She ran a tough race against a tough opponent, the same tough opponent Senator McCain and I are running against. Hillary Clinton ran against an opponent who is adored by the media and who has a huge war chest. She didn’t let that stop her. She was slandered and smeared. She was called a racist - and worse. That must have broken her heart. She persevered. There were cries for her to drop out, to concede the race, to stop fighting, some of them coming from people she counted as allies, even friends. And yet Senator Clinton stayed in the race, ran hard, worked hard. So, no, I don’t agree with Senator Clinton’s policies. But I admire more than I can say her courage, her determination, her sheer grit because that same kind of courage, determination, and grit are exactly what will carry us to victory in November.

On a more personal level, I admire Senator Clinton for how hard she worked to shield her daughter from the public spotlight during all her years in the political arena. I hoped that my children would be afforded the same privacy and respect. Apparently times have changed too much for that but I still vow to do everything I can to follow in Senator Clinton’s footsteps in protecting my children. And I’ll encourage all my children to view Chelsea Clinton as an example of how wonderfully a child raised on the stage of Washington politics can turn out. Senator Clinton and I may disagree on almost everything else but we’re both mothers who love their children more than words can say.

Head-on: Palin's experience

[There are two issues I believe Sarah Palin should tackle head-on: the extent of her experience and Hillary Clinton. The experience issue she can and should address in her RNC speech. I’d like to see her address the Hillary Clinton issue in her RNC speech also but that would be trickier.

I’ll describe what I think she should say about Clinton in my next post. In this one, I provide a draft of what I believe she should say about the extent of her experience.]

A lot of people have raised questions about the extent of my experience. Some of them ask if I’m experienced enough to do a good job campaigning. They seem to think I’m going to wilt under the scrutiny or say something stupid or freeze up in the Vice-Presidential debate or reveal I don’t have a thought in my head or who knows what. I can assure you none of that will happen. Well, maybe the saying something stupid from time to time; everyone says something stupid now and then. But I know how to talk to voters about what’s important to them and therefore important to me and I know how to hold my own however bright the spotlight and however big the stage. Americans will see that from me across the country over the next two months and in St. Louis on October 2. By November 4 any concerns about my holding my own on the national stage will be laid to rest.

Some people say I have no experience on the national level and I suppose that’s true. But I’m governor of Alaska and that means I’m an executive. I balance a budget and I balance the competing interests of different parts of the largest State in the Union. I have a Cabinet. I even have a sometimes hostile legislature I have to work with. I know energy policy - especially with regard to oil and natural gas - inside and out. Government at the national level is a bigger version of the same thing. It’s more complicated - and there’s a lot more of the taxpayers’ money involved - but it’s not a whole new ball game for me. My experience in this arena is an issue the voters will be able to judge for themselves in the coming weeks.

Finally, some people say I simply don’t have the foreign policy experience I need. It’s true I can’t claim to match Senator Biden’s long service on the Foreign Relations Committee and I certainly can’t match Senator McCain’s more than 20 years in the military and his service on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Still, I’m not as inexperienced as some people insist. Alaska has important trade dealings with Canada and I am Commander-in-Chief of the Alaska National Guard. I know that last point usually gets a laugh but the Alaska National Guard is the only National Guard on permanent duty and that’s because we face off against Russia. The Cold War may be over but those Russian bombers flying near our borders don’t seem to realize that. Whether my foreign policy experience is enough for the job will be something else the voters can judge between now and November 4.

One final point. I said, “enough for the job”. The job I’m running for is Vice-President. A lot of commentators seem to forget that. To hear them talk you’d think I was going to be President on January 20. They forget Republicans have put experience at the top of our ticket.

John McCain is the one running for President and he has all the experience in campaigning, in national government, and in foreign policy that anyone could want. He’s the quarterback; I’m the backup. During the campaign that means I’ll do everything in my power to help elect him. In the White House that means I’ll sit in on meetings; I’ll learn the plays; I’ll work at whatever jobs the President assigns me; and maybe I’ll even get to take a few snaps when President McCain is otherwise occupied. I’ll be part of the strong team President McCain will build to help him carry out his vision of where this country should go.

And if, God forbid, anything should happen to President McCain, I will be ready with the help of that strong team and the support of the country, to step in and step up. If the Democrats have doubts about my ability to do so then they should simply remember that if they win all the seats in Congress they’re counting on, they can always impeach me.

John McCain believed my experience and my ability would be a valuable part of his team on the campaign trail and in the White House. I trust that over the next 62 days the country will come to see that he was right about me as he has been right about so much.

[Okay, so there’s no way she’s going to include the last sentence in the next to last paragraph. But it would certainly be a show-stopper.]

Huffpo on Palin - First look

I don’t right now know enough about Sarah Palin to comment on her substantively so I’ve contented myself with reading what others have to say. After looking through some right-leaning blogs, I headed over to the Huffington Post to see what they were saying.

Linda Bergthold has up an article entitled “The VP Choice that Lost the Presidency for McCain”. Looked at the right way, it’s pretty funny. Bergthold begins by expressing dismay due to the list of things Palin is not (my comment in italics):

She is NOT pro-choice. No, she’s a Republican. Remember?

She has NO national experience. True. As opposed to Obama’s 1-4 years depending on when you figure he stopped doing Senator stuff and started running for President.

She has never been under the intense scrutiny of a national campaign. Neither had Obama until last Fall. Is Bergthold suggesting Palin is a slower study than Obama?

She is under investigation for some incident in Alaska that is messy and personal. Yes and that’s been known for quite some time. Sort of like Rezko. Except that Palin's activities are actually being investigated and Palin is turning over everything the investigators want.

She has no international experience. Unlike Obama who has, what, junkets?

Her experience governing is in a very small state, Unlike which very large state Obama governed?
famous for its "Bridge to Nowhere" Which she was responsible for killing.
kind of political graft. Unlike Chicago which has long been known as a bastion of political virtue.

Her Republican colleague in that state, Senator Ted Stevens has been indicted for corruption. I know Palin is a new name for the Democrats, but Bergthold really needs to read at least Palin’s Wikipedia bio. It's pretty clear Palin made her name fighting that corruption.

I must admit my sense of humor failed me as she got into her main thesis. Her overall point is that McCain’s pick is cynical and insulting to women because it implies that “any woman” will do. Bergthold explains how this is insulting to women on both sides of the aisle.

It's a slap in the face of other Republican women like Kay Bailey Hutchison, bless her heart, who was forced to stumble through an interview on TV trying to make the case for Palin whom she has never met. There are certainly women in the Republican party who were "in line" for this before Palin.

In line before Palin? Oh, you mean like Clinton was in line before Obama?

As for Democrats:

It's also a slap in the face of Democratic women voters. They don't get Hillary but they get Sarah as the first potential woman President?

So the Democratic women who were enraged at the sexism of the Democratic primaries are going to turn their anger on the party that did pick a woman? I’m not quite sure how that transformation is going to work.

It just boggles my mind that after viciously attacking Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primaries, the Huffington Post is suddenly concerned about Republican women who have worked hard for their party, played by the rules, done everything they were supposed to, and are now being shoved aside for some cute newcomer. And it boggles my mind even more that the Huffington Post is suddenly concered about any Democratic woman who supported Hillary.

2008 DNC Wednesday - Part Two

I’ve definitely watched too much convention - almost all the speakers from the last half of Wednesday’s convention put me to sleep.

I did listen to all of Robert Wexler’s speech. He was clear, forceful, and definite. He used “Israel” or “Israeli” twelve times in his speech so his role was to reassure Israel’s supporters that Obama’s government would remain a staunch friend and ally. At the end he said something to the effect that Obama would finally help engineer a two-state solution that left Israel a Jewish nation. I assume that means Obama would not support a right to return for Palestinians.

Madeleine Albright gave an excellent speech also and I would think getting her to speak for Obama (and Biden) was quite a coup. Her indictment of McCain as believing he knew everything there was to know and her statement that what we really need is a President with the ability to learn was an inspired recasting of the experience/inexperience issue.

Bill Clinton’s speech was uneven. I found him engrossing and energizing when he was speaking generally about how bad Republicans have been and how good Democrats are but rather draggy when speaking about Obama specifically. Of course, that may be because I am not enthusiastic about Obama myself. I very much appreciate his beginning by speaking well of his wife and her campaign and I liked his statement that the long primary fight had tested and strengthened Obama.

Bo Biden did a very good job introducing his father. I didn’t think Joe Biden’s speech was either particularly good or particularly bad.

Bill Clinton is the only speaker I heard raise the issue that makes me most uncomfortable about voting Republican: the increasing income inequity. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree about almost every issue and reasonable people can reasonably disagree about whether the country is, as a whole, heading in the right direction. But an increasing gap between have and have-nots is simply wrong. The problem is I fear the Democrat’s approach will not close the gap by making the have-nots better off but by attempting to make the haves worse off. That’s not helpful. On the other hand, if the Republicans approach simply widens the gap further that’s not helpful either.

I haven’t watched Obama’s acceptance speech yet tonight. I imagine I’ll get to it in the next day or so. Or I may just read it instead.