Your Thoughts on Palin's Speech.

Consider this an open thread.

(photo NYT)

G.D.

G.D.

Gene "G.D." Demby is the founder and editor of PostBourgie. In his day job, he blogs and reports on race and ethnicity for NPR's Code Switch team.
G.D.

Latest posts by G.D. (see all)

  • I liked her speech; I liked it a lot, especially those parts which I seriously doubt were written beforehand.

    Even more so, I liked the fuming responses from the Dems and the Followers of Obama. They truly hated her speech, which is a very good indicator of how good it was.

    What’s ironic is that it was exactly the sort of speech that all the liberal political pundits and a lot of the Left in general were disappointed that Obama didn’t make – one that took on the opposition in no uncertain terms.

  • jonolan: there seemed to be plenty of uncertain terms there. She got in a lot of zingers about the apparent uselessness of community service and Obama’s alleged narcissism, but, well, what else did she say?

    She lied about Obama’s tax policy and her own role in the Bridge to Nowhere debacle. In fact, there was just a lot of stretching of the truth, in general. She came across as a good speaker, but as you pointed out, most of that speech was written before she was even selected. She read the TeLePrompTer well, but she used to be a sportscaster. One would hope she was good.

    And she was. I won’t hate on her command on the stand. But the little policy she tossed in doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, so I guess she should also be given props for being such a talented liar.

  • scott

    I’m not trying to criticize Palin, but did anyone really expect a lot of substance from her first speech? I thought this speech was just an introduction?

  • scott: considering the speech was written before she was even named the running mate, one would think that it would have been just a little bit about the party platform.

    Also, i just sorta assumed that her introduction was last Friday. You know, when she was introduced.

  • from a spectatorial standpoint, i was impressed with how well she handled herself, considering the manner with which she was thrust on to the national stage. i was impressed by how well she was able to completely assimilate to, espouse and manifest the values and tactics of the GOP faithful. she didn’t look timid or flustered, and her timing with even small facial expressions and vocal inflections was perfect; the confidence in what she was saying was clearly there.

    HOWEVER.

    the speech was practically devoid of policy talking points, as were most of the speeches last night. obviously it was crafted to put a battery in the base’s back, and it’s what she needed for the millions of people who were going to be hard sells. but for anybody that was truly looking for substantial evidence to qualify Gov. Palin as a good candidate for second-in-command, i think they were left empty handed.

    i thought the cheap shots were especially spiteful and demeaning, even arrogant. that’s not to say that i didn’t expect them, but at times it seemed that before one low blow could settle in properly there were already two more hay-makers following it.

    so, in my opinion: she did what she had to do. she did NOT do what she couldn’t.

  • quadmoniker

    Scott: I have to say, she didn’t introduce herself very well, either. She repeated Republican talking points about herself that don’t hold up to scrutiny; that she is a reformer, that she said no to the bridge to no where. It’s not partisan to point out the facts as laid out by numerous articles and many of her colleagues since her introduction, that her short record in Alaska is more of a mixed bag, and that she was before the bridge to nowhere before she was against it.

    Also, a caller on Brian Lehrer’s show this morning pointed out what my undergraduate anthropology professors would be ashamed of me for missing. Bashing on community organizing was coded racism. Young graduates of elite colleges are what people think of when they think of those jobs. And it’s black leaders and Latino leaders who use words like “community.” And when you think of organized efforts or protests or marches, it’s urban African Americans or Latinos in California who come to mind. Whites in small town America use words like “my country” or “U.S.A.” Nevermind that everyone who populates “their country” in their minds looks like them.

    Think that’s reading too much into it? It’s not, really. It’s that subconscious level of symbolism that has always been deployed most viciously and most effectively.

    But the thing I find most troubling about Palin’s speech is the American public’s willingness to be lied to, over and over. And to be frank about where I’m coming from, I’ve never been an unqualified, ardent Obama supporter. I’ve always respected the man, and think he’s a brilliant writer and obviously a towering intellect. On the other hand, I think the world would have been vastly better off had it been John McCain who won the Republican nomination 8 years ago.

    But going forward? No. However imperfect the political process may be, there are substantive policy differences that will make or break middle class families in the coming years. Voters don’t really look at them, though. They let themselves be told what to think by the candidates and by the pundits. And it was her attempt to do that again, the partisan joking and the charisma and the outright lies are really the last straw for me.

  • LH

    Palin’s speech parroted the Republican platform, which is to go after Obama and hope that draws attention away from their position on taxes, healthcare, abortion, energy, the climate, the war, education … you know, stuff that matters to 95 percent of the U.S. population.

    Congratulating Palin for her speech is kinda like congratulating a baseball player for taking a 3-2 fastball out of the park. Palin was sitting dead red (no pun intended). She had to talk isht about Obama. What else could she talk about?

  • “Bashing on community organizing was coded racism. Young graduates of elite colleges are what people think of when they think of those jobs. And it’s black leaders and Latino leaders who use words like “community.” And when you think of organized efforts or protests or marches, it’s urban African Americans or Latinos in California who come to mind. Whites in small town America use words like “my country” or “U.S.A.” Nevermind that everyone who populates “their country” in their minds looks like them.”

    QM: I missed that, too. And my Puerto Rican Jewish coworker pointed it out to me. And don’t get me started on the flat out lies the woman was telling.

  • Of course, shani-o; everything a White says is somehow coded racism.

  • mr. get $

    jonalan: oh boy.

  • LH

    jonolan, the fact that everything a white boy says isn’t coded racism doesn’t mean that nothing a white boy says is.

    Are you really saying that in this context, talk of “community organisers” was not double speak for ‘those black people’?

  • jonolan: that’s a hell of a strawman. Did shani-o say that everything a white person said is coded racism, or did she point to this specific example of coded racism as, well, coded racism?

    This is why talking about race with conservatives is always so hilarious. We all have to act like race hasn’t been a guiding principle of conservative social policy — and coded racism hasn’t been a preferred tactic of the Republican Party. Do you really want to talk about Republicans and race? The Dixiecrats? The “Southern Strategy”? Yeah, it’s completely above the Republicans to play to racist fears.

    But fine, i’ll humor you. let’s pretend that the delegations at the Republican Convention just happen to be overwhelmingly white, and that none of this is the end result of how the Party has intentionally positioned itself over the last 50 years.

  • LH

    “But a number of setbacks, including an anti-Republican national mood, anger over the response to Hurricane Katrina and the Democratic nomination of Sen. Barack Obama, have largely negated their efforts, several Republicans said.” – Washington Post

    Even in addressing their shortcomings the Republicans can’t seem to confront the truth.

    What’s negated Republican efforts to improve minority outreach is the fact that their efforts are limited to lip service. Well, that and the fact that those efforts, whatever they are, are motivated by politics.

    The Republicans have done the least on a national scale to help minorities in any measurable, impactful way.

  • “Of course, shani-o; everything a White says is somehow coded racism.”

    If you say so.

  • L.H.,

    That is exactly what I’m saying. Frankly, Palin didn’t even truly disrespect community organizers. She just rightfully pointed out that they don’t have the same level of responsibility as a Mayor.

  • You’re right, Jonolan, it isn’t the same level of responsibility.

    Community organizers do what mayors and other politicians fail (or are unable) to do.

  • jonolan:

    This is what she actually said:

    “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,”‘except that you have actual responsibilities.”

    what she actually said was that community organizers have none.

  • LH

    jonolan: Palin’s comparison between a mayor and a community organiser is a stretch, and that’s being generous.

    Palin was trying to legitimise her credentials whilst simultaneously hitting out at Obama, using coded language.

    It may be that you really don’t perceive the phrase “community organiser” as double speak for ‘those black people,’ but that’s sure what it sounded like to many people.

  • quadmoniker

    I also like how, in trying to pit Palin’s Wasilla experience vs. Obama’s organizer experience, they effectively skip all of Obama’s years since law school. He served in the Illinois Senate and the U.S. Senate, people. If you want go back to the 80s, then it would be fairer to pit Palin’s job as a sportscaster against Obama’s community organizing.

  • G.D.,

    That’s fairly close to true since a Community Organizer can rarely be held accountable in any real way for abject failure. It’s just not the same thing when the buck doesn’t stop on your desk and there’s always someone else to blame for failure.

    LH,

    Coded language? How is describing his only administrative work before the legislature coded language? Isn’t Community Organizer exactly how Obama describes that job?

  • jonolan: his ‘only administrative work’?

    again, if we’re going with the ‘inexperience’ argument, what exactly, is the worth of Palin’s PTA membership? or her run as a sportscaster?

    She has about as much political experience as Obama has, and if we wanna play the executive experience game that the Republicans are disingenuously trying to sell (to mix metaphors) than that criteria necessarily rules out John McCain.

    Let’s be perfectly frank: were she Scott Palin with the same resume, she would never have sniffed McCain’s shortlist for a running mate.

  • LH

    jonolan: “How is describing his only administrative work before the legislature coded language? Isn’t Community Organizer exactly how Obama describes that job?”

    As a descriptor, the meaning of “community organiser” turns on the context within which it’s used.

    If, in referring to Obama as a community organiser, Palin was assessing his accomplishments, your question would have some traction. But Palin’s intent in dismissing Obama as a community organiser was reminding both her base as well as undecided voters that he is, after all, one of those black people.

    If you reject that view, then explain why Palin would refer to Obama as a community organiser at all. Is being a community organiser a negative?

    Palin and the rest of the Republicans know that where Obama is concerned, they can’t push the inexperience angle–at least not directly. So, they’ll resort to using the kind of coded language Palin did, which they believe affords them plausible deniability if/when they’re called racists, but serves as a wink and a nod to whites who play the politics of race.

    They may or may not be racists (I suspect that they are), but they’re definitely cowards.

  • Big Word

    It really makes no sense to criticize a person’s record of community service unless you’re trying to make a subtle connect to something negative. Put the racial debate aside for a moment and focus on what was said. Does the leadership in the Republican Party really think it’s not commendable to serve your community in that fashion? That it somehow makes you ineligible to wield executive power? If so, then why do they think that way?

    For an overwhelmingly Christian group of people the notion is ridiculous, hypocritical and borderline blasphemous. Christ’s entire life was about serving people, taking care of “the least of these”. The Republicans should be ashamed.

  • scott

    It seems to me from some of the comments here that some folks are determined to find some racism in Palin’s comments. Of course she negatively contrasts the organizer position with her experience as a mayor, she wants to convince people to vote for her. Don’t candidates for office always negatively contrast their opponents experience?

  • quadmoniker

    Scott: Yes, they do, or their voting record, or their demostrated stance on the issues. You’re right that that’s the VP’s role, that’s why Bush’s former speechwriter wrote the speech before the running mate was even chosen. They already knew how they were going to attack Obama.

    But the McCain camp made “experience” an issue in this election because they’ve said numerous times that Obama doesn’t have any. Then they picked a candidate who was younger and had even less. To diffuse criticism and mitigate the damage they did to their central argument, they made the other newcomer attack him anew.

    The bigger problem here is that it’s a false parallel. Obama was a community organizer in the mid-eighties, after college but before law school. During that time Palin was a television sportscaster.

    At about the same time she was mayor of Wasilla, where the population was roughly 5,000 during her tenure, Obama was serving in the Illinois state legislature with a constituency of about 200,000.

    No one’s saying Obama is the most experienced candidate ever, or Palin the least experienced VP candidate. But the parallel between her as mayor vs. him as organizer is simply not accurate. She picked that moment in his life for a particular reason – it’s symbolic meaning to the Republican base.

  • *slow claps* for QM.

  • scott

    quad:

    I think the comparison between Palin’s job as mayor and Obama’s job as community organixer is a way to highlight the fact that Obama has no executive position while Palin, however minor, does.

    To me the question is what do you find worse, a presidential candidate with experience and his VP who has less experience or a presidential candidate with less experience and his VP who has more experience? Personally, all things considered and without any party labels, I want the presidential candidate to be the most experienced of the two. Because at the end of the day, it is the president that make the final decision and while he or she may have the most experienced VP available, he or she makes the tough choices alone.

    Not to mention the fact that Obama’s choice of Joe Biden, a Washington insider if there ever was one, totally undercuts his slogan of “change we can believe in”. I think Obama could have done much better and I am sad that he didn’t.

  • quadmoniker

    Scott:
    Frankly, that naive. McCain’s camp likes to tout Palin’s “executive” experience, but they don’t really want anybody to question her on her tenure there. Palin left Wasilla saddled with outsized debt. As an elected official she has secured millions in earmarks for her constituents, and it turns out McCain had criticized those in the past. I wonder if Palin’s names is one of the names he says we will know.

    She also asked a librarian how she would go about banning books in the library, and many of her administrative duties were passed to a different town executive after a threatened recall.

    Obama has been a constitutional law professor, a state senator for a big chunk of the country’s third largest city, and a senator for one of the most populous state’s in the union.

    It’s a ludicrous case for her to try to make.

    You’re right, Obama is running against John McCain. For whatever reason, the Democrats are again refusing to fight dirty. But McCain’s record in Washington is hardly unblemished (Keating, anyone?) and it’s hard for him to make a case that he’s going to take the country anywhere new. His policy proposals last night were a laundry list of the G.O.P.’s standard fare.

    But the worst was the impulsiveness that seemed to come before the McCain pick. He met her to speak with her only a few days before the announcement. She was hardly vetted. And it was a blatantly calculated political move to energize the Christian right. Meanwhile, Obama’s selection was heavily vetted, was a well-kept secret, and was rolled out without any surprises.

    If the way that presidents pick their vp’s reflects out they will act as president, McCain seems far riskier.

  • scott

    I’m not trying to make a case for Palin, just giving you my view on things.

    Of course MaCain touts Palin’s job as mayor w/o the hard look at the substance, that is standard operating procedure for any politician. I agree her first term as mayor was rocky but she was not recalled and was in fact re-elected.

    You continue to harp on the fact that Palin’s executive experience is minor but seemingly refuse to admit that Obama has none. If you want to, you can argue that Obama’s legislative experience somehow makes up for the lack of being elected to run anything. What does Obama’s experience as a con law professor get him? I wouldn’t want my old con law prof running anything. Let’s be honest, being a legislator and an executive are two entirely different things. When you are a legislator you are a face in the crowd. When you are the executive, the buck stops with you and there is only one person responsible.

    Yes, McCain has some blemishes on his career. Even you have to admit that Obama and Biden do as well. No one in this race is as pure as the driven snow. Frankly, I think each party could have made a better choice for presidential candidate and both presidential candidate could have made better VP choices.

  • quadmoniker

    But if executive experience is so important, then no one could elect McCain, either.