Wednesday, September 3, 2008

"Letter to the Editor" ... of the day

Below is a letter that I thought was really good regarding the Sarah Palin pick. I haven't really written too much about it because it is one of those topics that I want to go on and on about but don't have the time. There is so much wrong with her as the pick. It is an insult and a danger to this country. I do want to talk briefly about an aspect of her personality that I have noticed but have not heard others talk or write about: her ambition and her ideology.

My impression is that she is a megalomaniac. Combine her "ambition over family" mentality with her "God over country" beliefs (her God, not yours or mine) and that spells D-A-N-G-E-R!! There is a now famous video where she says that she does not know what a Vice President does. Frightening, but what is even more serious is how she completes that thought. At the end she says (paraphrasing) that she will have to make sure that her powers are clearly defined and strongly implies that those powers will have to be "fruitful" to meet her expectations. This is not a throw away line. She wants power and has undoubtedly made that clear to John McCain. McCain, desperately flailing for a surprising pick, undoubtedly gave in instantly to the former beauty queen. Considering her extreme ideology and her lust for power - we have a potential disaster on our hands. You were warned here first: Sarah Palin is another Dick Cheney, if not worse.

To the Editor:

Although discussion about families of candidates may be off limits, as both Barack Obama and John McCain have argued, the news that Bristol Palin, 17 and unmarried, is pregnant does raise
... questions that should legitimately be part of the conversation about the candidates.

First, what does it say about the judgment of a parent — father or mother — who takes on tasks that will necessarily keep that parent away from family and preoccupied (at least I would hope preoccupied) with the state of our country, at a time when two of the five children in that family are in particular and poignant need of special attention?
What does this say about Sarah Palin’s raw ambition?

And second, what does it say about John McCain’s judgment that he knowingly asked a parent in this situation to be his running mate, without apparent consideration for the effect that this would necessarily have on her family, and particularly on those members of her family most in need?
What does this say about John McCain’s cynicism?

What does all this say about the commitment to family values so loudly endorsed by so many McCain supporters?

Ginny Blanford

No comments: