Bill at Contratimes came up with this interesting analysis of the VP debates. Here's an excerpt. It's interesting to note my post on this topic came away with similar observations but Bill is far more eloquent:
"OK. Where do I stand in all of this? Well, I should think my last post was clear. She won the debate because Joe Biden was not able to separate himself from her by the leagues and leagues his vast experience should have provided him. As I said, he was merely adequate, which is equal to failure. She came across as calm and confident; and she seemed bright in a way that was not simply cognitive: she seemed to actually sort of radiate. There is a light about her; well, perhaps not so much a light as an aura, a lambent gleam, a shimmer. And she looks unflappable; she was not daunted at any point.
Lastly, she won because of one thing, one very important thing: No one in this entire election season has been under as much pressure -- not by a long shot -- as Gov. Palin. Her every pore and corpuscle, every preposition and conjunction, have been scrutinized in a very compressed time: she comes in with virtually no national experience, and yet she did not waver, nor did she embarrass, nor did she fail. Her family has been abused, mocked and derided. Her parenting has been doubted, questioned, and dismissed. Her background has been explored and found wanting. And yet, without so much as a sigh, when she finished debating, she waved and smiled at America, walked to the center of the stage, thanked Joe Biden, and then took her little baby in her arms -- a seamless transition from one role to another."
I confess I hoped Sarah would fail. The fact that she was way far from being a flop worries me. A LOT. As far as Iran goes and other stuff.
ReplyDeleteIn my view – not sharp necessarily since I am watching from overseas – a republican victory would make a war to Iran more likely for a number of reasons (I think I said this before here). I have respect for a person like MacCaine, a tough and honest man, plus a hero. But he is a neocon, he was 90% pro Bush in all his activity. Is that what American needs now? Neocons again?
I like the idea of a black President. This being though not the only point. Barack Obama is a brilliant man in my opinion, he is young and creative, he can really bring that change America is badly in need for. Maybe we will not. But Americans should try.
And Sarah, Sarah, she’s so darn …shining, as you guys well pointed out, she proved to be not that naive in front of such a seasoned politician, plus, damn, she's a babe (they made a porn movie with a starlet resembling her, if I'm not wring lol), not irrelevant a factor in today's marketing-styled politics.
I know for you New-World guys this all may seem obvious, banal etc.. Let me though be worried plsss.
PS
Offtopic, I cannot have a correct rendering of your comments area with Firefox. I can only partially read the commentators' names. Do not ask me to surf with IE pls lol.
Ciao
PPS
ReplyDeleteLots of typos. I was in a hurry.
MOR,
ReplyDeleteI think you represent a lot of people on this front. I further think you're right about your assessment about McCain and his neocon stances - although Bush only became one once in power.
I think both parties suffer from a dearth of quality ideas. And yes, the Iran issue is certainly more explosive with the Republicans. Although Obama has yet to present a better alternative. So far he sounds like a European and talks with Iran have been stalled.
Obama is a good choice in a theoretical and cultural sense for sure. There are many intangibles,and I have considered this as you have, to his election - the "idea" so to speak. Notably one in which would pacify the world if that matters to Americans. From my perspective, Americans are choosing their leader not the world. However, I'm not sure he's as creative as one might think.
To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if Obama, were he to be elected, would be the most unremarkable of Presidents. Clinton was all persona and his tenure was just above average. His intelligence and image propelled to soaring heights. But in terms of policy, that's another issue.
Palin is all those things for sure.
I’ll just focus on one aspect of your reply. This chatter-box won't be brief, I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteFrom my perspective, Americans are choosing their leader not the world.
Of course America to them is more important than the world, especially for the American masses. But isn’t it a problem with democracy? People are called to choose but they maybe lack the knowledge, namely a bigger picture, that is to say the awareness of how global and local levels interact dramatically.
And ‘the world’ in my view cannot just mean ‘pacifying the world’. It is not realistic this role, sounding a bit propaganda (although at times I acknowledge it is sincere). ‘The world’ should rather mean ‘influence in the world’. This should matter more.
Like every country, America is after her interests, and America’s interest in my opinion is to spread her influence, power and business all over the world in order not to decline and to better interact economically. Of course the better you do it ethically, the more success you can have (people around the world are not stupid). Far from being cynic, this seems very clear: you are good to people, people become your friends, work with you etc.
From this angle (reinforcing world influence) America’s global image matters a lot. And the influence and the image (‘the world’) will directly impact on local families’ wallets. Are though people that aware of this global interaction? Maybe not. Do they care about the fact that their image, because of the neocons, has gone to the drain? I think they do, but they do not deem it so important now.
That’s why we get back to where we started.
Americans are choosing their leader not the world. Ok, but I wish they had a wider vision. It is not an American thing only, it is a worldwide education problem. In a true democracy people should be educated enough to choose wisely (especially having a world leadership role, but it should apply to all folks).
Otherwise – as the Greeks marvellously theorised – a democracy turns into a demagogy, a place where people get manipulated.
I know mine is a rant now – I got carried away lol - but you cannot rule the world with unjust wars and tortures and the killings of innocent civilians. Force is surely necessary, but it must be accompanied by persuasion and right conduct.
This is why a new black Kennedy’s dream (no matter the chances of success) could make a difference, for Americans and for the world.
For example, making people in the world love again America because she at least tries, and not allowing the American century to finish the way it is finishing ….
We need the American dream and the American ideals. And Americans need it too.
MOR,
ReplyDeleteI agree in large parts and we share the thought that "the idea of America" still resonates deeply.
On the black Kennedy thing, perhaps but Kennedy did lead America into Vietnam. So Democrats with ideals go to war too... ;<)