Sarah Palin for President?

Sarah Palin's speech at the "Tea Party Convention" in Nashville this past weekend certainly received plenty of press. If you hadn't heard about her Presidential aspirations before, now you know. Snippets of her rousing oration have made many a thinking person wince in embarrassment. Sarah Palin for President? What is the world coming to?

I also wonder what the Tea Party was thinking. I understand that they are trying to become a force to be reckoned with, and they are steadfastly moving in that direction (even though direction is not their strong point). So, for their first convention they invite...Sarah Palin? Sure, she knows enough about national politics to fill a thimble, but does anyone, including the GOP, take her seriously?

Sound bites of her speech leave one astounded. Her statement that what this country needs is a "...commander-in-chief, not a law professor at a lectern", despite getting thunderous applause from conventioneers, doesn't make sense. You can't swing a dead cat in the U.S. Congress without hitting someone with a law degree. So, what's her point? That what we need is a former beauty queen? Not only does this comment make her look silly, it doesn't say much for the intelligence level of the average Tea Partyer, either. Thankfully, she had admitted brushing up on issues and events that spread beyond the state of Alaska. Well, good. The hokey, stupidey thing hasn't really done her much good so far.

What does the Republican party think of all this? They seem to be biding their time, keeping their distance. John McCain, who we can all blame for unleashing Palin onto the national political scene, has declined to criticize her publicly. Stand-up guy that he is, he probably never will. It will be interesting to see however, how he and the GOP handle this "Palin thing".

Who is the "Tea Party" Coalition?

More than 200 years after the famous "tea party" revolt, the term is popping up everywhere: Newspapers, magazines and of course, the Internet. A somewhat loose, but evolving movement, the common thread holding it together appears to be voter anger. White, middle-class anger, but real and boisterous. Too many taxes, too much government and the erosion of individual rights seem to be the primary concerns of those who profess to be deeply involved in this coalition. These are not new complaints; what is new is that they are being loudly voiced so early into a new administration. Does anyone really believe that all these issues came about within the last year?

While it is apparent that this movement is gaining ground, it is unclear which party they will eventually align with. Both Democrats and Republicans have been trying to harness this "energy", with the GOP coming out on top. At the recent "Tea Party Convention" in Nashville, Sarah Palin was the featured speaker. So, this must mean that the Partyers are rallying around the Republicans, right?

Well, maybe. An AP article by Liz Sidoti notes that, although the Partyers don't consider themselves a "third party", it has been mostly Independents running for office who have attached themselves to this movement. Additionally, members themselves profess not to really know where this new coalition is going. The McClatchy News Service quotes Rebecca Wales, spokesperson for SmartgirlPolitics.org as saying that it has been difficult to boil down the coalition's message to any one issue, but that, "we're unified in the fact that we do get out. We mobilize quickly and it's powerful when we do." Well, that certainly clears things up.

It is understandable that many of us are upset by the way our tax dollars have been used: Unwinnable wars, bailouts for financial institutions who refuse to follow the rules and turn around and hand out tax money to their friends in the form of bonuses. But blaming a new administration is not going to solve the problem. Top-down changes in government need to occur, and big money and corporate influence need to butt out. Okay, "Tea Party" members--get to work. Any group that can manage that gargantuan task will certainly earn my vote.

"Death Panel" Propaganda Attempts to Derail Health Care Reform

As commonly occurs during debate surrounding legislation that would actually benefit the majority of Americans, a vocal minority creates a catch-phrase to try to tilt the scales of the discussion in their favor. Who are these people? Usually they are groups that stand to lose something (read: money) if the legislation goes forward without their input. The health care reform debate is no different.


I don't know who came up with the term "death panel" to refer to language regarding end-of-life counseling. I do know that somehow Sarah Palin, never afraid to say the most nonsensical things in a public arena, has become their poster girl, claiming that "bureaucrats" will be empowered to deny health care to persons such as her "...parents and ...baby with Down's Syndrome", based on how much these panelists feel such persons contribute to society. Huh?


Now, the foregoing is silly enough to be laughable if not for the fact that, apparently, people are believing this nonsense. Notwithstanding Mark Twain's famous comment on the American populace, I'm still reeling from the realization that educated adults actually think that their government is drafting laws to decide who lives or dies based on cost considerations. The language only requires that Medicare cover this counseling, which I understand to be things like pain management, hospice care, living wills, etc., if it is desired. How is this wrong or "evil"? Notable, too, is the fact that this language is not new, and has been supported by Senate Republicans. So, what's the problem?


Hopefully, those behind this ridiculousness will be exposed for the muckrakers they are sooner rather than later, so that the rest of us can get back to the necessary task of making health care available for all.