Republican Genius


The Republican Party had a stroke of genius during their National Convention (RNC). Before they presented Sarah Palin to the public, the Party's stalwarts took aim at the media—calling them left-leaning and blaming them for the Republican’s tarnished image. The trick worked so well that even after Governor Palin spoke, the media was uncharacteristically quiet. Instead of criticizing her speech, record, or experience, the media painted Palin as the darling of the convention who electrified the crowds. Somehow, the media glossed over the fact that Sarah Palin said nothing—like the rest of the speakers at the Convention—about the Party's policies, programs or plans for the future. These were not on the Republican menu because the RNC had two well-defined goals that week: attack the media and glorify John MaCain.


Unlike the other speakers, however, Palin attacked Barack Obama. Her first major speech reeked of bile. She was mean, vicious, and inaccurate with her allegations. Her speech was not worthy of a national convention and clearly unbecoming of a candidate for national office. Her performance dragged US politics and elections to an all time low and it seemed more suited for a stand-up comedy routine. Unlike McCain, Palin had not promised to conduct a dignified campaign and she never promised to behave during the campaign.


Sarah Palin’s inclusion in the Republican ticket fits seamlessly into the party’s plan to retain control of the White House. She and her Party are unjustly maligned, unfairly judged. The RNC was not a rally in support of change of any kind, official rhetoric notwithstanding: it was a call to defend the control of the Presidency—it was like watching Orcs itching for war. They will neither campaign on the issues nor play on voters' fears. The strategy is clear: Avoid issues. Pick fights. Spew hate. Spit venom. Vote Republican.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Alternative to Oposa

I do not mean to suggest that the Philippine Supreme Court has abandoned the environment. Sometimes the solutions to our problems need not be remedies that straddle generations or excite international attention. There is still one alternative that the Supreme Court has preserved: local governments. Local governments in the Philippines are not all allies of the environment. Too many local officials equate economic development with large-scale resource extraction activities such as mining and logging. But when cases reach the Supreme Court, the Court has been remarkably supportive of local governments and community efforts to protect the environment. Two decisions of the Court come to mind. The first is Tano v Socrates (G.R. No. 110249, August 21, 1997). In that case the Supreme Court upheld the power of the local governments to enact laws to protect the environment pursuant to the general welfare clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. The Court pointed out that the Code seeks “to...
Read more

Local government avalanche is Congress' fault

A recent Newsbreak report, GMA Creating Too Many LGUs , by Miriam Grace Go (August 22, 2007), unfairly blames President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for the increase in the number of local government units in the Philippines. This increase, particularly in the case of cities has been going on ever since the Local Government Code of 1991 took effect. It is encouraged by two features of the Code: (a) the formula for the distribution of the internal revenue allotment that favors cities, and (b) the relative ease in making cities. Politicians determined to increase the financial resources of their governments have been campaigning to upgrade into cities ever since they discovered these weaknesses in the Code. In 1986, there were 73 provinces, 60 cities, and 1,530 municipalities in the country. Just before the Estrada administration collapsed, there were already 110 cities. On March 5, 2001, less than two months into office, President Arroyo signed 14 bills on the conversion of municipalities i...
Read more

Clinton: End Game

Image
Senator Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House has ended and even she knows it. The math has not been in her favor for some time now. She tried to run on her strengths as a US Senator and her "34 years of experience" in government service to no avail. Her record could not stand up to Senator Obama's charm. She was unlikable; he was eloquent, even enchanting. His record is not so bad either. She was part of the old Washington crowd that was part of the problem. Obama was a fresh face who promised change "we can believe in." So Clinton tried different angles. She tried drama by shedding tears and launching sharp angry attacks against Obama. She tried comedy--by doing the comedy circuit on television. She tried adventure by claiming to have survived sniper fire during a visit to Bosnia. All these tricks worked a little; it kept the campaign alive, if barely. They tried to change the rules--bring in Florida and Michigan despite the fact that they were penaliz...
Read more