Alaska Women Reject Palin Rally

I received an e-mail "Fwd" today about the Alaska Women Reject Palin rally in Anchorage, Alaska, claiming that it was the largest rally ever in the state of Alaska and that it vastly outnumbered the Welcome Home rally for Sarah Palin (which received all the mainstream media attention). I usually don't believe anything I read in forwarded e-mails, but this was worth checking out.

I found the story in The Huffington Post, verifying everything I had just read. Basically, a bunch of women met over coffee and decided to start a rally against Palin. They posted fliers and notified some of the local media about their plans and had a turnout of close to 1,500 (making this the largest rally ever in Alaska).

Video and images from Mudflats:

So I guess the question I'm trying to ask here is... why did I read this in a forwarded e-mail? Why would Palin's Welcome Home rally receive all the attention while this one's biggest media coverage was an Alaskan blogger?

And the Winner Is...

Well, according to an ad, which appeared on the Wall Street Journal website earlier today before the debate even occurred, it was McCain.


According to a CBS early poll of 500 uncommitted voters, however, it was Obama. This was determined after the debate, by the way, not before.

Personally, I think that neither of them "wow-ed" me, but neither completely embarrassed himself either. McCain absolutely demonstrated his experience with the military and swore to take care of America's veterans. Obama, on the other hand, reminded us that he saw this financial crisis coming and tried to stop it, while McCain and the Republican party allowed it to happen. Those were two things that really stuck out to me, at least.

McCain did, however, show us that he's willing to come down hard on extraneous government spending while Obama may be asking for large sums of government cash to fund his various projects. Obama defended his position, though, not only by stating the importance of government spending on educatoin and health care, but also by refuting many of the claims McCain was making about his (Obama's) proposed policies.

On a completely superficial note, I was watching on NBC, and maybe it was different on other channels, but the fact that the camera frame had to be adjusted for Obama, who stands 6'1.5" tall, versus McCain who is only 5'9" made McCain look older and Obama look more presidential.

Does this really matter? Well, yes. According to this article as well as the Presidential Height Index, the taller presidential candidate usually wins the popular vote. Of course this isn't always true, but I think in this election in particular, it's a little more important. McCain isn't a young, healthy guy. In fact, he's 72 years old (compared to Obama who is only 47), and this obvious height difference only adds to the "frail, old man" image McCain does not want.

But getting back to the point of this post...

Who is the real winner? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Who Wears the Pantsuit?

According to Katie Couric from CBS News, women are 1) more likely to vote than men and 2) more influential when it comes to decision-making within their homes. Couric asks if the woman's influence will make it to the voting booth:


Watch CBS Videos Online

And if you're looking for that clip of Obama singing "I'm Every Woman," the audio is here:



So, who really does have the female vote?

Couric, Palin, and Those Shifty Russian Neighbors

So we've all heard that Sarah Palin lives right next door to Russia, therefore giving her all the foreign policy experience she could possibly need. There was no way Katie Couric could not bring this up during her recent interview with Palin.

I think my favorite part was when Couric tried so hard not to smirk about the whole Russia thing:

Watch CBS Videos Online

In case you missed the facial expressions, here they are for you:


Palin defended herself by re-iterating the importance of Alaska's proximity to Russia, but it left me thinking... isn't Siberia kind of the Alaska of Russia? (Sorry Alaskans, we still love you).

First, I pulled up a map of Alaska and Russia on Google Maps:


But then I zoomed out, and put a little marker on Moscow (represented by the letter "A"), because I think if Palin is going to talk about foreign policy experience with Russia, she must be referring to the Russian government, right?


Not so close, really. Actually, the distance from Palin's office in Juneau, Alaska to Moscow, Russia is approximately 4,470 miles (data from Google Earth). So this got me wondering, what else is Palin 4,470 miles away from (and therefore completely knowledgeable of)?

Well, according to Google Earth, the list would include both Panama and London, so perhaps Palin should add those to her foreign policy résumé, as well.

About Those Wolves...

I was just reading Mike's blog, where he posted this video:


How can anyone not find this completely disturbing? Also, why has it taken so long for anyone to pick up on this issue? I rarely hear any mention of Sarah Palin's wolf-killing policies in the mainstream media. Mama for Obama commented on Mike's entry about how Michael Vick went to jail for dog-killing, but we're considering electing this woman for VP.

Speaking of Michael Vick, who didn't know about that? I don't follow sports or watch ESPN, but I read about Michael Vick and his dog-fighting ring nearly every day for weeks because it was that big of a story and hit nearly every media outlet. Why was it decided that Michael Vick's story of an underground dog-fighting ring was so much bigger than a government policy to kill wildlife in Alaska under the leadership of our potential future VP?

Who Owns the Internet? And Also, Where's Joe?

With the Internet becoming more and more important in campaigning, a good question to ask is, who's on top web-wise? According to hitwise.com, Obama's website consistently gets more hits than McCain's:

However, Sarah Palin seems to be taking over the spotlight as people are wondering where the Democratic VP Joe Biden is. In fact, according to Fox News:

"Online searches indicate that Republican vice presidential hopeful Sarah Palin overwhelming has captured the attention of Web users, placing her No. 1 on the list of mostly widely used political search terms.

Joe Biden? He didn’t break the top 10."

So, where is Joe Biden? Well, according to this website, Biden is "everywhere that matters," making personal appearances in a number of important states. While these stories don't make the cut for national news, they are circulating through more local newspapers. Is Biden flying under the radar and gaining more localized public attention that we don't even know about?

I guess we'll have to wait and see if all this "local press" really does make a difference.

Palin Shows the Press Who's Boss... But Not Really

Today, Sarah Palin met with world leaders to increase her "experience" in foreign affairs. Palin and her people agreed to allow photographers and videographers to collect a few images of the meetings, but refused entry to any reporters.

CNN, in protest, pulled its TV crew from the first meeting Palin had with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Palin wanted the high visibility that the CNN TV crew could provide, however, and eventually agreed to allow a CNN producer in, as well.

This raises the question of who's really in charge? The candidates can agree to take questions or not, they can choose whom they are willing to be interviewed by, they can make stipulations about what they will and will not discuss, but in the end it seems to be the media holding the real power. Candidates have to get their faces out there somehow, so the last thing they should want to do is disengage with the media.

First Ladies

I know this is old news, but I thought this recent article in the Chicago Sun-Times about Senator McCain's first wife, Carol, was really interesting - "Let the record show McCain's cheating past".

Not a lot of people seem to know that while McCain was in a Vietnam prison camp, he had a wife, Carol, at home taking care of his three children. During this time, Carol McCain got into a terrible car accident that left her permanently crippled. When her husband returned, he was shocked to see the change in his former-swimsuit model wife and, even though Carol claims her accident was not the cause of this, he soon left her for a younger woman - Cindy McCain.

The article linked above points out how important female voters are in this election, and how something like this could be particularly damaging, should it come to the media forefront. Referring to female voters - "Many of these women have walked in Carol's shoes. / They have loved men when their lives were low only to be cast aside when their spouses' stars began to rise."

Should this become a bigger issue, do I think this will affect the opinions of American female voters? Absolutely. It's hard not to be swayed by a candidate's personal character, and this is an issue that hits very close to home for a lot of American women. If John McCain is cast as the philandering husband and Cindy McCain as the homewrecking other woman, while Barack Obama and his wife Michelle are portrayed as the all-American husband and wife team, I think this will have a major impact on female voters.

Just take a look at these magazine covers:


Cindy McCain - "Behind That Smile" versus Michelle Obama - "She shops at Target, loved Sex and the City and never misses the girls' recitals. The untold romance between a down-to-earth mom and the man who calls her 'my rock'"

As an American woman myself, Michelle Obama has that she's just like me element to her, while Cindy McCain comes off as cold and sneaky. I know this is based on superficial images and, well, magazine covers... but imagery works! How many women browsing through the magazine shelves at their local supermarket or book store are going to see these images, perhaps next to one another, and think the same thing (probably without even reading the articles inside).

How would you vote for First Lady?

Obama Just As Misleading As McCain

Senator Obama has been running an ad recently that has been "Scaring Seniors," according to Newsweek. His ad is about social security, and Senator McCain's support of privatization of the system. According to Newsweek, the ad is flawed and misleading. Watch below:


In the linked article above, Lori Robertson and Brooks Jackson from www.Factcheck.org go step-by-step through the Obama ad pointing out the many misleading details. I'm not going to repeat them all here, but just to sum up - Senator Obama's ad strongly implies that senior citizens should be concerned that their social security checks that many of them rely on are going to be cut in half should Senator McCain become president.

From "Scaring Seniors"
The ad refers to a Bush proposal from 2005 to hold down the growth of benefits for future retirees. Compared to the buying power of benefits paid to today's retirees, that would not have been a "cut" for anybody. It would have been a "cut" of half only in relation to benefits now promised to retirees who have yet to be born. And for average workers, that "cut" in 2075 was projected by one of Obama's own economic advisers to be 28 percent, not "half."

The article goes on to quote Senator McCain in 2007 saying, "...It's got to be bipartisan..." when referring to the Social Security reforms necessary to keep the system from going broke. Overall, it becomes very clear that Obama is being just as misleading in his advertising as McCain was with his recent Katie Couric WebAd.

"Can you really afford more of the same?" That's the closing line of the Obama-Biden Social Security ad. In its own way, this is more of the same - misleading ads that are then exposed in the media.

Stump the Candidate

I just watched this video of someone asking Governor Palin about her "...perceived lack of foreign policy experience," and even after re-watching twice, I'm still pretty sure she didn't answer the question, or even come close to it:


Isn't this the second time someone from the McCain camp has evaded this very question? Brent posted about the Campbell Brown - Tucker Bounds fiasco on his blog if you'd like to see the video I'm referring to.

Sometimes, I do think the media goes too far, asking questions to intentionally trip someone up or mislead viewers/readers, but in both these cases, Governor Palin and Tucker Bounds were asked the same, fair and simple question and any damage done was entirely self-inflicted. Do they really think Americans are going to be fooled by this? Tucker Bounds did nothing but turn the question into an excuse to re-iterate Senator Obama's inexperience, while Governor Palin answered with an excited We're ready so, Go Team!

The media doesn't always have to spin something to make a point, sometimes the candidates do it for them.

Couric on Palin

I think everyone is excited to see the Couric - Palin interview which is set to air on September 29th. One of the things that stands out most about Sarah Palin is that she is a woman running for Vice President, and who better to interview her than another powerful female figure?

I read today on the New York magazine "Daily Intel" some of the top reasons why this interview should be especially interesting: Why Katie Couric Will Do a Great Job Interviewing Sarah Palin

I think this is a fantastic opportunity for Palin to redeem herself after the Charlie Gibson interview that, in my opinion, failed to impress. I'm hoping we won't have to keep hearing "I'm ready" and instead we'll here more "Here's why I'm ready."

SNL Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton Spoof

Just for fun:


I know it's a spoof, I know it's not meant to be taken seriously... but are they really that far off?

McCain's Misleading WebAd

YouTube, a major video-sharing website, has just taken down a McCain WebAd that featured Katie Couric from CBS News talking about sexism in the election. She is quoted, "One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life." The ad implies that Couric was speaking about Sarah Palin when, in fact, she said this long before Palin became McCain's VP choice. Couric was actually speaking about Hillary Clinton, not Palin.

Couric talking about sexism in reference to Hilary Clinton:


CBS responded to the situation, saying "CBS News does not endorse any candidate in the Presidential race. Any use of CBS personnel in political advertising that suggests the contrary is misleading."

While I don't think this particular ad played a major role in anything, I do think this is an ethical issue. Whoever it was from Team McCain that came up with the concept for this ad must have been aware that Couric's statement had nothing to do with Palin, but chose to use it anyway.

Ultimately, I think this choice will hurt the McCain campaign more than it could ever have helped it, because it is so blatantly and purposely misleading. I think this will only add to the mistrust that many Americans feel towards politics in general, and now more specifically McCain's campaign. By manipulating this latest video to misdirect people, I think they've taken away a lot of their own credibility for any future statement, especially anything involving a public figure.

Blizzard of Words Hits Alaska

If you haven't seen it yet, watch the Charlie Gibson interview with Sarah Palin (part 1) here:


I'm a little concerned that "Alaska is close to Russia" seems to be foreign policy experience in the eyes of McCain and Palin. I was really glad Gibson brought this up (at 2:28). This was such an important interview for Palin, I really expected her to be ready to step it up and answer the foreign policy question, but once again she did not. She's really not even that good at distracting us from the question. To me, it's always so obvious that she has no idea what to say, as I'm sure it is for the millions of Americans who watched this interview.

At 3:31, Gibson asks Palin if she has ever traveled outside of the country except for her recent trip to Germany and Kuwait. Gibson brought this up right after Palin failed to answer the foreign policy question, of course. Palin quickly answered that she has also been to Canada and Mexico. Are Canada and Mexico really all that relevant today in terms of foreign policy? She was just telling us how energy issues are at the crux of the foreign policy issue, then she brags about visiting Canada and Mexico? I'm unimpressed.

At 7:52, Gibson asks Palin what she thinks of the Bush Doctrine. She makes it immediately clear that she has no idea what the Bush Doctrine is. Gibson, rather than helping her out, lets her embarrass herself first.

If it was Gibson's intention to expose Palin for her inexperience, I think he did a terrific job, and he did it by asking fair, direct questions without any personal commentary. Well, until he said what every viewer was thinking... "I got lost in a blizzard of words there..." (9:52).