Editing notebook pedro

It's been an interesting few weeks for American politics. I normally don't post about them, but I honestly feel like it is my patriotic duty to say something. I'm also going to say some things that might be challenging to some people. I'd like to encourage you to take 10 minutes of your day and read this post and then watch the accompanying video. Don't stop if it makes you uncomfortable. In general, I hate it when people take cheap shots at politicians or parties they don't like on principle. When making a meaningful criticism, you need to say meaningful things, not just "XXXX sucks!". And there is a difference between meaningful, substantive criticism (which I think is essential to democracy and therefore patriotic) and personal attacks (which I think are cheap and pointless). I would describe myself as an independent moderate. I like John McCain, and 8 years ago I was an ardent McCain supporter. I still wish he had won. But -- and please don't tune me out for saying this -- his pick of Sarah Palin is seriously questionable if not irresponsible. That said, I don't mean anything personal against Sarah Palin. I'm not going to make arguments about her politics or personal beliefs as to why she shouldn't be VP. The primary, first issue with Palin is her qualifications and readiness for the job. Not because she is a first term governor and former mayor -- but her informedness and ability to meaningfully communicate about the issues is seriously lacking. A VP should be a good candidate right away -- not someone who needs to be programmed by the campaign in order to have meaningful things to say. If you haven't seen her interviews with Katie Couric, you -- as an American voter -- really, really need to. There are several key issues in the interview that she fails to speak meaningfully on, and some parts where it's not even clear what she is saying or how it is directly relevant to the question. John McCain has (according to the tables used for health insurance) a 1 in 5 (or greater) chance of dying in office strictly because of his age. Regardless of how much you like Sarah Palin, it is hard to see the interview and think that she is truly ready to step in and be sworn in as president at a moment's notice. Again, not because of any ideological reasons (although you may or may not like her ideology), but because she is simply not ready. Please, forget all the SNL sketches and the vitriolic editorials, forget the bias of magazines and edited media. You have a rare opportunity to simply watch her responses to simple questions that, in my opinion, a VP should be able to answer. Here's a link to the YouTube search terms "<a href="http://youtube.com/results?search_query=couric+palin+interview&search_type=&aq=f">couric palin interview</a>". This way, if the links change you can still find clips. Make sure you listen to her answers about three topics: 1., why the bailout shouldn't go to the middle class instead of the banks, 2., her foreign policy experience, and 3., McCain's track record of regulating the economy. Some videos are excerpts or have commentary, etc., I encourage you to find and watch the unedited interviews. Update: See also her answers about the sources of media she reads and an example of a Supreme Court ruling she disagrees with (other than Roe v. Wade). Much has been made of this one in the media. It is simply factual that there are many Supreme Court rulings in the past that are questionable or at least that she could have been upset with, in particular the ruling regarding reparations from Exxon to Alaskan fisherman (one of whom is her husband). Other recent examples include the ruling on Eminent Domain from a few years ago, or historical cases like Dred Scott (slavery should remain legal) or Plessy v. Ferguson (justifying "separate but equal"). Palin did alright in the VP debate, but of course she was prepped for these issues. Furthermore, she often did not answer the questions, and in my opinion Gwen Ifill treated both candidates with a <a href="http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2026/whats-the-origin-of-to-treat-with-kid-gloves">kid gloves</a>. Unfortunately, I think that the <a href="http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&nolr=1&q=gwen+ifill+moderator+controversy&btnG=Search">Gwen Ifill moderator controversy</a> was valid after all. I think she reasonably stands to gain financially from an Obama victory because of her book... but more importantly, we won't ever know if a different moderator whose impartiality was not in question would have tried to force either candidate to answer the questions. Still, I think the Couric interviews are telling; anyone can prepare for a debate -- but candidates need to be informed about basic issues, political history, and should be able to defend their claims about past experience.