Palin

Since no one's posting, I'm going to double post.



And I can see Russia from my house! LOL


Let me repost one of the comments I made recently in my POLS2221 (US and Evolving International Order) course:

When I found out that McCain chose Alaskan governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, I was genuinely shocked. McCain obvious thinks that this is the best decision, and decided to go with an Alaskan woman as his running candidate.

Why though?

Convention and political gamesmenship dictates that McCain choose someone someone from the North, as he is from Arizona (a southern state). Palin isn't even from the mainland, so obviously McCain thought that he could pull the votes better with Palin. Palin was not chosen because of her logistical connections - Alaska is a hardcore Republican state, and only carries 3 electoral votes. No reason for McCain to choose someone from Alaska. Palin obviously has something better than that.

Is it Palin's experience? No. Palin is 44 years old, and could pass as McCain's daughter. She was a mayor of a tiny town in Alaska. She is a first term governor (with 2 years of experience). Experience-wise, she is even worse than Obama, which is saying a lot. Palin must have something even better than that.

What is it that Palin has that McCain decided it was important enough to forgo all the rules of the political gamesmenship and choose her over more experienced, more well known and regarded politicians? The answer? A vagina. Palin was chosen because of her gender, in an attempt to pull the disgruntled Clinton supporters to the Republican side. McCain obviously thinks that he has a better chance of winning with a pretty 44 year old beauty queen than with other more seasoned, experienced and well regarded and well respected politicians.

Naturally, this begs the question: Is the American public that immatured and shallow? McCain certainly thinks so. Palin, not chosen because of her experience, or her policies, but because of her gender and her beauty.

Oh well, why am I even asking this question... The Democrats did chose African American over experience. I'll leave you with two quotes from Geraldine Ferraro, the first woman chosen by a major party to stand in a presidential election (Palin is the second) :

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept"

"...in 1984 if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would have never been chosen as a vice presidential candidate. It had nothing to do with my qualification."




And then in a following post defending myself after offending some:



Thanks for the reply. Sorry if I offended you :).

In no way I am belittling Palin's achievements. I am sure she is a great mother, and a great leader.

Just not the best.

There were scores of other more eligible, qualified and experienced candidates that McCain could have chosen. In my previous posting, I have shown that she didn't beat the other candidates in areas of experience or qualification, or any other reason besides the fact that she is a woman. The fact that she is a woman was what made McCain decide on her over others that had more experience and qualification.

Impressive political career? Perhaps, but not as impressive as the other candidates. Of course she is not a complete political novice; she is just not a political maestro - and why would you choose a first term Alaskan governor over other political maestros?

Chairing the Oil & Natural Gas Resource Development Group? Impressive, but more impressive than the much much vaster experiences of the other candidates? I think not.

Which brings us back to she was chosen because she is a woman. She is a qualified woman, and I'm sure she would make a great VP, but ultimately, the reason she is selected is because she is a woman. Again, I am in no way belittling her achievements, but I don't think it was those achievements that made McCain choose her. McCain didn't choose her because of her experience or qualification, impressive as it might be, but because of her gender.

Obama may be an "intelligent, articulate, passionate and persuasive individual", but I personally think if he were to be a white man, he would not be accepting the nomination in Denver. Obama rode on the massive (almost 90%) support of the African American votes, and if he were a white man, a white, "intelligent, articulate, passionate and persuasive individual", he would not have been elected.

This is not to say that Palin and Obama are both impressive individuals. Openly stating that their gender and race are the reasons they are where they are today, might deny their personal achievements, but it is a fact. It is a fact that their gender and race were given more weight than their achievements and experience. I am not condoning or saying it is a positive or desirable phenomena, I am merely saying it is a fact.

And the fact is, Obama was elected because he is African American and Palin was chosen because she is woman.


Vagina anyone?

Newest crackdown against dissent - Malaysia heading for another Ops. Lalang?

A duplicate post from here

DAP leader Teresa Kok has also been detained under the Internal Security Act - the third person to be detained without trial today.

	Confirmed by DGP
	Arrested at 11.18pm

Malaysiakini report

First it was a blogger. And then it was a journalist.

Then went an MP and a state exco member.

The last time a journalist or an MP was detained under the ISA act, it was 21 years ago. We lived under a more oppressive regime, a more oppressive leader, a nation that did not tolerate dissent.

Or so we thought.

Echoing the sentiments of the Malaysian Bar Council President, I was under the impression that Malaysia was moving towards being a more open, matured society where dissent was accepted, even cherished. Evidently I have given too much credit to my nation's government.

They still resort to the Machiavellian ways of running the country - by arresting and jailing dissenters as means to threaten and intimidate the general population. And we say that our nation is not in distress.

To the Home Ministry, I ask you this : How is it that you can perceive these 3 Malaysians, especially the two women, Teresa Kok and Sin Chew report Tan Hong Chen to be a grave threat to Malaysian national security? Have they purchased bombs to blow up a body? What have they done, but to fight for justice, for freedom, for the rights of the individuals in our nation of Malaysia?

One can only wonder as to the plans of the Home Ministry. Are more to come?

Of particular concern is the arrest of Teresa Kok. An MP and a state exco legislator. The arrest not only deprives her of the individual liberties supposedly guranteed under article 5 of our constitution, but also deprives the people of Seputeh and Selangor of their right to representation in the Federal and State Parliament.

Only time will tell whether we will shrink back into our holes, cower and hide, just like in 1987, or we will come forward to aid our heroes in a time where they now need us to bear the torch for them. Will we fight for justice, for freedom, and for the liberty of these 3 heroes, now that they are incapable of carrying on our fight?

This is to say that we should help them peacefully, without resorting to violence, for it would become a greater atrocity and blow to our 3 heroes' cause if we were to spiral into a web of violence and bloodshed. We must show that we, the rakyat of Malaysia oppose and will not take the jailing of our people lightly, but we still have the maturity and restrain ourselves.

Before I end, I will leave you with 4 profound, and extremely appropriate quotes:


Dissent is the highest form of patriotism - Howard Zinn

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." - Pastor Martin Niemoller.

Fight for me, and I'll fight for you! - Teresa Kok

Before one can be fit for the practice of civil disobedience one must have rendered a willing and respectful obedience to the state laws. . . A Satyagrahi obeys the laws of society intelligently and of his own free will, because he considers it to be his sacred duty to do so. It is only when a person has thus obeyed the laws of society scrupulously that he is in a position to judge as to which particular rules are good and just and which injust and iniquitous. Only then does the right accrue to him of the civil disobedience of certain laws in well-defined circumstances. - Mahatma Gandhi