I've been reading many political blogs these past two weeks, trying to see how both parties' conventions played, what the people thought. And in those dozens and dozens of pages, the tens of thousands of comments have left me tired, frustrated and appalled that political discourse has become so vitriolic, sarcastic, and flat out deceptive. Informed citizens haven't been discussing issues, they haven't been debating policy positions, they haven't been rational, intelligent, informed. Its been name-calling, insults, lies. There have been many newly created slogans: PUMA, NObama, McSame, Rethuglicans---all of them meaningless. Why should I vote for a particular candidate? is the question. The answer usually comes back :STFU. Remember grade school taunts? Well, reading the blogosphere has felt like witnessing one giant verbal fight by 12 olds during the longest recess ever.

And now Sarah Palin is the ultimate blogger. She used her acceptance speech last night to strike back at her critics-- yes, the media got that right--, but Wow. I have never seen a politician give a major speech on a national stage that consisted almost entirely of variations of "Well, you're a doofus" She was completely juvenile. She attacked her critics and her opposition not by the reason of her argument, but by the force of her name calling. She belittled community organizing, she used very trivial things--likethe faux columns behind Obama's speech--as a reason to vote for her instead of detailing her policies, which she was almost silent about. (she did mention the natural gas pipeline.). Vote for set decorator in chief. See, I'm even being snarky. But I think my snark is based on calling out the lack of logic of her argument. Sarah Palin's snark is fear mongering and lies. It's hard to escape this cynical childish political culture but I never heard a politician succumb to it, and in her very first speech.

Also she lied. She lied often. Barack Obama does not care more about terrorists than this country. Barack Obama has had his legislation passed in the Senate. Barack Obama is not doing this for personal growth. (How can running for the most important job in the world be the same thing as taking a self esteem class? Is it the same thing as therapy? Don't you think Obama already knows who he is?) These were personal not policy attacks. Calling Barack Obama a terrorist sympathizer =calling him a dangerous lunatic for this country and that is so wrong, so vile, so repugnant that all I have to say is that Barack Obama nationally spoke about leaving Palin's family off limits during their difficult time. He said he would fire anybody from his campaign who used it to disparage her.

I didn't see it, but apparently Pat Buchanan gave a similar hate filled speech back in 1992. And apparently he was blasted for it by the media. Sarah Palin's speech last night, was praised. The pundits applauded. But that is not surprising as many political "journalists" are actually speech critics. They talk more about the art of the sell, than the product being sold. There was no discussion about the content of her speech, the accuracy of her statements. All it was the zingers and they were again juvenile and very mean. I think she was let of the hook was because she is a woman; she looks very sweet. If a man had made this speech, it would have been called as what it was: demagoguery. That it was not was sexist of the media, but sexism Palin will never rail against becuase she wants it; it's useful to smoothly make the hate go down. Ann Coulter was probably very proud.

From the Oxford American College Dictionary:

demagogue: n. a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

She appealed to the desires and prejudices of the Republican base but not to the American people.

Oh, and for those who say she was being tough, a skill necessary to stare down Putin, I ask: what, she will insult him, call him a dirty commie or maybe make fun of his baldness? When dealing with a country that has many nuclear weapons, is that really a good idea?. What many people lap up is the bully approach to foreign policy! You have to persuade other countries by appealing to their interests, not by--to continue with the school metaphor I began with--dunking their heads in a toilet and calling them names.. That's why its called diplomacy. Force is a last resort becuase it depletes your population, usually escalates exponentially and you make more enemies than friends. (See Russian force in Georgian War, response by international community to Russia). But even without threatening force, Palin--based on her speech last night--would be a terrible negotiator because she comes across as a strident and shrill and untruthful. That is not an attack on her person, that is a critque of her ablility.

Sen Obama has in his speeches talked about the middle class, about health care, about the struggle of working people. He has provided policy plans, and has never attacked Sen. McCain personally. And he has talked about hope and idealism. Sarah Palin used fear and destruction. For this, and many other legitimate reasons, she should not be Vice President.