Sarah Palin spent ten minutes of a short 30-minute speech she delivered in Pennsylvania last Saturday (October 11) “painting Sen. Barack Obama as a radical on abortion rights.” Obama and Palin agree that the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade should be overturned, and Palin has voted against abortion under all circumstances, including rape and incest—except when the pregnancy endangers the mother’s life. In opposition, Obama disagrees with the overturning of Roe v. Wade and voted against an act to ban partial birth abortions.
In the speech, Palin emphasized a remark about sex education made by Obama in March. Obama told a voter that if teenagers are not educated about sex and STDs, they might unknowingly make mistakes and end up “punished with a baby” or “punished with an STD”—a valid argument. She quoted him out of context:
"So I listened when our opponent defended his unconditional support for unlimited abortions and he said he said that a woman shouldn't have to be 'punished with a baby’. Ladies and gentlemen, he said that right here in Johnstown. 'Punished with a baby.' It's about time we called him on it."
Why would suddenly Palin focus on such a controversial topic to gain support? Up until now, she has mostly avoided the topic in her campaign. Palin’s very conservative views on abortion alienate many voters, especially moderates and the women voters her nomination was expected to draw to McCain’s side. Could it be that Palin is slipping up again, or is this some sort of tactic to win over voters? Hard to tell, but it certainly is drawing more attention to both campaigns as we approach the November election.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/11/campaign.wrap/index.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I'm sick of the slander. I wrote about a similar issue in my blog post last week; instead of using substantive arguments and logic in its attacks on Obama and Biden, the McCain-Palin campaign has resorted to pettiness and wordplay.
Margarita: the quote you pulled from Palin's October 11th speech in Pennsylvania is a great example of the campaign's dirty tactics; of course Obama doesn't favor "unlimited abortions" and doesn't think a baby is inherently a "punishment." He's neither a baby-hater nor a baby-killer. In addition to the Ayers "non-issue," which I wrote about last Monday, Khaled Hosseini (who wrote The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns) points out another example of their juvenile attacks in The Washington Post. Speakers at McCain-Palin rallies have referred to Obama as "Barack Hussein Obama" with "unveiled scorn" twice last week alone, as if his middle name makes him someone to distrust. Hosseini calls these jeers "deeply offensive to millions of peaceful, law-abiding Muslim Americans who must bear the unveiled charge," and asks why neither McCain nor Palin have had the "moral courage" to "denounce the use of Obama's middle name as an insult."
But fortunately for Obama, the personal attacks may be hurting the slanderer more than the, er, slanderee. According to Michael Cooper and Megan Thee of The New York Times, the campaign's "recent angry tone and sharply personal attacks on Senator Barack Obama" have damaged those issuing the attacks more than their intended target; polls have shown that more voters view McCain as "waging a negative campaign" than his rival. And, furthermore, the negative attacks as well as his choice of running mate were the top reasons given by those whose opinions of McCain had diminished.
So, with three weeks left in the election season, McCain and Palin should probably learn to scale back their personal attacks and focus on issues that are actually important to the American people. Perhaps their campaign would benefit if they would just "play nice."
...and by "last Monday," I meant "last Sunday"
I think that Palin is trying to galvanize the Republican base. When she referred to Obama's warning that teenagers who have not taken sex-ed might be "punished with babies," Palin was probably emphasizing the use of that statement even within Obama's context. Of course using that statement without a context might be a controversial thing to say, but to certain religious people, using that statement with Obama's context might still be a controversial thing to say. Consider some Christian beliefs that all births are willed by God, even if the parents did not intend to conceive the baby. Also recognize the similar argument that God had a plan for everybody when they were conceived, even if the parents did not have a plan. I do not know how religious the people of that town are, but I do think Palin's arguments certainly could ring true for various people. Whether Palin should be trying to appeal to the broader public instead of trying to stir the loyal base is up for debate too.
At this point in the election, I believe that Palin is trying to pull out any stop she can. She might have been avoiding the abortion issue somewhat due to the controversy currently surrounding her family. I agree with twee, though. The effort on Palin's part to discredit Obama by using a small quote placed slightly out of context might be going too far. Palin should have the right to disagree with Obama, but by personally attacking Obama for what he said in a previous speech is a stretch. I am sure if Obama had the chance to recant that statement, he would. All politicians at some point choose the incorrect words to say at a certain time, what their opponents should focus on though is the issue at hand, not the choice of words.
Post a Comment