Doonesbury Say What?

[thewayne]

"The threshold question: It's not usually asked, but it's in everyone's mind in a presidential election. 'Should we give this person nuclear weapons?' ...Answers itself."
— George Will on Sarah Palin

"Alrighty then! I can see the glow of Russia from my house!

I read the response when Palin announced she wanted to meet Margaret Thatcher. Loved it! Of course, Lady Thatcher is in her mid-80's and not in good health, but I don't think she'd want to meet Palin anyway.

Comments

[moiraj.livejournal.com]

Palin was the primary reason I didn't want McCain to win. (There were a lot, but that really was the big one for me.) He was a million years old and in poor health. (From what I understand.) The pressures of being the American president would have killed him off, and Palin would have direct access to the nuclear weapons. (Imagine the cariboo she could kill with those!)

On the other hand, I could reassure myself with the fact that she probably doesn't know where Canada is.

[thewayne.livejournal.com]

LOL! It's that big tree-ey place between Alaska and Washington, isn't it?

Yeah, she was a total deal-breaker for the McCain ticket and probably was one of the single biggest factors that cost him the election.

I think you're right that the stress of the presidency probably would have killed him, just look at how much Obama has greyed during his term in office thus far! There's a lot about McCain that I don't like, particularly his Maverick/I'm Not A Maverick flip-flopping. But he did serve in combat and he certainly suffered for it.

There's an interesting statistic that I don't have time to look up right now that showed the difference in Congressional party affiliation and military service. At that time, which was probably late 90's/early 2000's, the overwhelming affiliation of people who actually served were Democratic. Most of the Republicans had either gotten exemptions or served in the Guard and not overseas; Dole, McCain, and George Bush Sr. being notable exceptions.

[moiraj.livejournal.com]

Heh. Your first president was a general - wasn't he? - and our first prime minister was a lawyer. That must have created one hell of a precedent for both of us, because I'm aware how significant to many Americans a military background is, whereas all the prime ministers I can think of - like you, not looking it up - were lawyers.

[thewayne.livejournal.com]

Yup, George was one of the major leaders of the revolutionary army. We also had US (Ulysses S.) Grant, a big general during the Civil War (he was sometimes called Unconditional Surrender Grant), and Dwight Eisenhower who was a big figure in WW 2. William Henry Harrison's slogan of "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too" was from a battle related to the War of 1812, and my wife pointed out Teddy Roosevelt. I also thought of JFK, who served well in WW 2, but wasn't a prominent general like Eisenhower.

It would seem to appear that we Americans have a strong penchant for military figures, which I really think is indicative of how much a popularity contest the presidential race has become. Fortunately some degree of competency is still a requirement.

I am constantly reminded of the Douglas Adams line, the purpose of the presidency is not to wield power, but to divert attention away from those that actually wield power. A bit of a misquote, but close enough.