Image via Wikipedia

With the political and family drama surrounding Sarah Palin over the past year is she really an asset to the Republican Party or an albatross to the already suffering conservative party?

Sarah Palin appeared to be a political goldmine for the Republican Party, just little more than a year ago, with her savvy straight shooting talk aimed at hockey moms an conservatives everywhere.  Until the Katie Couric interview.  What was I am sure an interview aimed at showing off her good looks and well intentioned knowledge of current events, couldn’t have been a bigger disaster for her politically or personally.  Instead of appearing intelligent, well informed and relevant, she instead portrayed a candidate who was flustered, confused and ill prepared for the sharp questions hurled at her by the powerhouse that is  Katie Couric.  To make matters worse, when this disaster of an interview was over, she continued to reiterate her solid stance as a serious vice-presidential candidate, all while never directly answering the tough questions that were posed to her during the interview.  She also continued to defend the Republican Party’s campaign decision to schedule the interview for her when she was so obviously ill-prepared.

After the election, here comes yet more family controversy and drama.  Her daughter, Bristol Palin has herbaby  and for a couple of months at least, all seems to be going well with Bristol and her fiance Levi Johnston.  They paint the perfect picture of a together family moving in a positive direction.  Not so fast.  Just three short months after the birth of their baby, there is trouble big trouble in the little paradise of the Palin  family.  Levi Johnston starts on the media interview trail, painting the Palin family in not such a rosy light, inferring that things with the pro-hunting, tough talking Governor of Alaska weren’t quite what they seem.  Not such a surprise considering that during and after elections we always find that things weren’t quite as perfect as they seemed with our candidates. 

As if all this weren’t enough, then comes her resignation in July as the Governor of Alaska!  What was she thinking?  We were never really given a direct, solid reason for her resignation even during her “goodbye speech”  to the great folks of Alaska, although there was quite a bit of scuttlebutt about her book.  Really?  Writing a book is more important than serving out your comittment to the good folks who elected you?  She did profess to be resigning her position for the good of Alaska, to comfort those supporters who may have thought she was jumping ship for her own agenda.  I’m sure they felt much better knowing she was doing it for them and not for her own self-promotion.  Right.

Jump to current time and now she is busy slamming the campaign managers of her running mate, John McCain.  Apparently now she can come out in the open with her tell all book and her talk show appearances, and let the world know that her campaign failures was all the fault of John McCain’s campaign managers.  She’s appearing today on the Oprah Winfrey Show, apparently telling us all she could not tell us before.

Sorry Sarah, but with all your posturing and contradictions how can we trust you or take you seriously?  You are not doing the Republican Party (which you profess to love), any favors nor the folks you claim to represent.  At least with John McCain we knew exactly what we were getting.  With Mrs. Palin, what we we get depends on which way the Alaskan winds are blowing. Can’t wait to see what Oprah uncovers.

Preston Casillas

11/03/09

AP Politics

The Best Candidates for President

During the electoral process, two outstanding politicians, well, stand out. These chosen people are brought forth for the sole purpose of winning the big prize, the Presidential office. Once won, the elected politician gets the privilege, and responsibility, for controlling a world superpower. In my mind, the best candidate wins, whether I agree with the election or not, and he or she deserves to take the office. There are many reasons for my strong stand on this, but mainly, three stand out.

First off, the candidate has to win, at every possible phase of the election. That means they have to convince their entire party that they are better than their rivals. Then, they have to convince not only their own state, along with a majority of the others, that they are better than the other person that convinced their own party that they were the best

Second, the fact that the candidate raised enough money to actually run, create ads, and establish a personal following is absolutely astonishing. Because of our system, the candidate that has enough connections and charisma to connect with ignorant and mostly untrusting people is just mind-blowing. The task of winning over the general public in a large enough majority to win states is humbling.

In the last election, McCain held his campaign together by saying that he was the underdog, but the truth was that his party did not have enough uniformity that year. Barrack Obama won over 50% of his party’s vote; the most since 1964. (mediate.com) Party organization, agreement, and the disorganization of the opposing party puts a finer point on the issue; Barrack Obama deserved the win. He had to get his party, which is pretty much historically unorganized, to strap down and agree on one person, an African American and young man, to lead the country. I have a hard time getting my own family to pass the salt, and he got half of a party to put their two cents in for him.

The best candidate is always chosen for nomination, whether I agree with him or her or not. Being President is demanding, before one takes office, and as such, there are requirements. One needs three things: charisma, funding and connections, and especially a strong backing from within one’s own party. If you have all of that, and you are competent to run America, then you deserve the seat of power.