I might take a hit for this post but oh well. In fact, I’ve been modifying this all day because I said what I did earlier in such a piss-poor way. It’s like engrish is my fifth language or someting.
I’m going to hack at it again in a few seconds, and be patient, because what I’m trying to say is heavily nuanced even in my own brain. I keep revisiting it to make sure I’m not being internally inconsistent.
***
I was listening to NPR (Diane Rhem) this morning as I was coming in to work. (know thine enemy, I say)
A caller said that she thought that the dialogue should shift away from experience and focus more on world exposure. Obama has lived in big cities and in other parts of the world. Palin has lived in small towns and by the way did you know that she went to five different universities and hasn’t released her grades?
I have in the last week just done a flip-flop from my past behavior/approach/outlook.
Here’s the thing: If all we can do is focus on Obama’s grandmother, Palin’s universities, where he/she lived, what kind of mother/father they are, etc. then we have goddamned well missed the boat.
There’s also been focus on how old McCain is. Focus on Palin being a mom.
Lets quote from the EEOC.GOV website, shall we?
… employment decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about the abilities, traits, or performance of individuals of a certain sex, race, age, religion, or ethnic group, or individuals with disabilities; and
denying employment opportunities to a person because of marriage to, or association with, an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or an individual with a disability. Title VII also prohibits discrimination because of participation in schools or places of worship associated with a particular racial, ethnic, or religious group.
It gets mentioned again:
… the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older
And again:
Discriminatory practices under these laws also include:
… employment decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about the abilities, traits, or performance of individuals of a certain sex, race, age, religion, or ethnic group, or individuals with disabilities; and
People are making definitive and decisive arguments about these candidates based on criteria that are illegal for a company to consider in hiring/firing of an employee or potential candidate. Federal law. And we’ve been doing this for years. I know it won’t stop and I know I will probably continue to do it even after this post (because it is fun). But could we refocus a bit?
The office of president and/or vp are elected offices but they are essentially candidates for a job. They get compensation for their job just like any of the 93.9% of us that are currently (as of today) employed in the United States.
I want to hear about their actual job-related qualifications, their actual voting record, and their policy platforms. I want a resume, not a bio. This is not to say you can’t be obnoxious if you damn well please (because, as I said, I plan to) but let’s not let news/reporters waste everybody’s time reporting feelings or suppositions as fact. If reporters start putting in feelings or suppositions they should stop being “reporters” and become the next Michelle Malkin, where there’s a blend of facts and insight and critique that becomes more than the sum of the parts. And, just as in aerospace: Not everyone gets to be an astronaut. Not everybody is going to be a Malkin or a Sowell or a Hannity.
Sure if Candidate X is a pedophile, a felon, drug abuser, or actively breaking a serious law – YES, those are things that one would take into account and those facts should be brought into light.
But is noting that Palin went to five universities and won’t release her records something that is even remotely germane to the topic at hand? The topic is whether she’s qualified to be a vp. Is it relevant to the job the number of kids you have? What about what your wife wrote while in college (yes, I know, this is a major flip-flop for me)? Does your wife’s racially-charged college paper belong in the arena of reporting facts relevant to the election? Not really.
I guess I am just very very weary of the two year’s worth of MSM’s focus on specious and irrelevant arguments about stuff that is total bullshite in the context of ability to do a job as outlined by the Constitution.
There. I hope I did that with more justice this time.
Lemur King's Folly 