So, I wasn’t going to say anything about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy, as I do think Obama and McCain are right that the private lives of the candidates should be, for the most part, off limits.  However, when their private lives impact or reveal their suitability for their potential position, then I think it is not only fair but important to delve into things a bit more.

I have no problem with the fact of the pregnancy.  The girl is young, hormones are hard to control, and things happen.  And I commend her for dealing with the situation in an adult manner.

However, I do have issue with what this reveals about her mom.  Her mom has an abstinance-only position, in spite of the numerous studies that have shown that this is a failed policy, that it doesn’t work as a way of reducing teen pregnancy.  And, lo and behold, it didn’t even work in her own family.  This, to me, is a sign of the same dogmatic view of life that admits no greys, that ignores the real-world evidence and stubbornly pushes forward even when the reality is that such policies just do not work.

It is fine to live your personal life in such a dogmatic way.  That is the beauty of our country and the freedom of religion/belief that it exemplifies.  However, this is not the kind of person who should be leading our country.  We need someone who can adjust to reality, who can see when things are working and when they are not and who can adjust their position accordingly.  We need someone who will listen to voices that disagree with them, who, even though doesn’t like those voices, will consider their counsel and, when prudent and necessary, adjust.

The other thing that bothers me is the free pass this situation is getting from her supporters.  I truly do not believe that if the shoe were on the other foot, a free pass would have been given to Obama.  They would have blamed any pregnancy of his daughters on their “liberal” and “immoral” lifestyle, the type of lifestyle that, certainly, all Democrats live.

The more I hear about Palin, the more I think she is a bad choice.  She was for the “bridge to nowhere” before she was against it.  She was for earmarks before she was against them.  (And Kerry was the flip-flopper?)  She has left the country once in her life.  The claims that Alaska is next to Russia and that gives her some foreign policy experience are just ludicrous.  When is the last time Russia even mentioned Alaska?  Has she even met a Russian national?  And that she has foreign policy experience because her son is going to Iraq?  That is equivalent to saying my parents are scientists because I went to graduate school.

I’m not entirely sure why, but this election, more than most, has me fired up.  I wasn’t even this upset at Bush’s last campaign (though I was when he won).  I just can’t believe the way the politics is playing out.  I hope that McCain, in choosing Palin, gets those Evangelical votes he so desparately wanted but, in doing so, forfeits the centrist moderates he needs just as badly and thus the election.

Now that the two tickets are set — Obama and Biden, McCain and Palin — I thought I’d give my perspective on what the choices for VP tell at least me about the two campaigns.

First, it is interesting that each campaign chose a person that personifies the very essence of the other campaign that they were attacking: Biden is the Washington insider, no symbol of change, and Palin is about as inexperienced as you could imagine.

Biden, Obama’s pick, is a well-known commodity.  He has been in the Senate for many years, longer than even McCain.  Why did Obama pick him?  To me, it seems that Obama was trying to address some of his own short-comings, namely his lack of foreign affairs experience and insider knowledge of how Washington works; even though Obama is also a Senator, his experience is, admittedly, limited.  So, it seems that Obama chose Biden to shore up his weaknesses, to make his ticket stronger and to better able to perform the job they hope to be elected to.  He picked Biden in spite of his baggage, including his tendency to go off message and be a hot head, as well as the plagarism charges that are likely to at least be rehashed in this election.

Of course, that isn’t the only reason.  Biden is expected to be an attack dog, to be able to bring more heat against McCain during the election.  So, there is a pragmatic reason for his choice as well.  But, it seems that the primary reason is to make the potential Democratic administration that much more effective.

Palin, on the other hand, it seems to me, was chosen solely for what she can bring to the election, not what she would actually bring to a McCain administration.  She was chosen to appeal to the conservative Evangelical base as well as the disaffected Hillary supporters.  The hope, it seems, is to attract them to McCain, or make McCain seem more palatable to those constituencies.  She doesn’t bring much of anything to a Republican adminstration in terms of experience or abilities.  She is known as being tough on corruption, and being fiscally conservative, but it isn’t at all clear how that helps a Presidential administration.

Obama’s choice of Biden tells me that Obama knows his weaknesses and is willing to put people who are much more knowledgeable in those areas around him, to help advise him.  He is willing to surround himself with people who can advise him, who will challenge his views and opinions, resulting in better decisions.  McCain’s choice of Palin, on the other hand, tells me the opposite.  Palin herself denies the role of humans in global warming, despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of scientists who actually study global warming are convinced the evidence points to humans having played a significant role.  She also supports the teaching of Creationism in schools.  She is a person who believes what she believes, who is dogmatic, and has no place for opinions that differ from hers, even when those opinions come from experts.  We have already had 8 years of this, of science being thrown to the wayside because it is inconvenient, because it disagrees with the assumptions of the administration.  We don’t need any more.  McCain’s choice of Palin tells me what I already suspected:  he doesn’t need advisors, because he already “knows” the answers.  He demonstrated this earlier with is dismissal of economists’ insistence that a gas tax holiday was a bad idea, and he has further demonstrated with his choice of Palin.

The choice of a VP serves two principle purposes: to help the ticket win and to help make the administration more complete.  That Obama picked a VP that seems to serve the second purpose more than the first is a good sign to me.  That McCain picked a VP that primarily serves the first purpose and is likely irrelevant in the administration itself is, to me, the worst possible reason to pick a person.  These choices reinforce, for me, Obama as the better candidate for president in this election. I am impressed with Obama’s choice, but I am disappointed with McCain’s.