Sarah Palin-omics

This has been quite the whirlwind year for Sarah Palin. Many people are split on whether she ultimately helped or hurt John McCain's chances at the United States presidency. Although I didn't agree with her on most of her stances, I liked her a lot as a person and thought she was very interesting and down to earth.

However she has certainly provided a large amount of late-night fodder. Not limited to: the winks and folksy talk during the debate, the wardrobe malfunctions and the constant focus on her family during the beginning. Ultimately I think history will view her as a Dan Quayle-type politician and the run in '12 she has hinted at, will be fruitless at best.

I say that because Palin in essence is a combination of Mike Huckabee and Karl Rove. I make that connection because she combines folksy religious-ness with red-meat conservative platforms. Huckabee proved that evangelicals do not have enough pull in the party to anoint their own candidate and Rove left the White House weakened at best. Telling people that Democrats are "soft" on national security and god-less when it comes to religion, will only work for so long in elections. Eventually those criticisms fall on deaf ears.

Palin can salvage her reputation by spearheading a diversified group of issues and beefing up her foreign policy experience from now until '12. If she is able to shake off those issues and keep her personality, she could transform herself into a George Bush II style candidate with religious principles and compassionate conservatism. Although Bush seems to be vilified for all the nation's problems, he did win two terms didn't he?

Obama's Veep Choice

If I was advising Barack Obama, who has fallen behind John McCain in recent polling, I would advise him to pick the only person who can guarantee him the election. That person is none other than Hillary Clinton. Before you jump all over me saying its not going to happen and accusing me of being cronies with Ralph Nader, lets think about this for a second.

We all know the negatives that Hillary brings. Critics say that you would be getting a 1992-esque two vice-presidents for one! This implies Bill Clinton would constantly be in the backdrop and lurking in the shadows. The solution: make him a UN ambassador or send him out on goodwill missions 24/7, if he is out of picture Obama can have room to breathe. It is also been shouted out from the rooftops that Hillary is unpopular with independents. No big deal, you need to excite your base first and independents will not chose you based solely on your VP choice. Obama's campaign has been built on liberal enthusiasm from day one, could any other VP choice bring that much enthusiasm with them? I think not.

Say what you want about Hillary, but she is actually a very smart and interesting person. Many people hate her just because they think they should hate her. The media did not do her any favors in the 1990's but if you look past that you don't see any ego on her part and her choice not to use Mark Penn's strategy against Obama or let slip John Edwards' martial woes is honorable in the least.

Clinton at this point has to be the nominee if Obama is going to win. Remember back to President Bush in '00 and '04 with Dick Cheney as the VP nominee. Cheney has never been popular with independents and may be even more unpopular than the president but George Bush did fine with him and convinced his base he was a traditional republican.

The Puppet Master

If you're one of the few people who still thinks Dmitri Medvedev is calling the shots in Russia, you'd better think again. When Russia invaded Georgia, President Bush (and rightfully so) issued the United States' response to the move, calling it "unacceptable". Condi Rice has played her role as Secretary of State (almost like a prime minister) by doing most of the "behind the scenes" work during the negotiations.

When Russia gives its response to the United States, Vladimir Putin of all people is the one to give it. He criticized the United States for portraying Georgia as the victim and for airlifting Georginan troops from Iraq. Shouldn't Medvedev have given that response? A prime minister in a secondary leadership role giving the official public response to the leader of another nation? Sounds fishy to me.

Europe and the United States need to learn that Russia's steady ascent to increased aggression over the last decade is due solely to Putin, an old school KGB man. Putin in some regards is a full blown dictator without an official title. As the world is prepared to give Russia a good 'ole slap on the wrist, this just seems a little too 1939ish for me.