Moe Tucker – unlikely voice of reason

[Maggie]

I know Tucker showing up for a Tea Party rally a few months ago shocked and upset a great many on the Left; but I just found this interview via Mickey Kaus’s blog (Kaus is a liberal I respect – he actually makes arguments). The interview, via e-mail, is interesting to say the least (language warning):

Interview: Moe Tucker of the Velvet Underground Sets the Record Straight

[SubGod22]

Interesting read. More people like her would be a good thing.

[Maggie]

Interesting read. More people like her would be a good thing.

"There are a lot more than you think who agree with me." - Maureen Tucker

[ShockTalk]

Wow! No mincing words here.

I'm not vocal or participating Tea Partier, but understand and agree with many of their efforts. Moe does a great job of explaining her connection to the Tea Party and why such a connection can cross over all political party lines. I feel such a movement should not be considered just a "Republican" or a far right wing movement. Moe also says she's no fan of Palin, nor I. Personally, I do not feel she's anywhere close to be qualified to lead our county. However, if this movement is successful in changing how Washington operates, I will give her kudos, regardless of whether she did it for her own political gain or for America.

[ISASO]

If you think about it, how much more qualified was BHO for the office? He just reads off a teleprompter and when he doesn't...look out...scary words come out.

Could we please have an unqualified person as President who simply does the right thing, the common sense thing for our future and our sovereignty?

[ShockTalk]

If you think about it, how much more qualified was BHO for the office? He just reads off a teleprompter and when he doesn't...look out...scary words come out.

Could we please have an unqualified person as President who simply does the right thing, the common sense thing for our future and our sovereignty?

I felt McCain, by choosing Palin as his runing mate, gave away a distinct advantage of experience by greatly reducing its importance, particularly with the turmoil overseas and dealing with other countries (Korea, China and so forth). How could he effectively criticize Obama's lack of experience with Palin so close to potentially being thrust into the job.

I disagree with your "unqualified" position as, one who is such, would be mostly incapable of making the right decisions. Being a non-policitian is another thing. However, that person should still have meaningful life experiences and personal presence that would instill confidence from the people he represents and respect from the leaders of most other countries.

[Maggie]

ShockTalk –

The short answer to your first question is that McCain arguably had the experience and foreign policy chops that no one else on either ticket could creditably lay claim to (this includes Biden – don’t get me started on that clown’s foreign policy stances); Palin was not the top of the ticket (with regard to foreign policy, which really took a back seat during the 2008 election – the Iraq War fatigue was already baked into the cake so to speak, the President is who really matters). Palin was not chosen for her foreign policy experience.

Furthermore, the narrative that she badly damaged the McCain ticket is way over blown. McCain pulled even for a while after the convention – it was the economic melt down coupled with McCain buzzing around out of control (suspending the campaign, etc.) while Obama basically did nothing (but appear composed) that really killed McCain. He probably was not going to win anyway but he turned a loss into a 7 point beat down – and probably helped Democrat congressional candidates down the ticket.

Look I am not a huge fan of Palin (although I still think she was a wise choice for McCain as VP – but it was handled poorly). She is not a stupid person but I think she needs a lot of seasoning – there has to be substance attached to the populist rhetoric we so often hear from her. I do think she has done some smart things and showed some good political instincts the last 20 months – but it has not been enough in my book. Now she could change my mind but at this time I see her as someone who might develop into Presidential material by 2016 or so – emphasis on might.

The problem is I’m not sure I want someone who might be ready in 2016 to even be in the discussion as a Presidential candidate in 2012. The world is still a very dangerous place and President Obama’s foreign policy efforts, in my judgment, have made it in many ways more dangerous. As an aside, I don’t think foreign leaders respect him and they certainly don’t fear him (which can be a good thing). But even on the experience point I hedge because I don’t see any of the 2008 crop of GOP candidates as particularly desirable for 2012. I am excited about the younger up and coming members of the GOP like Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, etc. but they lack “experience” too. As of today if say Rubio or Ryan decided they wanted to run in 2012 (which would be the flip-side of President Obama’s run in Rubio’s case, ironically), I would give both a much longer look simply because they are light-years stronger on policy than Palin. I would probably favor Rubio for top of the ticket because I am not sure about Ryan on foreign policy (basically because he doesn’t talk about it much).

It is going to be an interesting two years.