The Obama v. McCain moment was good political theater, but meanwhile another side of sorts gets play in the news. No, not the desperation of the likes of Keith to hang on to Sarah Palin, including bringing in public appearances of Bristol and her former boyfriend. No, I'm talking about Meghan McCain. Someone over at the NYT blog finds her embarrassing, something I bet her dad thinks sometimes. See also, Wonkette.
But, I think overall, she comes off pretty good with the proviso that without her father, she would not be saying anything particularly newsworthy. Or, rather, Meghan McCain would just be representative of many of her generation, educated well-off independent minded sorts that the current Republican Party is not doing much to attract. Such is her message, after all, and she should know -- she voted for both Kerry and McCain. MM became a Republican on Father's Day when her dad was running. If he was not, one wonders if she ever would have.
Here’s what I’ve never understood about the party: its resistance to discussing better access to birth control. As a Republican, I am pro-life. But using birth control and having an abortion are not the same at all. Actually, the best way to prevent abortions is to educate people about birth control and make it widely and easily accessible. True, abstinence is the only way to fully prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Still, the problem with abstinence-only education is that it does not make teenagers and young adults more knowledgeable about all the issues they face if or when they have sex—physically and emotionally.
This is an example of her blog entries at The Daily Beast, which along with her going on Colbert to say she is "pro-sex" is the sort of thing that got attention long before now. She almost seems ready to join Feministing or something. She seems a stark contrast to many Republicans, but she is not really too much different than her dad -- who is a media hog and has not shied too far away from his "bad boy" rep in the past. The problem, of course, is that the current Republican Party simply does not fit here, even if it could potentially do so. Let's be honest here. It's why she voted for Kerry, I bet. More:
Putting it bluntly, we’ve done a disservice to our violence problems by making the political argument about guns instead of whatever causes people to be violent in the first place. Anger, alcohol, drugs, economic hopelessness, reckless driving—they can all precipitate tragedy. Simply removing guns from the equation does not solve the larger problem. Worse, it gives the wrong impression about what can and should be done to help those who are troubled. The real solution to preventing gun violence is not taking away the tools, but tackling its causes: poverty, inadequate health care, mental illness, joblessness, inadequate housing, and poor education. Desperate people will make anything a weapon. We need to eliminate desperation, not guns.
Sound enough ... up to a point. I think MM helps the conversation, so overall, I think she is a positive influence. Let's remember she is not Bristol Palin; she is in her twenties, and a graduate of Colombia. (Well, that explains it!) MM comes off as a bit of an airhead at times, but the same can be said for many much more well paid talking heads. Still, my concern would be to force her to make some hard calls. Pro-life? Fine. Do you think this complex choice should be compelled by law? Pro-gun? Fine. How about things like this?
Sometimes, it is necessary to walk before you run, and her sanity on birth control, gay rights,* and so forth is an important message. But, if she wants to speak out, particularly on some liberal friendly outlets, she has to go the next step. After all, if she wants to save the party from itself, talk about realistic policies, we also have to know the answers to those questions too. I'm okay with her not talking about Palin. Her saying she simply does not know much about the economy is fine, since she was not trying to run for President. [Does make it easier for her to defend the Republican line!]
She has to explain a bit more about the breadth of her positions all the same. For same sex marriage? Cheers! If you think abortion should be illegal, the bloom might be suddenly off the rose. Colbert is right though ... she does not quite sound Republican. This only helps her, of course.
---
* Yet again, the "guest columnist" for the NY Daily News is ten times better (in nausea level alone) than the regulars, including the likes of Charles "Obama is a big phony" Krauthammer, doing his regular channeling of Cheney.