Politics and sex, an apt combination in light of the deep economic and political turmoil currently rippling through the United States.

Controversy abounds in the U.S. with less than a week away from the National Presidential Election. Carl Rove has instigated a last desperate attempt to demoralize voters and disenfrancise Democrats by spinning the hate-mongering wheel he does so well.

From late night comedians to political commentators, the jokes are rampant regarding Sarah Palin’s wink in Obama’s latest campaign ad, further combined with last week’s fiasco with Palin’s wardrobe, which costs the Republican National Committee a whopping $150,000 at taxpayers’ expense.

Rovians working on Sarah Palin’s camp has a few more campaigning days before Election Day, which has edged the party to desperation mode. In the latest attack, Conservatives are calling the Obama camp sexist for including an image of her winking in his recent ad. Nevermind the fact that the underlying message in his ad was the substance, or lack of, in McCain’s choice of VP. Here’s a suggestion, perhaps Palin should just stop winking at the camera.

Calling foul and spitting mad, the Conservatives have now embraced feminism. Their message seems somewhat counter-intuitive, vote for the candidate that you can relate to as a mother, woman, feminist. Counter-intuitive since Palin has little in common with the vast majority of women voters.  Yet, Rovians are resorting to sex and gender to galvanize women voters to empathize with Palin’s model as a wife, working mother of five, and politician.

This pure desperation attack is a last ditch effort to revive a campaign that shows Barack Obama leading in almost double digits in most national poll. Obama has taken the lead by focusing on having a dignified and intellectual stimulating campaign, a position that the Republican Party has been unable to maintain in the last few months. Obama has avoided being drawn into meaningless and distracting discussions of Palin’s exterior portrayal and has consistently stayed on the issues. Not once did he say about his running mate that he was “proud” of him, something that McCain has used in a few instances when referring to Palin. That is sexism.

My colleague just shared this article with me. I liked it so much that I could not resist the urge to share it with you. I hope you like it too.

The article explores the effect that Obama has had on the ‘Global Village’. (The Guardian on the upcoming US election.)

===START=================================

If Sarah Palin defies the conventional wisdom that says elections are determined by the top of the ticket, and somehow wins this for McCain, what will be the reaction? Yes, blue-state America will go into mourning once again, feeling estranged in its own country. A generation of young Americans - who back Obama in big numbers - will turn cynical, concluding that politics doesn’t work after all.

And, most depressing, many African-Americans will decide that if even Barack Obama - with all his conspicuous gifts - could not win, then no black man can  ever be elected president.

But what of the rest of the world? This is the reaction I fear most. For Obama has stirred an excitement around the globe unmatched by any American politician in living memory. Polling in Germany, France, Britain and Russia shows that Obama would win by whopping majorities, with the pattern repeated in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. If November 4 were a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama.

The crowd of 200,000 that rallied to hear him in Berlin in July did so not only because of his charisma, but also because they know he, like the majority of the world’s population, opposed the Iraq war. McCain supported it, peddling the lie that Saddam was linked to 9/11.

Non-Americans sense that Obama will not ride roughshod over the international system but will treat alliances and global institutions seriously: McCain wants to bypass the United Nations in favour of a US-friendly League of Democracies.

McCain might talk a good game on climate change, but a repeated floor chant at the Republican convention was ‘Drill, baby, drill!’, as if the solution to global warming were not a radical rethink of the US’s entire energy system but more offshore oil rigs.

If Americans choose McCain, they will be turning their back on the rest of the world, choosing to show us four more years of the Bush-Cheney finger. And I predict a deeply unpleasant shift.

Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change.

Suddenly Europeans and others will conclude that their dispute is with not only one ruling clique, but Americans themselves. For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.

And the manner of that decision will matter, too. If it is deemed to have been about race - that Obama was rejected because of his colour - the world’s verdict will be harsh. In that circumstance, Slate’s Jacob Weisberg wrote recently, international opinion would conclude that ‘the United States had its day, but in the end couldn’t put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race’.

Even if it’s not ethnic prejudice, but some other aspect of the culture wars, that proves decisive, the point still holds. For America to make a decision as grave as this one - while the planet boils and with the US fighting two wars - on the trivial basis that a hockey mom is likable and seems down to earth, would be to convey a lack of seriousness, a fleeing from reality, that does indeed suggest a nation in, to quote Weisberg, ‘historical decline’. Let’s not forget, McCain’s campaign manager boasts that this election is ‘not about the issues.’

Of course I know that even to mention Obama’s support around the world is to hurt him. Incredibly, that large Berlin crowd damaged Obama at home, branding him the ‘candidate of Europe’ and making him seem less of a patriotic American. But what does that say about today’s America, that the world’s esteem is now unwanted? If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us - and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.

===END==============================

Sarah Palin is arguable the most unqualified candidate to run for the vice presidential race in US history, which is only to affirm our suspicion that John McCain is a desperate, deeply disconnected man resorting to desperate measures. Palin is not only an ultra social conservative, she vetoed the bill denying benefits to gays as unconstitutional on Aug 2008, deemed it acceptable to deny benefits to homosexual couples in Aug 2006, and in July 2006, she was against spousal benefits for same-sex couples.

Even more egregious is her perspective and policy on women’s rights. While most conservatives are pro-life except in cases where the victim was raped and involved in incestual relations. They make wider exceptions iin situations where the woman was victimized in some way or form.

Palin advocates the illegality of abortion for women who are victims of rape or incest. To put it in pictures, if your are a 15 year old daughter was gang raped, she cannot abort the fetus. If she was raped by a family member, she cannot abort the baby. In an interview with Katie Couric on this matter, Couris asked Palin how she would respond to the scenarios above, and her reply was “I will counsel her to consider life.” What Palin neglected to mention is that her policy would make it illegal for the 15 year old to have an abortion.

As a social conservative, Palin claims she respects her 17 year old daughter’s “decision” to get pregnant while unmarried when in reality Palin has a record of slashing funds for programs to support teen mother.

Moreover, Palin hates fellow Americans beyond the Alaska border. Why else would she be a part of an organization that supports Alaskan secession from the US. Rosa Brooks from The Los Angeles Times reported:

Over the years, Palin has actively courted the Alaska Independence Party, or AIP, an organization that supports Alaskan secession from the U.S. To be clear, we’re not necessarily talking about friendly secession either: As the AIP’s founder, Joe Vogler, told an interviewer in 1991: “The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government. … And I won’t be buried under their damn flag.”

The Washington Post claimed that the selectin of Sarah Palin smacks of desperation and fraught with peril for the Republican nominee.

CNN commentator, Paul Begala, said that in choosing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, he is not thinking “outside the box,” as some have said. More like out of his mind.

Begala continues:

Palin, a first-term governor of a state with more reindeer than people, will have to put on a few pounds just to be a lightweight. Her personal story is impressive: former fisherman, mother of five. But that hardly qualifies her to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.

For a man who is 72 years old and has had four bouts with cancer to have chosen someone so completely unqualified to become president is shockingly irresponsible. Suddenly, McCain’s age and health become central issues in the campaign, as does his judgment.

Irresponsible and a complete mockery to women everywhere, that we are so disenfranchised and intellectually inept that we would vote for a candidate that is against our own rights. The Republicans must be desperate.