Palin and Experience
Sep 2
I find it very hard to believe that the McCain campaign didn’t see this coming:
This is why the Palin pick is so puzzling — because it clearly undermines the McCain campaign’s own rhetoric. It’s not that Obama supporters are “suddenly concerned” about experience — by and large, they’ve valued judgment over experience all along; it’s that the McCain campaign is suddenly not very concerned about it. They set a standard for the experience needed to be CinC, and then picked a VP candidate who clearly lacks it. It’s not the least bit unfair to ask them why the sudden change of heart.
Link via TPM.
#1 by Kozlo at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
So, by your own words, she lacks experience. Then, what about Obama? He has only one year experience in the US Senate before running for the President of the US. What about Bill Clinton who was a governor from the small state of Arkansas who as well didn’t have any real experience before running. Don’t you libs be worried about her. She will be just fine. What you need to be worried about is the silliness of CHANGE that Obama has tried to feed us so many days now, then, he goes out and picks up a 35 year Washington insider(Balding Biden). I thought his campaign was about change?
#2 by tgirsch at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Kozlo:
Apart from the fact that you obviously didn’t read (or didn’t comprehend) the paragraph immediately below the video (to reiterate, Obama’s supporters have generally argued that his record of judgment is more important than experience, while McCain’s supporters have been the ones saying experience is important), you also appear to be bad at math. Obama was elected to the US Senate in 2004, four years ago. So unless you want to apply a standard of “experience” that says McCain’s only got “about five years” in the senate, don’t go pulling out the actual days on the job crap.
Besides, it’s not the “libs” who are concerned about her — we’re pretty much thrilled with that disastrous pick. It’s the conservatives who are expressing concern.
#3 by Ted at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
For perhaps the first time that I have heard, the interviewer actually cut through the smokescreen time and time again to strip down to the facts. Especially when the question of Alaskan reserves being deployed for military action was brought up by Bounds. At first it was presented as a time when Palin made “executive decisions”, but this was quickly cleared away as being false; in terms of reservists being deployed on national military missions, the governer has no more input on the subject than you or I do. State-level deployments yes, but Bounds offered no examples were offered as to Palin deplying the reserve on a state mission in the last 20 months.
#4 by Big U at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
tgirsch > I would guess he was referring to the idea that during the past 2 years of campaigning for the top job that Obama hasn’t been too involved with doing the job he is actually elected and paid to do. That seems to be something that has been brought up before.
#5 by tgirsch at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Big U:
Maybe so, but looking at the worst offenders on missed votes, that’s probably not something a McCain supporter ought to be bringing up…
#6 by digglahhh at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Nope, he/she’s being a disingenuous troll who posts superficial, and false, talking point palaver before even reading the post to which he is responding. C’mon - was that seriously how you interpreted that post there, Anne Frank?
#7 by KTK at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Why do you find it surprising that they didn’t see this coming?
They didn’t see Hurricane Katrina coming even with hourly updates from the weather service.
They didn’t see the Iraq fiasco coming.
They didn’t see that their lies about WMDs and other shifting motives for invasion would be uncovered.
They didn’t see 9/11 coming after being given a memo entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside the United States”.
They didn’t see the oil-price crisis coming after years of documentation of peak oil and having started a war in an oil-producing nation.
They didn’t see exactly the same reaction coming when the current dipshit’s own father nominated Dan Quayle.
They didn’t see George W. Bush and his entirely unmitigated legacy of world-scale disasters coming.
These are simply not competent people. Republican policies always fail. They constantly talk themselves up but, by documented history, the only thing they are good at is directing public money and tax breaks to their favored corporate benefactors, and the upper class. Every time they try to do something productive off their own bat, they fail miserably.
#8 by Kozlo at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
If the Obama camp has valued judgement over experience, then, why pick Biden? He was shown (like Obama) that he was wrong on the surge. It was Biden that called for splitting Iraq up into various parts - as if that was a true answer to the Iraqi situation. So, by those two examples, Obama and Biden have bad judgement. Oh, by the way, it was from the mouth of Bill Clinton who said that Obama would have served only one year in the Senate before running for the president of the US because when you start running for the position of presidency there isn’t much time for anything else. Shall I get the clip for you to see that it was from the very lips of your Democrat former president (Bill Clinton).
#9 by Ted at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
I’m probably in a minority on this, but I think putting together a serious, broad, successful campaign for president is extremely useful experience for actually being president. If forces you to think through many different scenarios, develop policy, place a staff, etc, etc. And you are the one making the executive decisions. Raising money, spending money, etc.
I’ll say this, Palin will be much, much better positioned to be VP (and potentially pres) come November than she is right now. But there is only so much one can absorb in a couple of months. (Of course her state’s proximity to Canada and Russia make her an expert on foreign policy. Cindy McCain has made that clear.)
In any event, in a week or two I think she becomes a back-burner issue and the focus shifts back to McCain and Obama, with a brief blip when they debate.
#10 by Brooklynite at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
There are a few different ways the people can judge the fitness of a candidate for high office.
They can look at the candidate’s resume, or his or her record in office.
They can evaluate the candidate’s policy positions.
They can examine the candidate’s character first-hand, while he or she runs the gauntlet of a campaign.
They can trust the judgment of the candidate’s close allies and colleagues, assuming those colleagues are well known to the people.
The problem with the Palin nomination is that it can be defended on none of the above grounds. Her record is scanty. She has taken no stands on most of the pressing issues of the day. She is utterly unknown to the public. And the man who put her forward only spoke to her twice in his life before doing so.
Some portion of the electorate may conclude that Barack Obama fails one or more of the above tests, but there is no question but that the vast majority of voters feel competent to judge what kind of a president he would be, for better or for worse. When we try to make the same determination about Palin, we’re reduced to guessing.
#11 by Ted at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
“it was from the mouth of Bill Clinton who said..” Hehe, only one guy I know that can mash a line like that, although I have to give digg credit for the initial ID.
#12 by Ted at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Brooklynite, thanks for a very clear, concise description of the situation.
#13 by Kozlo at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Hey tgirsch, in the second to last sentence of the paragraph below the video clip, it briefly mentions (in referring to experience)that Palin lacks it. So, didn’t you understand what you posted? Maybe, too, you like Obama think there are 57 states to the union. I’m waiting for your lack of a true response!
#14 by tgirsch at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
There’s this thing called “context,” and most people with a basic understanding of the English language would recognize that. Yes, I mention that Palin lacks experience. I also mention that the only people who had been arguing that a “lack of experience” was a critical factor were McCain and his supporters, who have now officially flip-flopped on the importance of experience.
And, as has been pointed out before, anyone who seriously believes that Obama ever thought the US has 57 states is probably too stupid to tie his or her own shoes.
#15 by digglahhh at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Nobody fucking wants you here, Fred.
For all your yapping about our freakish liberal tendencies and odd sexual preferences (meaning, we like sex), you clearly have some deep entrenched S&M fetish. How embarrassed you would be if mom crept down the basement stairs only to see you, leather-clad, groping yourself to a KTK post…
Yes, I know its only Tuesday, but I dare anybody to challenge that for disturbing mental image of the week.
#16 by Kozlo at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
Since when are you libs all about context. When McCain said that we would be in Iraq for 100 years, you libs took that as the absolute truth and jumped all over it. So, when we do the same on Obama and his 57 states comment, then, it is taken out of context. Which is it? Make up your mind and stick with it!
#17 by Ted at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
The scum oozes back into view…
#18 by tgirsch at September 2nd, 2008
| Quote
I’ll make up my mind as soon as the McCain campaign makes up its mind about whether experience is really important…
#19 by Kozlo at September 3rd, 2008
| Quote
I see that you chose the easy way out of this conversation. Typical liberal! Ready to take the easy way out.
#20 by tgirsch at September 3rd, 2008
| Quote
No, the easy way out would be just to make mindless quips like “typical liberal” and “why are you so full of hate?”
#21 by Hector at September 3rd, 2008
| Quote
I am enjoying the discussion here. but who is “Fred” and why is Kozlo linked at http://leanleft/?
#22 by Tim C. at September 3rd, 2008
| Quote
Fred is a long-time commenter/troll here. Over the last year or so he’s changed his name to Morris, and I think Kozlo is another new name.
He’s pretty good at recycling the approved talking points being passed around by the GOP, inventing straw men, and generally arguing facts not in evidence. His favorite move is pretending what someone wrote means something other than what was written
Sometimes he helps around here by being a foil and calling out those who use rhetorical excess.
Sometimes he even has a valid point.
Sometimes whatever line he’s pushing so out-there-wack-a-ding-hoy-nuts that I think he’s a really clever liberal trying to make the right look even dumber than it actually is.
Most of the time I just laugh and then ignore him.
#23 by Steve Plonk at September 8th, 2008
| Quote
Sarah Palin sounds like a displaced “voodoo science” teacher from Dayton, TN, AKA “Monkey Town”. She has “flat earth” religious views and wants to impose them on others not of her ilk.
She is a censorship advocate, an anti-green governor, and generally the darling of the far right of the republican party. McCain chose her because he HAD to. In some ways, Palin is the antithesis of McCain. I certainly hope that the public is not fooled by this embodiment of a political ploy. ( I also posted this comment on Literary Kicks.com).
Let’s vote for Obama/Biden and not pay attention to “Sarah Barracuda’s” mewlings to others of her ilk. Oh, and we’re running two wars and NEED to pay our fair share of taxes.
Whatever happened to WAR BONDS? If the government is going to borrow to the hilt, folks may as well get something back for it.