Carly Fiorina, former CEO of HP and current economic advisor to John McCain and Chair of Victory 2008, today in a radio interview said that Palin isn’t qualified to run a “major company, like Hewlitt-Packard.”
Later, Fiorina appears on MSNBC and says John McCain couldn’t run a major corporation either.
Now I understand a country is not a corporation, but if a close advisor to John McCain admits that John and Sarah aren’t qualified to be the Chief Executive Officer of a major company, how are we supposed to trust them to be Chief Executive Officer of the United States, as well as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces?
Are Fiorina’s quotes effectively saying John McCain and Sarah Palin can not run the United States of America, which has quite a larger budget than, say, Hewlitt-Packard?
FWIW, I’m sure she’d say the same about Obama. Heck, the folks that run Hewlett-Packard said the same thing about Carly Fiorina, in essence firing her in Feb 2005. She was responsible for the acquisition of Compaq, which kind of bit HP in the butt.
Any schmuck pulled off the street could have run some of the companies I’ve worked for. Of course, it would help if the schmuck was the son or daughter of the old CEO.
I think very highly of Carly Fiorina and personly wish she was running for higher office.
I don’t have the ability to watch these clips right now, but what she is saying makes a lot of sense. Of course McCain and Palin aren’t qualified to be CEO of HP. They, like most politicians, aren’t qualified for all sorts of jobs. They wouldn’t make very good doctors, football coaches, chefs, roustabouts, or lots of things. They are trying to make the case that they are qualified for President and Vice President. It takes a very different skill set.
She did say that. But that’s beside the point. That point being, she’s supposed to say that Palin and McCain could run a corporation like HP, whereas Obama and Biden couldn’t. But she didn’t distinguish her candidates from their opponents, alleging them to be more qualified, rather, she dismissed all four as being (in her opinion) equally unqualified.
Then explain to me why they keep touting this “Executive” experience thing, if it’s not really a skill set that falls under the qualifications for President or Vice President?
I would not agree that it has “bit HP in the butt”. It was certainly controversial, but I think it has worked out in the end. HP is the world’s largest PC seller and their shares are trading near a 5 year high.
Not sure she knows how to properly run a company, at least not without running it into the ground. It is funny, in a stupid kind of way, that she said this about the guy she’s working for.
Just seems like another lapse in judgment by McCain in picking his people. I’d have gone with someone who knows about economics as an economic adviser, not someone who was forced out of their only CEO gig by the board. But that’s just me.
Please note that this all occurred after she was replaced. I’ve never seen anyone suggest that Compaq was a prudent or necessary acquisition by HP. More like a waste of cash. Compaq’s products added little of value to the HP line.
Really? Then why do they keep disparaging Senator Obama with the claim that "he’s never run anything, if what they really mean is that he’s never run “the executive branch of the government”?
I think you are being unfair here. She certainly did not run it into the ground. She pushed for a merger which was opposed by the son of the founder. That’s why she was ousted. The company has done very well since the merger. I think, in retrospect, it looks like it has been a success.
First, I’m not really a defender of the need for executive experience. Having said that, I think management or executive experience might be helpful when applying for a position of executive authority. I definitely don’t think being a politician makes someone remotely qualified to be the CEO of a major corporation.
I understand that Dr. Andrew Z. Fire, the Nobel-prize-winning doctor, has indicated that he believes neither Senator Obama nor Senator Biden are qualified to perform RNA interference gene splicing by double-stranded RNA.
I’m surprised that a McCain advisor would say that. Wow. Within the last few hours I’ve seen two stories of McCain Campaign staff members saying stupid things. He sure can pick 'em, eh. Heckuva a job, Brownie.
I assume you have a cite for Dr. Fire’s statement? Or were you just being cute?
And is being qualified to perform RNA interface gene splicing by double-stranded RNA ever argued as being a relevant qualification for the presidency? As opposed to serving as a chief executive to a multi-billion (or trillion) dollar organization? Executive qualifications have been a long-time arguement for the Republicans in this campaign, from the primaries on.
My question is why would a top advisor to the McCampaign say neither of her candidates is qualified to run a multi-billion dollar organization-- twice in one day? Again, to me, that does not bode well, as the U.S. government is a bit more complex than a corporation.
And Carly Fiorina was booted from her position because the shareholders thought she screwed up. So having her say something about someone being unqualified to run a company is quite ironic, unintentional as I am sure it was.
I think it is obvious that she is saying it because she believes it is a truthful statement. What possible experience do they have to run one of the largest computer companies in the world?
I don’t see why this is noteworthy. They aren’t running to be CEO of HP.
So let’s get this straight … what’s surprising about this is that she is arrogant enough to say that nobody running for President or VP could do what she does (or did … poorly)? Or is just that she is politically clueless enough to actually say what she thinks?
(FWIW, I actually highly doubt that CEO experience qualifies someone as President or visaversa. This is part of silly season.)
