http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZU9GGBI2jM This is posted in the pit about the hypocrisy of pundits. It also serves for posters. I don’t think any one takes her seriously as a president. She serves a purpose. She brings in the religious right. That is all. A mayor of a lily white village in Alaska. Yep she’s ready to run the free world now.
I’m sorry, but Edwards was ridiculously inexperienced by the standards of Presidential ticket names - far more so than Obama, who in addition to being in his first term as a senator also has state legislative experience. He was probably the least experienced Presidential or VP nomination of your lifetime.
This, however, is really more ridiculous. Sam, you have to drop this absurdity really soon, because it’s the dumbest argument in the history of the world, pure GOP spin that for what reason I just cannot understand you’ve decided to repeat.
A governor may me, technically, the commander-in-chief of the state’s National Guard, but you know as well as I that a governor spends no time at all being a leader of a military formation, makes no military decisions, and 99% of the time probably forgets it’s even in their job description. The straightforward fact of the matter is that the Guard is a de facto branch of the armed services and is controlled, in every sense that matters, by the feds. Governors have no latitude to start wars or order military operations and can’t even stop the feds from calling up Guard units if they object to the reason for callup (as determined by the Montgomery Amendment of 1987.) It’s ridiculous and embarassing to suggest Palin, or any other governor, has any experience at all “commanding” the National Guard.
I agree a governor is a tougher position than a Senator in many ways, but let’s not pretend Sarah Palin has any sort of experience as a military commander. She doesn’t.
I’m not claiming that being a Governor ensures that someone will be a good President or a bad one. Frankly, looking at the history of Presidents and their backgrounds, I’m not sure there’s any background that guarantees anything one way or the other.
I actually think temperament, speaking ability, and character matter quite a bit. For example, I think Reagan was a good President in part because he was a nice man, in part because he was a great speaker and motivator, and in part because, while he had a conservative political philosophy, he also knew when to compromise.
I think Bush was a lousy President because he lacked all of these characteristics.
For what it’s worth, I think Obama has many of the traits Reagan had. McCain has some, and lacks some. I don’t know enough about Palin yet, but what I’ve seen so far is a mixed bag. You know who she reminds me of most right now? Arnold Schwartzenegger in his first year as governor. A reformer who was going to shake up the system and make it work right, who was a bit like a bull in a china shop. And that’s not necessarily a good thing. She’s made a lot of enemies in Alaska by fighting corruption in her own party. That’s admirable, but it makes me wonder how functional second Palin term would be. I suspect that, like Arnie, experience would teach her that to get things done you have to know when to back off.
Look, you’ve got to give Palin credit for her accomplishments. At age 42, she defeated not just the incumbent governor of her own party, but the Democrat challenger. She has a sky-high approval rating. She’s obviously a very accomplished woman and a skilled politician. She deserves some respect.
In any event, there are plenty of substantive arguments to make against Palin, against Obama, against McCain, and against Biden. None of them are perfect. It sure would be nice to have discussions about their relative strengths and weaknesses without having to wade through the over-the-top, “OMG! She’s teh Worst Ever! Silly little princess!” crap being spewed on this board.
You know. I’ve actually wasted a lot of time trying to see the wisdom of this pick.
My first thought was of course that it was a stab to get the PUMA vote, but the pro-life views would keep that to those PUMAs who are more into pettiness than issues. No real advantage here.
Sure, Barack can’t attack her on experience. That cuts both ways though. McCain can’t bring it up either since his choice for the next person in line for the big chair has a thinner resume than Obama’s. If McCain brings it up, Obama can just point to Palin. As long as Obama doesn’t use it, McCain can’t either. That’s a minus.
And before it comes up, I think Barack’s is a bit on the light side as well. I’d have preferred he waited another four to eight years to run. He just represents my views on issues far better than McCain v2.0.
She will bring in the evangelicals. That is a part of the base that McCain has had problems reaching, and it’s a plus.
The problem is that the views that will bring in the evangelicals make it hard to sell her as an agent of change or a breath of fresh air to the moderates/undecideds. She’s a brand new face on the same old moral majority. That’s a minus.
As it stands, there had to have been better candidates out there. Palin is a dice roll. This choice represents John McCain shooting from the hip, and we won’t know how good his aim is until November.
Yes and no. The point is that there are tougher Governorships than Alaska. As you pointed out, the state is flush with cash from oil resources. While I’m sure there are hardships involved, simply finding ways to spend a large amount of budgetary cash is a problem most Governors would kill for. I’m not trying to underestimate the difficulties of her job. Simply putting it into perspective. Let’s also remember that she’s only held the job for twenty months.
Again, only for twenty months and simply being a governor is no guarantee for success. As much as you seem to think that others partisanship is blinding them to her virtues, yours seems to be blinding you to her potential shortcomings.
I’ll attempt to put this into terms that you, as a canuck iirc, can understand. Just because you’ve been the coach of a peewee team for half a season doesn’t mean you are exceptionally qualified to coach in the NHL. You may be better qualified than a person off the street, but you aren’t the most qualified either.
This is not a very good point as no matter what happens, our next president will be a senator. Either we keep this to Palin’s qualifications to be vice president, which some think are the lightest since 1908, or you admit that you think John McCain will die and make Palin the first female president.
It wasn’t unedited. It was falsified. You are misinformed. Read Bugliosi’s book.
The Governor of Alaska does not command a National Guard.
First of all, I haven’t been making any such claim. I understand that she doesn’t lead military formations - neither does the President, btw. But she IS responsible for calling out the Guard when necessary. She’s responsible for budgeting it. She has been to Iraq to visit an Alaska National Guard Unit posted there. When Guardsmen die, she gets to write the letter to the family, or attend the funeral.
This is not ‘foreign policy experience’. Nor is it military experience. It is, however, a responsibility of a Governor that a Mayor of a city does not have, and that’s the point I was refuting with the comparison.
This is not true. The Governor of Alaska does not make any deployment decisions and isn’t even briefed. Sarah palin has never made a single decision regarding the Alaska National Guard.
Are you joking? All the references to THEY when campaigning against Hillary and later against McCain.
Of course the Governor of Alaska makes deployment decisions regarding the Alaska National Guard. The Governor does not send Guardsmen to Iraq, but she does call them out in cases where they are needed inside Alaska. Which is why the Guard exists at all and isn’t just one big federal military force.
And Governors are briefed on security issues by the Department of Homeland Security, and in fact run a state branch of the DoHS.
I mostly agree with Harborwolf, but would like to add the following:
It’s early yet, but the first round of polls seem to indicate that Palin isn’t clicking with women or the center (too inexperienced, too conservative, too obvious a pander). She’s only helping McCain with the groups Obama wasn’t in danger of stealing from him, like the pro-lifers. That’s nothing to sneeze at, but I don’t think that’s the revolution he was hoping for either.
McCain’s minimal vetting of Palin speaks really badly for his judgment. In the end, I don’t think that all of these little scandals popping up will amount to much, but if McCain had done his homework, and not made his decision at the last possible moment, it could have been handled much more smoothly. These things won’t sink Palin or McCain/Palin, but they’ll blunt the positive effects she could have had. McCain put making the biggest splash possible over making sure he was making the correct choice for his campaign and the nation. By chooses a relative novice like Palin, McCain has reduced if not eliminated his ability to question Obama’s experience. By doing it so sloppily, he demonstrates that he isn’t using his own experience very well. I don’t know how well people who aren’t obsessively following the news will pick up on this, but it’s there.
So there we have it, McCain dominates the media for a few cycles, but it’s not all good news by far. He gets help with the evangelicals, but not so much with the center. In return, he’s surrender his best weapon against Obama, though I’ll give McCain enough credit to know he was doing that much, at least. It’s not a disaster (though God only knows what else is lurking in Palin’s past, McCain certainly doesn’t), but it’s by no means a game changer. And McCain needs a game-changer.
This is not true in Alaska. All decisions are made at a federal level through a local commander. The Governor is not in the loop.
Even domestic emergency responses? Huh.
Not that that’s at all like what the president does as CiC.
Yep. In Alaska, that is exactly the case. They are under a commander in the state. He makes the deployment decisions. The Governor is not even briefed. Somebody posted a link on the weekend thread to an interview with the current Commander saying that Palin has never had any involvement with the Alaska NG.
Re-read it DtC. The commander said that the Governor has no input on National security duties of the National Guard, but she can deploy them within the state. N fact she has done so to help combat fires (at least that is whatthey said on CNN).