RK ARCHIVE - RTD: If a Democrat had picked Palin...

Yeah, I'd say it will be a "crubicle," but not so much for Sarah Palin as for our nation. I mean, there's not much that Sarah Palin can do in the next few days to change the fact that she's a right-wing social extremist with essentially zero qualifications to be commander in chief (or even "a heartbeat away"). The American people, on the other hand, can resoundingly reject this insult to their intelligence by John McCain, who has in this case put his own political prospects before the good of the country. At a time of war, terrorist threat, and serious economic problems facing our nation, is Sarah Palin really the person John McCain thinks would be best able to lead our nation in the event something were to happen to him? Either way - yes or no - what does that say about John McCain's judgment? How about putting that through a crucible? Or, how about subjecting McCain to the "derision" that would have greeted Barack Obama if he had picked the progressive equivalent of Palin?

Comments

TrooperGate (Pain - 9/1/2008 9:01:07 AM)

TPM has a good summary of troopergate, the involvement of the Governor to have her ex brother-in-law fired.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/a...

So let's put this all together.
We rely on elected officials not to use the power of their office to pursue personal agendas or vendettas. It's called an abuse of power. There is ample evidence that Palin used her power as governor to get her ex-brother-in-law fired. When his boss refused to fire him, she fired his boss. She first denied Monegan's claims of pressure to fire Wooten and then had to amend her story when evidence proved otherwise. The available evidence now suggests that she 1) tried to have an ex-relative fired from his job for personal reasons, something that was clearly inappropriate, and perhaps illegal, though possibly understandable in human terms, 2) fired a state official for not himself acting inappropriately by firing the relative, 3) lied to the public about what happened and 4) continues to lie about what happened.
These are, to put it mildly, not the traits or temperament you want in someone who could hold the executive power of the federal government.

Sarah Palin: Secessionist? (Lowell - 9/1/2008 9:07:04 AM)

This is utterly bizarre:

I'm Governor Sarah Palin and I am delighted to welcome you to the 2008 Alaskan Independence Party Convention in the golden heart city of Fairbanks. Your party plays an important role in our state's politics. I've always said that competition is so good, and that applies to political parties as well. I share your party's vision of upholding the constitution of our great state. My administration remains focused on reining in government growth so individual liberty and opportunity can expand. I know you agree with that. We have a great promise to be a self-sufficient state, made up of the hardest-working, most grateful Americans in our nation. So as your convention gets underway I hope that you all are inspired by remembering that all those years ago, it was in this same city that Alaska's constitution was born. And it was founded on hope and trust and liberty and opportunity. I carry that message of opportunity forward in my administration, as we continue to move our state ahead and create positive change. So I say good luck on a successful and inspiring convention. Keep up the good work, and God bless you.

Here is a link to the Alaska Independence Party and here is its platform ("for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government"). Here is its founder, who "was murdered under suspicious circumstances in 1993" and who "was buried in Dawson City, Yukon Territory, Canada, fulfulling a wish that he not be buried under the American flag."

Definitive proof on Palin (Lowell - 9/1/2008 11:31:25 AM)

...that she's a social extremist.

See here for Palin's own responses to a questionnaire when she was running for governor of Alaska in 2006. My favorites:

1. She believes abortion should be illegal even in cases of rape, incest, or the health of the mother:

I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor's determination that the mother's life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent's life.

According to FiveThirtyEight, "Palin's position is far outside of the mainstream."

A CBS News poll, also conducted in October 2007, revealed similar numbers: just 16 percent of Americans share Palin's position that abortion should be legal only in order to save the mother's life, while another 4 percent believed that abortion should be illegal in all cases.

3. She supports "abstinence-only" sex education.

According to FiveThirtyEight, "Palin's position is far outside of the mainstream."

...a 2004 poll conducted by NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation, and the Kennedy School of Government showed that 90 percent of Americans believe that sex education is a "very important" or "somewhat important" part of the school curriculum, whereas only 7 percent believe that sex education should not be taught at all. In the same survey, just 15 percent of Americans supported abstinence-only programs.

5. She opposes "hate crimes" laws.

According to FiveThirtyEight, "Palin's position is well outside of the mainstream."

In a May 2007 Gallup poll, Americans favor hate crimes statutes by a 78-18 margin. When the definition of hate crimes is expanded to include sexual orientation, support diminishes slightly, but such statues are still favored by a 68-27 majority.

11. She believes the phrase "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance by the Founding Fathers ("If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me").

Actually, the Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 - a century after the constitution - by "Christian Socialist" Francis Bellamy. That's right, "Christian Socialist" - wonder what Sarah Palin thinks of THAT?!? Anyway, the original Pledge read, "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Notice no "Under God" in there? That's because it wasn't added until June 14, 1954, nearly two centuries after the Founding Fathers' time. Close! :)

Sterling Republican credentials (Teddy - 9/1/2008 11:38:27 AM)

1) Hyposcrisy 2) Spitefulness 3) Authoritarian use of political office to personal advantage 4)Conviction an angry God is on her side (not the other way around?) 5) Pretensions of frugality (belied by fact she raised her town's budget by 30 percent) 6) She's from outside the Beltway-Washington about as far as you can get and still be American (and McCain is now going to be running against his own Party of Washington Insiders)... and so on. What's not to like---- especially since she apparently has guys with their tongues or something hanging out.

Well, personally I think all these concerns about her qualifications are misplaced. Since Republicans trivialize government, her lack of Washington experience is definitely a plus. Her heavily touted blue-collar background is a plus. With her (even small) television background and journalism degree she is not as unsophisticated in media-murder as you suppose. I regard her as a clever, potentially threatening choice. Country slickers are whole lot worse than city slickers

My neighbor made an interesting point (Indy4all - 9/1/2008 11:55:32 AM)

He questioned whether the experience that Obama has had in the Senate is what is making people draw such distinctions regarding his "experience" for Presdident anyway.

He asked if in 2004 Kerry had chosen Barack Obama would he not be defended by the Party as being qualified as well. I tend to agree. The speech in 2004 delivered at the Convention had it been a VP speech would have done much to silence critics in greater proporation than argueing about "record". I can remember people knowing that Obama was going to be the next force even then.

Was it his record? Or was it his passionate delivery in 2004 that made us connect to him? Anyone being honest knows its all about the connection and not the record.

MY opinion is had Obama been the VP nominee in 2004 and not Edwards things may have been very very different in that election.

I find the experience question a distraction and hope this does not continue into the week and Obama/Biden simply concentrate on the plans they have for the country.

EXPERIENCE did not work by Hillary Clinton because it was not the issue experience around Obama that makes him qualified to be President for sure but that the country DOES NOT care about that this election. They want to be inspired that the country can change and have faith in the abilities to deliver on such changes.
Obama fits that bill.
The question over the next 60 days is what kind of change America (or the electoral map) wants to endorse.

I am not sure I get this argument (aznew - 9/1/2008 12:25:07 PM)

The argument that I think you are making, that Palin's utter lack of qualification to step into the presidency is not a valid critcism because of Obama was the nominee in 2004, he would have been similarly unqualified, is a bit too abstract for me.

The fact is that he was not the nominee. Perhaps Sen. Kerry took a look and concluded that indeed, four years ago Obama needed more seasoning before being named to the ticket.

As I have said, the issue is not Palin herself, but McCain's judgment in choosing her.

Anyone being honest (to use your rhetorical device) would say, in responding to the question, "Do you think Palin is qualified to step into the presidency," would have to answer, "I have no friggin' idea, but there is little in her background to suggest she is, and plenty to suggest she is not. I have no idea if she knows anything at all about national security issues. She has said herself that she has not thought much about Iraq, for example. If she does become president, I hope and pray she is qualified."

Similarly, anyone being honest would answer that question about Obama as follows: "I have seen him questioned by the media and political opponents on national security issues for 20 months. Even if I don't agree with his answers, he clearly has a worldview and has put considerable time in learning about and thinking about these issues. Obama's position on the Iraq war in 2004 was clearly correct. Obama's call for a timetable to withdraw from Iraq and put more emphasis on Afghanistan is not being adopted by the Bush Administration. Obama's recent international trip has demonstrated that he has an excellent grasp of complex international issues and the respect of people around the world."

The idea that discussion about Palin's experience is a distraction is simply absurd, IMHO.

I think it goes to perception (Indy4all - 9/1/2008 1:40:01 PM)

I though that the point he was making was more on the perception mentality we have and the the politics of people telling us what "makes" someone qualified.

I remember in the military that the greatest platoon leaders came from the most unlikely of places and it was almost never the Academy. How much "experience" do we require these young new offciers to actually have before we send them into harms way? I think its a valid point.

The question of "stepping in" is virtually rhetorical commentary at best since the last time we have had it was an assasination and before that FDR I think. Its great theatre though. Thats why I was making the implication that if Obama had been chosen in 2004 his record/qualification would in the end not have matter much and given what little impact the Edwards selection provided the campaign may have been better.

Obama grasp as an intellectual is unparalled I think on this stage. Notice, I did not say "elitist", I think there is a distinction between the two.

Obam lacks real experience when simply comparing the resumes of our other Presidents that come before him who have had some executive experience upon coming into office. I am discounting the experience but it just is not that impressive. What is impressive though is his rise through the political structure which in to itself is amazing and requires great skill which I think may get overlooked by many who may be critical of his resume. That may be the richest of his experiences after all.

There have been those that would seek to inflate the "experience" fcator for there own end, but the reality is that Barack Obama after the 2006 elections and the change of Congress moved to the committees of greater importance in terms of his resume (Homeland Security/ European relations) in January 2007. Many have implied he has been on these for his entire time in the Senate and I do not believe that is the case. So for those who seek to be critical in the analysis must understand those that do not see six months in those roles as being spectacular given when he launched his bid for the nomination in 2007.

None of thes discount his ability to lead nor should we discount anyone elses abilities solely based on the perception of record. Afterall, its about the individual.

Just as people will make the case, and I think RTD has tried at times, that Barack Obama is simply a calculating politician who has simply put himself in the arena for personal gain while others we see it as a skilled progression of ones career with a greater vision or goals for the country and putting himself in the position to greater impact America.

Its political theatre regardless. Its rather comical I think that in 2000 Barack Obama could not even get a floor pass at the Democratic Convention and eight years later he is the Democrat nominee. No comical in a negative sense but in an amazing proclamation of just how crazy politcis really is.

Palin while not overly impressive has a great story and has a record to support her position on the stage, whether she can command that stage is another story. I think we are seeing just how daunting a task our Governors have across the nation. Maybe Barack Obama could help our Gov. kaine with solving our transportation woes with a plan that could win the support of the General Assembly or promise to increase Federal dollars for infrastructre directed at states like Virginia. I would like to hear more policy in this arena for national infrastrcuture from both camps.

The perception is Obama is a great orator and campaigner and yet it discounts the hard working people that are behind the curtain of the campaign a bit. Obama is the head but not the whole story by any means. You do not bring down the Clinton machine alone. What experience Obama does have will HAVE TO serve him and the country well, because once your President, great speeches do not get you nearly as far as they do on the campaign trail or in the Senate. If he fails to change the ecomomic situation of America or things overseas go badly and we are forced to respond with troops somewhere again it will not matter how great a speaker he is.

Voter like myself in this election know that regardless of the Party; this election is a leap of faith of sorts. It is a choice of risk versus reward and whether we want to go with the past or change the future. Its left up to each of us to determine exactly what amount of risk/reward we are willing to take. Maybe "experience" is a factor to some, but in this election I think there are things greater than that and matter more.

Too much to respond to it all (aznew - 9/1/2008 2:18:09 PM)

so I'll just touch on a few points:

Nixon did not finish out his second term. And Reagan, of course, was unable to serve for a portion of his. So, since Roosevelt's last term, 11 elected presidents, 4 unfinished or incomplete terms. So, based on that sample we're talking a 40% chance. That's pretty significant.

But, of course, there is McCain's age and the fact that he has had two bouts of cancer.

The long and short of it is that no one can predict the future, but as the saying goes, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Also, a word about executive experience. Being a governor does train you in one way: you need to make executive decisions. There is a skill to doing that, to being, in Bush's immortal words, the "Decider."

The problem is that there are good deciders and bad deciders. Bush is a bad decider. He does a bang-up job of making decisions, but all too often he makes the wrong one.

Obama has plenty of experience in making good decisions. His campaign is the best example of that. Over the course of the past two years, America has had the opportunity to see Obama make decisions, and see the result of those decisions. Based on that, Democrats chose him as their candidate.

It is here that Palin's resume is thin. We know how she might decide on, say, a Supreme Court justice (whether that decision would be good or bad would depend on where you stand on the issue of choice, among other things). But at a minimum, she seemed to have exercised poor decision-making in her pursuit of her former brother-in-law.

And most importantly, on the most important issue, we have no idea whether she would exercise prudent judgment or poor judgment on national security issues because, frankly, she herself -- by her own account -- does not know where she stands. she says she has not thought about Iraq -- she has been focused on Alaska.

Does she know a Shia from a Sunni? Has she spent a nano-second of thought on Israeli-Palestinian issues to understand the wall, settlements, the history. Probably not (I'm guessing neither Jews nor Arabs are significant voting blocs in Alaska).

You can write all you want about perceptions and strategies, but Indy, in previous posts you have portrayed yourself as a common sense independent. Quite honestly, this is a rather simple choice if all it involves is common sense.

Busheeeeeeeeeeeed (Indy4all - 9/1/2008 6:15:43 PM)

If the Bush administration has shown us one thing its that we need to get over this idea that our elected President is all knowing and and "expert" on every issue around the globe or even with dmoestic issues. We like to think these guys have firm grasp of issues but in fact they don't and have never had. We need to look for people who are concensus builders, relationship leaders who surround themselves with experts in the field.

Joe Biden has been in the Senate forever and is not an expert on every issue. Senators "specialize" in areas of interest and where it suits the Party as a whole, ala John Warner on defense and national security, Biden on Foriegn raltions and national security. These guys have staffs larger than most small businesses in Virginia for god sakes. Oh and then there are the consultants and think tanks as well.

Leadership is not always born out of so-called experience per say but a way in which direction and vision is coupled with hihgly effective management skills. George Bush's advisors behind the scenes are the real people to worry about and have always been so. One may want to look for mavericks but those mavericks must also contain the ability to lead from the front on issues.

If the election is about experience by definition; Obama loses. But it will not be nor do I believe it should be. Experience is overrated in the game thus far given the nature of politics in Washington. Even the most experienced get dooped; ala Biden and Clinton on Iraq for example. people that do things solely from political motivation or cover should always be looked upon with a skeptics eye.

My point to the VP was not about Nixon circumstances it was to the age question everyone has been raising. And I think McCain will be just fine given that great Senate healthcare plan in Washington we keep hearing about and besides should he win he's got his own ward at Bethesda Naval Hospital to keep up in the game I guess.

I am independent-from a critical thinking view but am a conservative Democrat. I know my place gets ridiculed by many liberal here as not "being a true democrat" b/c I support people like Connolly over Byrne and the like. I just look at things criticlaly and not emotionally. I can call it both ways and feel at times people merely approach it from an unwillingness to concede things that they know are not valid but do so solely for political purposes just like the politicians.

Conservative democrats may certainly roll with Obama but not ideologically but because they see the blood in the water. They knjow that they have a real shot to win the election and thats motivation enough and the underlying issues or differences will be cast aside. On balance I am not so sure that Obama is that much different than Kerry on most of the issues of the day and yet I know many conservative Dems that did not vote for him here in Virginia but will vote for Obama b/c they have confidence that he can win and that they are tired on the Bush reign.

Whther I hold my nose and cast the vote or not is still up in the air until the debates and if that makes me "not a true Democrat" at least I know I am certainly clinging to my true Virginian roots. We have been voting for Republicans in national elections since like Vietnam while supporting Dems inside the State. Based on the recent State polling when reviewing the Warner race and the Obama/McCain race there appears to be more of us than of some of you. But then thats just data points.

The speech definitely made a lot of people. (JPTERP - 9/1/2008 12:25:30 PM)

stop and pay attention, but his appeal goes beyond just that one speech.

His profile is important too -- he's got some unconventional experience -- in terms of travel and community organizing. I don't see these experiences though as being entirely out in left field -- it strikes me that these experiences could help him in the world's most challenging job.

Additionally, some of the stuff that his mother was doing in terms of micro-finance in Indonesia in the 1960-1970s was ahead of its time. Obama's experience living overseas is hard to measure -- but it clearly had some role in shaping his views -- it added some nuance to the way that he approaches issues.

The Iraq War speech in 2002 too demonstrated that he had spent some time thinking seriously about foreign policy, and his analysis in that speech about the likely outcomes shows evidence of good judgment.

That ability to inspire is important too. Reagan was the first president that I really remember -- I have only hazy memories of Carter. But Reagan and Clinton's ability to inspire played some role in their success as presidents.

Palin out of her depth (Quizzical - 9/1/2008 12:20:50 PM)

Palin won the election for governor in Alaska with roughly 115k total votes.

She was only sworn in as governor on Dec. 4, 2006 -- not even two years in office yet.

Did she achieve any academic distinction or honors whatsoever? I haven't read about any. (People like Tim Pawlenty - who appeared on Meet the Press - have some nerve in trying to compare Palin to Obama.)

Other than going to college in Hawaii for a semester, then finishing her journalism degree in Northern Idaho, she has lived in Alaska her whole life.

One must wonder how much she knows about the problems of the lower 48 states.

One of the biggest decisions for her as governor of Alaska has been what kind, and how big, of a subsidy to distribute to Alaskans from that State's share of oil profits. That's not the reality for the other 49 states.

Palin recently said she did not know what the Vice President's job is.

Listen up Sarah, here is what the Vice President's job is going to be, at least where you would be concerned: to try to get enough OJT to be at least minimally competent if you have to step in for McCain.

Here's an interesting article...there's more (KathyinBlacksburg - 9/1/2008 3:59:33 PM)

http://blackstarnews.com/?c=13...

1. She opposed police and stood with bar owners who wanted the bars closed at the usual 5 AM (they were only closed one hour before opening again). Police had seen a spike in drunk driving between 2 AM and 5 AM and wanted to reduce bar hours. Not only did she oppose the police, but also she retaliated against those opposing her. But she held a sign saying "law enforcement for McCian the other day!

2. Against the position of law enforcement, she supported guns everywhere, even bars, schools and even banks.

When the Alaska legislature proposed expanding Alaska's already liberal laws to include carrying concealed weapons in schools, banks and bars, Stambaugh and several other Alaska police chiefs opposed the legislation. "We were simply applying common sense to the use of guns," Stambaugh noted. "Even in the Old West, you left your guns at the door. Guns and booze don't mix."

3. She served as one-woman library censor by ordering books off the shelves. When the librarian refused she was fired.

To back it Flipper (Indy4all - 9/1/2008 10:03:47 PM)

Its not just Republican conservatives. I went to dinner tonight in Henrico Couty with wife wife who is from NY and a school teacher along with a few of her fellow teachers as a get together before school year starts and all of these woman are peeved at the last two days of attack on Palin. They are conservative Democrats mind you. One a special ed/needs teacher lambasted the liberal media for its attacks on her and now her daughter for being pregnant and the suttle views promoting pro-choice that Palin should not have had her baby that has downs and now acting as if it is immoral for her daughter (17) to deliver her baby as well. Peeved. These are middle of the road Democrats and the mouthpieces are helping the case for Mccain by embarking on such politics.
I fear that w/o a real convention and the hurricanes will keep these pundits from removing the foots in their mouths before it is too late.
Another apsect that arose in conversation was Palin was not the most qualified "woman". This line is offensive I learned tonight to woman greater then it is to men. To make such arguements means she has to be compared to other woman and not men in the selection. In my view she was more qualified then Tim Pawlenty for example and last I checked he is a man so another dangerous line by the pundits trying to put up other more qualified woman.
Its a line that can spell disaster in the South for Obama. I do not think one wants to motivate social conservatives and alienate female independents and Democrat conservatives at the same time in the Southern & Western States.
These a school teachers Flipper. If Obama cannot lock up these votes here in Virginia, thats trouble. Almost all special education teachers are woman in this country---some one needs to have these folks lay off the line about her giving birth at 44 to a downs baby. Its not an arguement the Obama camp is going to win regardless of whether people are pro-choice or not.
Again, Lowell does not like to hear it here as alot of folks do not about the old Clinton supporters but my wife and these other teachers have not gotten behind Obama yet and if these lines or talking points intensify I get the feeling they will not in November either.
If Obama supporters here do not think there is a brewing problem they run the risk of underestimating the middle here in Virginia b/c everyone tonight is 100% behind Mark Warner.
Are not these exactly the voters that Obama needs if he is to win Virginia's electoral votes?

Excitement factor (Indy4all - 9/2/2008 10:15:52 AM)

Sunday morning while being interviewed by NBC he would make you fall asleep. Based on what you point out he is certainly qualified on "paper" against Palin but in terms of bringing the "buzz" factor he fails miserably. Had he been picked , just think we would either have only been talking hurricane or Obama's speech Friday and over the weekend. Not saying Palin is a game changer but Pawlenty would not have driven the base up at the Convention and it would have been even more boring than 2004.

Come to think of lets not taunt those Pawlenty quals; he;s got more executive experience than all three; McCain, Obama, Biden and Palin I guess; I stand corrected.

I wonder if he had picked him would "experience" issue have gone away; oh wait no foriegn policy/national security experience.....just like every other Governor in the country. If its such a great factor why do we continually electe more Governors than Senators?