Can you name for me a single person in this world who will vote for Obama over McCain because Sarah Palin is inexperienced?
Just one person. Not a hypothetical one, an actual one, who isn't lying.
No, you can't, because it's a nonsensical proposition.
Obama has less experience than any President or Vice President candidate of either party -- yes, including both John Edwards and Dan Quayle -- in almost 70 years, except for Spiro Agnew, if you count both national legislative, state executive, or federal executive experience.
Read that again: except for Agnew, every Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate of either party in the last 68 years has more experience than Barack Obama.
And somehow, Palin's experience, which is in fact comparable in depth (though of a different type) to Obama's is going to make people choose ... Obama? One wonders if they realize that Obama is at the top of his ticket.
I can see the ads now: "Don't vote for McCain: he has one of the least experienced running mates in modern history. Instead, vote for Obama, who is by far the least experienced candidate for President in the last 68 years!"
How is this a good argument for Obama?
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Posted by pudge at August 30, 2008 10:47 AM | Email ThisHer greatest strength in my eyes is her willingness to fight the ESA listing of polar bears. The extreme greens are a vicious and unrelenting foe and it takes great courage to stand up to them.
Posted by: deadwood on August 30, 2008 11:04 AMYour Wikipedia source shows Agnew as Maryland governor for two years, and Baltimore County Executive for four years. He had much more experience than comrade Obama.
Posted by: The Pirate on August 30, 2008 11:08 AMIn my opinion the crux of the matter is not about experience, it is accomplishments. Barack Obama has NO accomplishments he can tout, other than he wrote two books about himself. Not only is his resume thin but the accomplishments are nonexistent. Palin does not have alot of experience either but she has made great use of her time in Alaskan government by taking on the corrupt establishment. Obama? He used his time to ingratiate himself with the Chicago establishment, never challenging their hold on the city. If the Dems want to make comparisons, bring it on!
Posted by: Willard on August 30, 2008 11:08 AMI dunno, I think Agnew and Obama and Palin have comparable experience. All three have about two years of actually working at a high elected level, although Obama has had the last two years of running for President in addition.
But yes, there's something to be said for the experience of running a state, compared to the experience of being a party-line voter with no significant accomplishments in the U.S. Senate.
I'm not stupid. I have 72 year old parents. I know that when if I voted for McCain, there was a chance that he'd not live through the presidency. MY VOTE depended on his choice of VP.
hmmmmm Palin was a council woman and Mayor of a town of 9000 people, which qualified her to become governor, which qualified her (with less than 2 years of experience as governor) to be VP...This candidate has a better quality of experience than Obama? Please....
How is this conservative-values mother of five able to spend any real time raising her children!!!! I'm a married mother of 2 children who is able to stay home during school vacations and be with my kids when school is over because I work as teacher in California. I would stay home all of the time but we can't afford it. It is hard, hard work to make sure my children are not raised by someone else. It takes an extreme amount of effort to have plenty of time to spend with my kids -- quality and quantity!
This woman went back to work 3 days after giving birth to her Down Syndrome child.
Go ahead let's hear your rallying cry for Palin...Spin, Spin, Spin it away. Maybe someone else will be swayed by your arrogance. Me? I think for myself!
I'm not stupid. I have 72 year old parents. I know that when if I voted for McCain, there was a chance that he'd not live through the presidency. MY VOTE depended on his choice of VP.
hmmmmm Palin was a council woman and Mayor of a town of 9000 people, which qualified her to become governor, which qualified her (with less than 2 years of experience as governor) to be VP...This candidate has a better quality of experience than Obama? Please....
How is this conservative-values mother of five able to spend any real time raising her children!!!! I'm a married mother of 2 children who is able to stay home during school vacations and be with my kids when school is over because I work as teacher in California. I would stay home all of the time but we can't afford it. It is hard, hard work to make sure my children are not raised by someone else. It takes an extreme amount of effort to have plenty of time to spend with my kids -- quality and quantity!
This woman went back to work 3 days after giving birth to her Down Syndrome child.
Go ahead let's hear your rallying cry for Palin...Spin, Spin, Spin it away. Maybe someone else will be swayed by your arrogance. Me? I think for myself!
Yes, you are stupid.
Posted by: The Pirate on August 30, 2008 11:37 AMhmmmmm Palin was a council woman and Mayor of a town of 9000 people, which qualified her to become governor, which qualified her (with less than 2 years of experience as governor) to be VP...This candidate has a better quality of experience than Obama? Please....
So you are going to vote for Obama because he is more experienced than Palin?
Really?
Really really?
Obama is by far the least qualified candidate for President from either party in your lifetime, and longer.
And you think anyone should care about Palin's experience?
Really?
Palin may be a fine woman. As a vice president who may be called upon to take over for grandpa, she is about as qualified as my (very smart) dog.
I do respect the fact that she is at least trying to clean some of the slime out of her states Republiconvict Party. Good for her. Only a million miles to go.....
Maybe someone should ask her how old the earth is.....
Posted by: All Facts Support My Positions on August 30, 2008 11:48 AMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UojMnCgqVA
Your ilk would have been MUCH more happy if Palin had aborted her baby because that's the kind of sickness you represent.
It's like your moronic obsession with Republican corruption while you hypocritically give the scum on your side of the issues a pass.
Maybe someone should ask you to adjust your medication.
Posted by: Hinton on August 30, 2008 12:00 PMFactless smears won't get you far. In fact, there is no evidence Palin did anything wrong. You appear to imply otherwise. If so, you're lying.
Posted by: pudge on August 30, 2008 12:01 PMBigotry and smears are only bad against the right, to them.
I think it was brilliant to wait until Obama was nominated before announcing Palin as the VP candidate. I bet if McCain had announced it before hand, there was a real chance that Hillary would have walked away with the nomination.
Their party apparatus would have seen that they would be extremely vulnerable on experience and the whole "victim" card with Palin as VP candidate.
I'm not a McCain fan, but I've got to recognize a brilliant move when I see it. Did you hear that? McCain: "check"
(Disclosure: I'm no Republican, I'm a republican. I'm voting for Rossi and I'm writing in Ron Paul.)
Posted by: blindman on August 30, 2008 12:07 PMHere's my favorite quid-pro-quo so far:
Gregoire gets $50,000 from the tribes to pay for the third recount. She wins, then "negotiates" a massive expansion in Indian gambling and waives the state's right to take a cut of the winnings. That's right, she traded $50,000 of personal gain for millions and millions of dollars of state revenue. We're the only state in the union that doesn't get a cut of Indian gambling winnings. Me first, the State of Washington second.
Why can't people like you be honest? We know you're a liberal. Simply admit it.
Or do you actually think we're going to fall for 'I've voted Republican all my life but this time ..."
As if we've never, ever seen that before.
Posted by: jimg on August 30, 2008 12:21 PMGregoire: me first, WA second.
Posted by: blindman on August 30, 2008 12:22 PMSomehow Obama was only elected in 2006 according to the geniuses that post here. Seriously there are people now claming that after being elected to the Senate nearly four years ago he has only two years of experience as a Senator.
Plus his election campaign staff has more people than the VILLAGE that Sarah Palin led as mayor.
When your campaign against Obama consists of lies and deceit rather than propping up your own candidate you are in a woeful situation.
Palin is under investigation for abuse of power in "troopergate." Her appointee to replace the guy she fired for the infraction of not firing her former brother in law is under investigation for sexual harrassment.
Her position on foreign policy up until two days ago was literally unknown. Up until those same two days ago she backed Barack Obama's energy plan. She has actually used a windfall profits tax in Alaska. She left a town of 6000-8000 people 20 Million dollars in debt when she left office. She initially supported the bridge to nowhere.
This is your candidate that you laud.
If she wasn't an attractive female would you really support here?
Posted by: bedir than average on August 30, 2008 12:25 PMIt DOES matter who is VP and this woman is not ready, by a long shot, for it.
What you seem to forget is that it all just a choice between Obama/Biden and McCain/Pretty Woman. People do sit out elections and I suspect her nomination is going to drive many to do just that.
Posted by: westello on August 30, 2008 12:34 PMObama is from the corrupt Chicago machines. What are his accomplishment's other than his skin color and teleprompter reading abilities? What are his big legislative victories? Or great private successes?
Palin is superior to Obama, and she is 2nd on the ticket. Go back to talking business of baseball, or go to the HA.
Posted by: AP on August 30, 2008 12:34 PMIt DOES matter who is VP and this woman is not ready, by a long shot, for it.
What you seem to forget is that it is NOT all just a choice between Obama/Biden and McCain/Pretty Woman. People do sit out elections and I suspect her nomination is going to drive many to do just that.
Posted by: westello on August 30, 2008 12:35 PMWhen you lefties rip Palin, you are ripping Obmama is harder than you are hitting Palin. Palis is superior to Obama, yet she is #2 on the ticket! No wonder you lefties are upset! You know you are going to lose, so at least another 4 years with that cancerous scourge called freedom.
Posted by: AP on August 30, 2008 12:38 PMSomehow Obama was only elected in 2006 according to the geniuses that post here. Seriously there are people now claming that after being elected to the Senate nearly four years ago he has only two years of experience as a Senator.
Please learn to read.
The point is that he only spent two years actually in the Senate before he began campaigning for President full-time. He is paid to be a Senator, but he isn't spending much time doing it, and as such, he doesn't get much experience from it.
Plus his election campaign staff has more people than the VILLAGE that Sarah Palin led as mayor.
Yes, because of his own dreadful inexperience, he needs that many people helping him.
When your campaign against Obama consists of lies and deceit rather than propping up your own candidate you are in a woeful situation.
Um. So what Obama's lies about McCain that he tells every single day?
Palin is under investigation for abuse of power in "troopergate."
So?
Her position on foreign policy up until two days ago was literally unknown.
Obama's is STILL unknown. Most Democrats, for example, seem to think Obama would pull troops out of Iraq any faster than McCain would, despite the two having the exact same policy on that.
Up until those same two days ago she backed Barack Obama's energy plan.
You're lying, right after falsely accusing people of lying. Nice.
Agnew backed into the Governorship of Maryland because of an over-the-top racist on the Dem ticket.
Palin backed into the Governorship of Alaska because of the scandal-ridden Murkowski machine - she was the supposedly squeaky-clean alternative brought in to save the (Republican) ship of state.
Heh. Hardly... Her record as Mayor of Wasilla was riven with charges of incompetence, cronyism, vendettas and not owning up to serious mistakes like a sports facilities touted as a self-supporting which quickly became a white elephant.
Funny how nobody wants to tout her record of raising taxes in Alaska and distributing the proceeds to Alaskans.
Posted by: YLB on August 30, 2008 01:13 PMNice lies about Palin. Keep it up!
Posted by: pudge on August 30, 2008 01:25 PMAgnew was more qualified to be President than Obama. He was, for six years, Baltimore County Executive, a big suburban county that surrounds the City of Baltimore (which is not part of the County) and now has a population of 750,000. During his time as County Executive he succeeded in passing the County's first anti-discrimination law and was actually was elected Governor of Maryland in 1966 with a lot of African-American support because the Democratic nomination was won by the George "Your Home is Your Castle" Mahoney who was running a George Wallace-type white backlash candidacy. So Agnew had some accomplishments though we later learned that there was a dark side to his service as County Executive that cost him the Vice Presidency.
Enough 1968 trivia. It reaches the highest level of hypocrisy to call Governor Palin unqualified when she clearly has had more accomplishments and experience relevant to the Presidency than Obama.
Let's compare. Palin serves as Governor of the only State that borders two countries, one of which is not friendly to the U.S. As someone who worked in a Governor's Office (in California) that has an international border (with Mexico), I can tell you that there is often a need to deal with foreign officials. Foreign relations experience. Check.
Obama's foreign policy experience? He serves as the 7th (out of 11) ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee but missed most meetings because he was campaigning for President. He has never called a meeting of the European Affairs subcommittee, which he chairs. He's made some speeches in Europe and they seem to like him.
Palin is the Commander-in-Chief of the Alaska National Guard in a state that is the front line of our national defense. The state also has a lot of military installations that require coordination with state government. Defense experience. Check.
Obama's defense experience? After prodding by John McCain, he finally took a trip to Iraq. He opposed the surge that looks like it will bring success in Iraq. Obama is where he is now because he took positions on Iraq to make a distinction between himself and Senator Clinton. He did this for political reasons and not in the national interest.
Governor Palin recently pushed legislation through the Alaska legislature that raised taxes on oil companies so that they pay more of their fair share in taking Alaskan national resources. She rebated most of the tax revenue to Alaska residents. But as Governor she understands the value of energy development so we can finally end our dependence on foreign oil. Standing up to oil companies on behalf of the citizens. Check. Having direct involvement in energy development. Check.
Obama has no direct experience on energy issues and has taken inconsistent positions on it.
Palin has twice challenged political machines in her state and home town and prevailed--against members of her own Party. Reform is probably her stongest suit. Reform and willingness to buck her own Party. Check.
Obama got his name attached to some ethics reform legislation but has maintained associations with Tony Rezko and Chicago machine politicians.
Obama has rarely deviated from the Party line.
In her experience before state government, Palin served as a City Council member and Mayor of a small town (we can hear the Left snort about being the Mayor of a small town as if that is some disqualification). She cut taxes and reduced spending in that job. Prior executive experience, including accomplishments. Check.
Obama served as an Illinois State Senator and voted "present" most of the time. He was elected with Chicago machine support.
Palin has been an effective Alaska Governor, reducing spending, increasing taxes on the oil companies, and pushing reforms through the legislature. Success in her current job. Check.
Obama has only been present in the Senate for about 120 days in the past three and half years. He has never called a meeting of the subcommittee he chairs and has no discernible legislative accomplishments.
Biden has some legislative accomplishments (Violence Against Women Act), bankruptcy reform, and defense and foreign policy experience. But he has no experience outside of the DC Beltway except for two years of service on the New Castle County, Delaware Council. He has no executive experience whatsoever and I getting elected to the Senate at age 29 and serving in it to age 65 tends to make him a bit out of touch with the rest of us.
McCain has more legislative accomplishments than Biden, more experience reaching across the aisle, experience making huge sacrifices for his country, more foreign and defense experience. No one talks about this, but McCain also has executive experience commanding a Navy squadron wing which is significant and far more than Biden or Obama have ever done.
I don't think the Democrats ought to be treading in the experience area as an issue.
Someone said there are two kinds of politicians: work horses and show horses. Palin, McCain are work horses who focus on accomplishments and principles rather than advancing their own careers. Biden has been both a work horse and show horse depending upon when we look at his 38-year career in elective office. Looking at Obama's career with scant accomplishments, I don't think I need to even say what kind of political horse he is.
Posted by: Brent Boger on August 30, 2008 01:50 PM
Arguably, both Palin and Agnew have more experience than Obama. I didn't say Agnew has less, just that Obama CLEARLY has less than all the rest.
You could make a case for all three of them to be higher or lower than the other three -- and you make a strong case for Agnew over Obama -- but the point is that Obama is still, by far, the least-experienced Presidential candidate since Wendell Willkie in 1940.
I'm a presidential scholar, and I'm scratching muy head at your assertions; can you explain how you arrived at your conclusion regarding experience? Did you count Nixon, for example? Why did you stop at 68 years?
Posted by: tt on August 30, 2008 01:54 PMFolks, she was the mayor of a village in Alaska -- have any of you worked in government to know what that means? Do you realize that Alaska is smaller than Ft. Worth in terms of population?
If you believe McCain is the better choice, vote for him, but please don't bend reality to fit your "team" -- we have far too much at stake now.
And yes, that goes for Obama folks as well who play the same game ...
Posted by: tt on August 30, 2008 02:04 PMObama served as an Illinois State Senator and voted "present" much of the time.
Pudge your right. It is clearly correct to say that Obama has the least experience since any presidential nominee since Wendell Wilkie. But that might be an understatement Wilkie was a successful Fortune 500-CEO and led campaigns on national issues , if I recall.
Other than high oratory, Obama has accomplished the following: (1) get elected to the Illinois Senate after being a community organizer and making an alliance with Jeremiah Wright; (2) win 53% of the vote in a Senate primary and go onto beat Alan Keyes who really was a resident of Maryland in the general; and (4) wire some early caucuses to give him momentum to win just enough primaries to beat Clinton.
Posted by: Brent Boger on August 30, 2008 02:21 PM
So you think Fort Worth is a Village??
She IS the Governor of Alaska for petes sake.
BTW, she isn't running for President, but yet she has more experience than Obama, and HE IS.
So please take some of the posters here and add a bit of sarc to them. They are usually just trying to brush off the kool aid splashed about by AFSMP and YLB.
Posted by: Chris N on August 30, 2008 02:25 PMIt seems to me that:
1) Her husband would still be taking care of the child, just as he is doing now while she is fulfilling her gubernatorial duties. I'm not sure, but doesn't it seem that "Facts" wants a woman at home taking care of the kids? Not a very progressive way of thinking;
2) Her child would receive extra assistance that is not currently available to her as governor.
As for the rest of his statement: typical male bovine feces.
Posted by: Douglas on August 30, 2008 02:25 PMI'm a presidential scholar, and I'm scratching muy head at your assertions; can you explain how you arrived at your conclusion regarding experience?
Um. I stated what they were. Did you not read the post? National legislative, state executive, or federal executive experience.
Did you count Nixon, for example?
You are a presidential scholar and you think Obama has more experience than Nixon did when he became Ike's VP? Four very active years in the House and two in the Senate, compared to Obama's two years in the Senate, followed by two years of campaigning for President. Obviously Nixon has more experience than Obama by the stated criteria.
Why did you stop at 68 years?
Any presidential scholar would realize that the GOP's candidate in 1940 -- 68 years ago -- was Wendell Willkie, with no experience in government.
I'm absolutely frightened for my country when I see that folks actually think that leading the Alaska NG gives one enough defense experience to just say, "check" (as one poster did).
And I am frightened for my country when a presidential scholar can't count backward 68 years and immediately come up with Wendell Willkie.
Brent: yes, but I stated my criteria and stuck by it. We could argue Palin has more experience than Biden, because Biden has been basically just a Senator and father since he was 35, and Palin has done many more things. So I picked the three things most people think of when they think of experience for President: federal executive, federal legislative, and state governor experience. (Federal executive is kinda broad, but even then everyone before Obama who did not have Presidential experience, or the other two types, were cabinet secretaries, top ambassadors, top generals, and so on).
And actually, if you go back ONE HUNDRED years, Obama is still the least experienced presidential candidate other than Willkie, except for Woodow Wilson (who had even less top elected experience than Palin and Agnew, but was a leading political intellectual). (And at that point I might have to add that Charles Even Hughes ran for the GOP in 1916 after resigning from the Supreme Court, so I might have tossed in "Supreme Court experience" :-).
What are your qualifications as a "presidential scholar"?
I have worked in government most of my career at the state and local level. Often those coming from the outside do the best job. And being a governor, no matter how small the state, is being placed in an executive role that is similar to the presidency on a smaller scale. This especially true of Alaska because it is one of three states that has the governor as its only statewide elected official (elected on a ticket with the Lt. Governor).
Palin, in her short time as Alaska Governor, has accomplished far more and been exposed to more things relevant to the Presidency than Obama certainly and arguably Biden.
You almost treat the Presidency as a civil service job. You have to be in the Senate or Governor for a minimum amount of time before you can take the exam and be put on a list. And your service as a small-town mayor doesn't count because we hath decreed from those of us inside the Beltway that it is not relevant.
Experience is a good thing when running for national office. But it is not the sine qua non of it. It really should be what you have done with that experience. Palin has done more with hers than Obama has with his.
Abraham Lincoln did not have a lot of experience when he was elected President, but he did a lot with it.
Posted by: Brent Boger on August 30, 2008 02:41 PMAnyone who thinks that Palin got the nod based on qualifications is a damned fool.
Posted by: Ryan on August 30, 2008 02:44 PMAnyone who thinks Obama got the nomination based on qualifications is a damned fool.
Scholars question Palin credentials
By FRED BARBASH & DAVID MARK | 8/30/08 5:17 PM EST Updated: 8/30/08 5:17 PM EST
"John McCain was aiming to make history with his pick of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and historians say he succeeded.
Presidential scholars say she appears to be the least experienced, least credentialed person to join a major-party ticket in the modern era.
So unconventional was McCain's choice that it left students of the presidency literally "stunned," in the words of Joel Goldstein, a St. Louis University law professor and scholar of the vice presidency. "Being governor of a small state for less than two years is not consistent with the normal criteria for determining who's of presidential caliber," said Goldstein.
"I think she is the most inexperienced person on a major party ticket in modern history," said presidential historian Matthew Dallek.
That includes Spiro T. Agnew, Richard Nixon's first vice president, who was governor of a medium-sized state, Maryland, for two years, and before that, executive of suburban Baltimore County, the expansive jurisdiction that borders and exceeds in population the city of Baltimore.
It also includes George H.W. Bush's vice president, Indiana Sen. Dan Quayle, who had served in the House and Senate for 12 years before taking office. And it also includes New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro, who served three terms in the House before Walter Mondale chose her in 1984 as the first woman candidate on a major party ticket.
"It would be one thing if she had only been governor for a year and a half, but prior to that she had not had major experience in public life," said Dallek of Palin. "The fact that he would have to go to somebody who is clearly unqualified to be president makes Obama look like an elder statesman."
And Alaska is a much smaller state than Illinois, the political base of Barack Obama, whom Republicans have repeatedly criticized for being inexperienced, having served nearly four years in the U.S. Senate after eight in the Illinois state Senate.
"Not to belittle Alaska, but it's different than the basket of issues you deal with in big, dynamic states." Dallek said.
Palin has no experience in national office. Before becoming governor in December 2006, she served as a council member and mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, which had a population of slightly more than 5,000 during her time in office.
Brad Blakeman, who ran the 1988 Republican convention for GOP nominee George H.W. Bush, turned the experience question on its head, suggesting accomplishments in office mean more than time accrued.
"Here's a governor who may have served two years, but her accomplishments are worth eight," said Blakeman, citing Palin's work as governor on ethics reform and an Alaska oil pipeline. "She's got as much experience for being vice president as Barack does to be president."
But other students of presidential history said that In choosing Palin as his running mate, McCain has reached back to a time when few actually seriously contended that the vice president should be demonstrably prepared to assume the presidency from day one.
If elected vice president, Palin would appear to have the least amount of experience in federal office or as a governor since John W. Kern, Democrat William Jennings Bryan's 1908 running mate, who had served for four years in the Indiana state Senate and then four more as city solicitor of Indianapolis. The Democratic ticket lost to Republican standard bearer William Howard Taft and running mate James S. Sherman by an Electoral College spread of 321-162...."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/13001.html
Posted by: Friend of All Facts on August 30, 2008 04:03 PMYou folks are just as deluded as the scientologists
How so? Nothing in that article goes against anything I wrote. Can you actually form a cogent argument, or is cutting-and-pasting the best you can do?
My point was not that Palin had more experience than Obama, though that case can certainly be made. My point was that Obama had less experience than everyone mentioned there except for MAYBE Agnew (and frankly, I've come around and think Agnew probably had more experience than Obama).
So this is what it comes down to: the two least experienced candidates for the executive office in the last 68 years. The difference is that one is on the bottom of the ticket, and one is at the top of the ticket.
And you think this makes Obama and the Democrats look GOOD?!
"2 Top Alaska Newspapers Question Palin's Fitness
stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com Posted August 30, 2008 | 12:04 PM (EST)
Since yesterday's shocking arrival of Gov. Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate there has been the usual cable news and print blathering about the pick from those who know little about her. But what about the journalists close to home -- in Alaska -- who know her best and have followed her career for years?
For the past 24 hours, the pages and web sites of the two leading papers up there have raised all sorts of issues surrounding Palin, from her ethics problems to general lack of readiness for this big step up. Right now the top story on the Anchorage Daily News web site looks at new info in what it calls "troopergate" and opens: "Alaska's former commissioner of public safety says Gov. Sarah Palin, John McCain's pick to be vice president, personally talked him on two occasions about a state trooper who was locked in a bitter custody battle with the governor's sister.
"In a phone conversation Friday night, Walt Monegan, who was Alaska's top cop until Palin fired him July 11, told the Daily News that the governor also had e-mailed him two or three times about her ex-brother-in-law, Trooper Mike Wooten, though the e-mails didn't mention Wooten by name. Monegan claims his refusal to fire Wooten was a major reason that Palin dismissed him. Wooten had been suspended for five days previously, based largely on complaints that Palin's family had initiated before Palin was governor."
A reporter for the Anchorage daily, Gregg Erickson, even did an online chat with the Washington Post, in which he revealed that Palin's approval rating in the state was not the much-touted 80%, but 65% and sinking -- and that among journalists who followed her it might be in the "teens." He added: "I have a hard time seeing how her qualifications stack up against the duties and responsibilities of being president.... I expect her to stick with simple truths. When asked about continued American troop presence in Iraq, she said she knows only one thing about that (I paraphrase): no one has attacked the American homeland since George Bush took the war to Iraq."
His paper found a number of leading Republican officeholders in the state who mocked Palin's qualifications. "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Lyda Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"
Here are excerpts from the editorials in the two leading papers.
From the Daily News-Miner in Fairbanks:
Sen. John McCain's selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate was a stunning decision that should make Alaskans proud, even while we wonder about the actual merits of the choice.... Alaskans and Americans must ask, though, whether she should become vice president and, more importantly, be placed first in line to become president.
In fact, as the governor herself acknowledged in her acceptance speech, she never set out to be involved in public affairs. She has never publicly demonstrated the kind of interest, much less expertise, in federal issues and foreign affairs that should mark a candidate for the second-highest office in the land. Republicans rightfully have criticized the Democratic nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, for his lack of experience, but Palin is a neophyte in comparison; how will Republicans reconcile the criticism of Obama with the obligatory cheering for Palin?
Most people would acknowledge that, regardless of her charm and good intentions, Palin is not ready for the top job. McCain seems to have put his political interests ahead of the nation's when he created the possibility that she might fill it.
And from the Anchorage Daily News:
It's stunning that someone with so little national and international experience might be heartbeat away from the presidency.
Gov. Palin is a classic Alaska story. She is an example of the opportunity our state offers to those with talent, initiative and determination...
McCain picked Palin despite a recent blemish on her ethically pure resume. While she was governor, members of her family and staff tried to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the Alaska State Troopers. Her public safety commissioner would not do so; she forced him out, supposedly for other reasons. While she runs for vice-president, the Legislature has an investigator on the case.
For all those advantages, Palin joins the ticket with one huge weakness: She's a total beginner on national and international issues.
Gov. Palin will have to spend the next two months convincing Americans that she's ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency...."
As reported at Huffington:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/2-top-alaska-newspapers-q_b_122625.html
Posted by: Friend of All Facts on August 30, 2008 04:20 PMPalin has more experience than Obama
Posted by: Obi-Wan on August 30, 2008 04:22 PM2 Top Alaska Newspapers Question Palin's Fitness
Hundreds of newspapers across the country question Obama's.
even while we wonder about the actual merits of the choice
Just as we wonder what merits Obama has.
Republicans rightfully have criticized the Democratic nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, for his lack of experience, but Palin is a neophyte in comparison
No, she's not. You can't get much more of a neophyte than Obama.
Most people would acknowledge that, regardless of her charm and good intentions, Palin is not ready for the top job.
No more unready than Obama.
McCain seems to have put his political interests ahead of the nation's when he created the possibility that she might fill it.
Just as the Democratic Party did by nominating Obama.
It's stunning that someone with so little national and international experience might be heartbeat away from the presidency.
You know what's worse? That someone with so little national and international experience might be ELECTED PRESIDENT.
We can play this game all day.
GOP Alaska State Senator: Palin "Not Prepared To Be Governor. How Can She Be Prepared To Be Vice President Or President?"
Anchorage Daily News | August 30, 2008 03:35 PM
The Anchorage Daily News is reporting that many of Palin's local colleagues, even Republican, were rather stunned by her being chosen as McCain's vice president.
State Senate President Lyda Green said she thought it was a joke when someone called her at 6 a.m. to give her the news.
"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?" said Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla. "Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"
As repoprted at Huffington:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/30/gop-alaska-state-senator_n_122664.html
I bet republican women like Meg Whitman, Senator Elizabeth Dole, Senator Olympia Snowe, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, and Carly Fiorina are thanking you losers for voting this yungin more qualified to be a heart beat from the presidency than they. I guess grandpa always wants the latest model. Cindy doesn't have to worry about getting booted cuz Palin doesn't have $100 million and just had a new kid. I'm sure grandpa doesn't want to do diapers, again, unless he is the one wearing them.
Posted by: Friend of All Facts on August 30, 2008 04:34 PMGOP Alaska State Senator: Palin "Not Prepared To Be Governor. How Can She Be Prepared To Be Vice President Or President?"
Same question of Obama.
"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?"
Obama is not prepared to be Senator.
You can't win this fight, because in order to do so, people need to believe the stupid lie that Obama has significant experience. So why are you bothering with a fight you cannot win?
I am really dubious about the opinions of a bunch of college professors about Palin's credentials. They don't know what they're talking about--do they know what a governor actually does, especially in a unique state like Alaska?
I also have to be dubious about the Anchorage Daily News, a McClatchy paper, which I know is a very pro-Democratic chain having spent time under the yoke of its flagship paper, the Sacramento Bee.
And I don't know about Senator Green, but I would bet she's part of the Stevens-Young-Murkowski machine that Palin has worked hard to defeat. I'm sure Governor Palin has enemies and it wouldn't surprise me that among Obama's few Republican votes will be that of Senator Ted Stevens, unless he's in jail. Gov. Palin won't need his vote in Alaska--I've heard that her apporoval ratings have ranged from 65-80%.
Posted by: Brent Boger on August 30, 2008 05:52 PMIf Palin lacks "enough service/federal service" to be a Vice President , then I want YLB & Friends to please explain John Adams? And, please explain Teddy Roosevelt?
If anything, Governor Palin is Teddy Roosevelt all over again, minus the hubris, in today's political landscape.
Posted by: barrackslawyer on August 30, 2008 07:45 PMGov. Palin has been in the position of being on call for emergencies for more than 2500 days of her government service.
For these 2500+ days, she has needed to be ready to respond to the needs of her city/state. She has had to plan ahead for the problems. She truly could be the one that gets that 3am call.
Her rear is on the line at a moments notice - none of the jobs Obama has held have carried even one day of that level of responsibility, or even authority.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on August 30, 2008 08:10 PMI agree. Which is why Obama and his training wheels Joe Biden will be sent home in November by the American electorate.
"This isn't a position that lends itself to on the job training", as Joe Biden pointed out in criticizing Barack Obama's lack of experience during the primaries. The left is making a complete ass of itself in crying "inexperience" on the part of Palin while ignoring the signature gathering empty suit byproduct of the Chicago political machine's almost transparently thin resume.
Stunning in its stupidity, but then again, we are talking about liberals here so we shouldn't be that surprised.
Posted by: Rick D. on August 31, 2008 11:16 AMBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
heh...heh....
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Oh man, that's rich!
Posted by: Ryan on August 31, 2008 11:51 AMIt's just as reasonable as to say Obama is JFK.
1. Sarah Palin's Troopergate scandal 29-Aug-08 06:18 pm
"The saga of Gov. Sarah Palin's Troopergate scandal gets curiouser and curiouser. Now, with an investigator hired by the Legislature about to look into the mess caused by her firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, it turns out Palin's attorney general, Talis Colberg, has launched his own investigation to find out beforehand what the Legislature's hired sleuth might discover.
Colberg says he started his probe after The Wall Street Journal quoted Sen. Hollis French as saying the governor could be impeached as a result of the investigation. Blogger and politico Andrew Halcro reports his sources within the Department of Public Safety say department employees are being interviewed under oath about what they know regarding circumstances leading up to Monegan's firing.
Specifically, they are trying to find out if anyone from the governor's office or her family tried to get Palin's former brother-in-law, Mike Wooten, fired as a state trooper. Halcro says that raises the question of whether Colberg is tampering with witnesses in the case.
Then yesterday afternoon, the governor held a press conference announcing that not only did her administration bring a lot of pressure to fire Wooten, but the troopers recorded a session months ago between Frank Bailey, her director of boards and commissions, and a trooper supervisor saying that Sarah and Todd wanted to know why Wooten hadn't already gotten the ax...."
http://www.voiceofthetimes.net/index.php...
http://messages.yahoo.com/Cultures_&_Community/Issues_and_Causes/Current_Events/US%255FNews/threadview?m=tm&bn=7088116-guncontroldebate&tid=927779&mid=927779&tof=17&frt=2
So, the question is whether she might have lied as folks around here like to throw around the term. You know, like people who perjure themselves?
2. Critics: Palin used 'Bridge to Nowhere' for gain By MARY PEMBERTON, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 5 minutes ago
"ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Gov. Sarah Palin was for the so-called infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" before she was against it, a change of position the GOP vice presidential running mate conveniently ignored Saturday when she bragged about telling Congress "thanks but no thanks" to the pork barrel project.
Federal funds for the $398 million bridge were tacked into an appropriations bill as an earmark, the practice by which members of Congress get special funding for pet projects. Sen. John McCain opposes earmarks as an avenue for pork barrel and special interest spending.
After McCain introduced her as his choice for vice president on the Republican ticket, Palin talked about her reform credentials, and said she stopped the bridge project as part of an effort to end of earmarking in appropriations bills.
The Alaska bridge pushed by Sen. Ted Stevens became a symbol of congressional misuse of tax dollars. It would have connected the town of Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport on it. Ferries and water taxis serve the island now.
"I have championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress," Palin said in her vice presidential campaign debut in Dayton, Ohio. "In fact, I told Congress, I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks' on that Bridge to Nowhere."
"If our state wanted a bridge, I said we'd build it ourselves," she said.
She didn't talk that way when she was running for governor. The Anchorage Daily News quoted her on Oct. 22, 2006, as saying yes, she would continue state funding for the bridge because she wanted swift action on infrastructure projects. "The window is now while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist," she said...."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_bridge_to_nowhere
You Klowns would support a cow pie, oops, a moose pie if it had GOP or republican stamped on it.
Can you say empty skirt?
Palin has made executive decisions while 0bama has been little more than a spoke in the wheel making group decisions. The fact you can't understand that makes you either a complete hypocrite or willfully ignorant. I'll let you decide which one you are.
Posted by: Rick D. on August 31, 2008 04:07 PMGovernor Palin must have forgot how she felt about earmarks:
"....That is not how Palin described her position on the Gravina Island bridge when she ran for governor in 2006.
On Oct. 22, 2006, the Anchorage Daily News asked Palin and the other candidates, "Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?"
Her response: "Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now -- while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."
Palin's support of the earmark for the bridge was applauded by the late Lew Williams Jr., the retired Ketchikan Daily News publisher who wrote columns on the topic.
Williams wrote on Oct. 29, 2006, that Palin was the only gubernatorial candidate that year who consistently supported the Gravina Island Bridge, the Knik Arm Bridge and improvements to the Parks Highway.
Two months earlier, while campaigning in Ketchikan, Palin made a positive reference to the bridge, while also joking, as a resident of the Mat-Su Valley, about Sen. Ben Stevens' slap at Mat-Su residents as "Valley trash."
"OK, you've got Valley trash standing in the middle of nowhere," Palin said on a stop in Ketchikan, a quote reprinted in the Juneau Empire Friday. "I think we're going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project."
A year later, she issued a news release as governor saying Ketchikan needed better airport access, but a $398 million bridge was not going to happen.
"Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island," Palin said on Sept. 21, 2007.
The money was not sent back to the federal government, but spent on other projects.
That was hardly "Thanks but no thanks."
In his statement announcing Palin as his running mate Friday, McCain said, "She put a stop to the "bridge to nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million."
One of the immediate related questions for Alaska is whether Palin plans to change her position and accept McCain's view that earmarks should be abolished and that any bill containing them should be vetoed.
This is significant because the state, along with dozens of local governments and nonprofit groups across Alaska, routinely asks Congress to fund everything from new buildings to docks and road work. The Alaska Railroad alone asked for about $80 million this year, while Nome wanted $13 million for wind generation, North Pole asked for nearly $7 million and the Fairbanks North Star Borough asked for about $25 million.
McCain has made his position clear.
"I will veto every bill with earmarks until the Congress stops sending bills with earmarks on them. I will keep vetoing. I will make them famous. You will know their names, " McCain said in a speech on April 15, according to video on his Web site. He also said, "I have a clear record of not asking for a single earmark for my state."
Alaska has a clear record of seeking earmarks.
In March, Palin's Washington, D.C., representative, John Katz, wrote a defense of earmarks, published in the Juneau Empire in which he said the state is cutting back on its wish list.
The Palin administration requested 31 earmarks this year totaling $200 million and "we are not abandoning earmarks altogether," Katz said, as they are a "legitimate exercise of Congress' constitutional power to amend the budget proposed by the president."
http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/31/sarah-palin-supported-ketchikan-bridge-nowhere-dur/
You Klowns are supporting a cow pie who is an empty skirt.
My thoughts are these, your dream date may turn out to be a nightmare. Does she do an Eagelton and go home to take care of the family or does grandpa have to throw her under the straighttalk bus? Happy Labor day.
Posted by: Friend of All Facts on August 31, 2008 04:15 PMPosting as "Friend of facts" here and Bye Bye GOP at Goldy's hate site? why the cowardly lyin' approach Bye Bye?
I can only think you've already been banned once and now your back copying and pasting Keith Slobberman's DNC talking points like the good parrot you are.Enjoy your short stay here.
Posted by: Rick D. on August 31, 2008 04:28 PMLooks like Ms. congeniality has issues
Unsurprisingly, you're a sexist.
Sarah Palin's Troopergate scandal
There is no scandal. There is an investigation as to whether there was wrongdoing, and so far there is no evidence of it.
Palin used 'Bridge to Nowhere' for gain ... "She didn't talk that way when she was running for governor."
No, but she talked that way AS governor, LONG BEFORE she was ever picked as the VP nominee. She realized it was a bad idea and so she killed it. How is this a big deal?
That was hardly "Thanks but no thanks."
Saying No to over $300m is not "no thanks"?! On what planet?
Wow you people are desperate.
Actually, she killed the bridge because the Bush administration concluded the bridge was no longer politically viable. And Palin said Yes to the over $300m which Ted Stevens got Congress to give to the state for other pork in exchange for dropping the embarassing bridge.
(Source: Anchorage Daily News)
Posted by: Bruce on August 31, 2008 08:39 PMActually, she killed the bridge because ...
You're a liar.