-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
HEY GOAL - How about an invite for Sarah Palin?
- Thread starter USMA-82
- Start date
Like I said, it was a personal opinion, so I'll refrain from further comment on the topic, except one more...
But with all due respect, I fail to see how being mayor of a very small town in Alaska and being Governor of the same state for 20 months makes her more qualified to be President than the Dem combined ticket...and I can say I'm no fan of Obama. I think our current incumbent has demonstrated that being governor is no real guarantee of appropriate experience.
One GOP hack on ABC's This Week with George, when defending her as the pick despite her glaring lack of international relations experience, said she was more than qualified as she was, after all , the governor of the state nearest Russia!!!!!
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
While it's possible that those of us that have been exposed to the darker sides of politics take a more cynical view of such issues, IMO she's a mistake for McCain and a mistake for America. That is not a hit against her as a person, she's a fine person, just an opinion about her being ready to take that 3AM phone call that Russia has invaded Poland.
I'll say no more on this.
![[hmmm]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/009.gif "Hmm [hmmm]")
Too bad that's not the truth. Like 'em or not, you can't dismiss Biden's 35 years of senate experience. Palin may be the true conservative those who don't like McCain's moderate views (you know, the ones he had before he started running for President and realized he needed to appeal to the conservative base) wanted in order to pull the ticket closer to the right than the middle, but she's still easily as inexperienced as Obama. Rationalizing what she has done as Mayor or running some board as if it's a valid argument neither solves anything nor changes the facts. A little off point but still something I'm surprised I haven't heard many people talking about is how she was a member of the Alaska Independence Party, which calls for the secession of Alaska... which is all fine and good, but probably a bit embarrassing if your presidential campaign slogan is "country first."
Truth be told I'm wishing for a third, valid option. Obama's (obviously) WAY too left especially on the 2nd and McCain seems to have gone from an aisle crossing Mr. Moderate to pandering for far right votes which is a position of convenience I'm not too convinced by, but it's obvious somethings need some change from the way they're going now. Too bad the two party system is so firmly entrenched that isn't gonna happen anytime soon.
dwarven1
Lonely Mountain Arms
Sure I would. As for a puppet... have you read anything at all about her, or are you just reading moveon.org? She's gone after corruption in her own party - something that some Repubs are NOT happy about, too.
As for Joe Biden... that's the guy who AUTHORED the first AWB, and you think he'd be better? Pray tell, exactly WHAT has he done in terms of executive experience that makes you think he'd know what to do with power if he got his grubby paws on it? 30+ years of sucking off the public tit - has he ever even HELD a real job where he's had to WORK for a living? Sarah Palin has, unlike the entirety of the other ticket.
Well, I'm not thrilled that she's so pro-life, and frankly her position that creationism should be taught in school bothers me... but given the alternative? Nope, not worried at all.I'm frankly horrified that the GOP has tapped Palin to be the VP pick. Isn't anyone else worried about her being President!
I'll offer one person's opinion here:
Let's agree to leave names, hotness, personalities, parties out of the discussion I'm about to embark upon.
Legislators:
- Senators (and Reps) sit in on committees and offer opinions, vote on laws, etc. Many of these affect international relations/events.
- As close to "negotiating national policy" or "international relations" that they get (as an INDIVIDUAL) is to go on junket trips where they get paraded around in groups on our dime and feasted while making international headlines.
- All decisions are made as a "group", so when the SHTF on a decision they made, they all point in other directions.
- The nature of the job is 180 out of phase from "the buck stops here" mentality.
- They essentially live in DC (area) and rarely even know what is going on in their "own back yard" (the place they were voted to represent). They rely on underlings to report sanitized and boiled down info on what is bugging their constituents.
- They are subjected to huge "donations" by corporate interests and end up "playing ball" to get ahead or stay in the job.
- They are never held accountable for what goes wrong, but always take credit for things that turn out right . . . even though they were only 1 of 100 (or more in the House) that voted for it.
Mayors/Governors:
- Someone said "all politics is local" and it is as true today as it was when it was originally stated.
- These folks are directly accountable for decisions that they make.
- They are on "speed dial" from a lot of ORDINARY people who have opinions on what's going on around them.
- Small town/state politics at this level is intensely personal. Many of us have called our Mayor/Town Manager at home on some issue. This becomes less likely the larger the community is (wrt population, not area). We run into our leaders in local supermarkets, stores, gas stations, etc. They live in the neighborhoods that they manage, so they see (and hear) the impact daily.
- If someone tries to grease their palms, everyone and their brother hears about it almost immediately.
- You are in a perpetual "hot seat" and expected to perform, without 100s of "handlers" and TelePrompTers.
- They ARE the chief executive of their city/town/state! They may not negotiate with foreign leaders (it's not part of any job but that of the President), but they are as close as you can get to people who negotiate with diverse interest groups to get something to work. So, they understand the concepts, even though they all have to do OJT to learn the nuances of negotiating with foreign powers (who may have different social/cultural norms then Americans).
- "The buck really does stop here" for those actions that fall under their domain.
I hope this helps put some perspectives around the decision making and why Senators aren't usually elected to the Presidency, while Governors are oftentimes elected to the ultimate position.
Let's agree to leave names, hotness, personalities, parties out of the discussion I'm about to embark upon.
Legislators:
- Senators (and Reps) sit in on committees and offer opinions, vote on laws, etc. Many of these affect international relations/events.
- As close to "negotiating national policy" or "international relations" that they get (as an INDIVIDUAL) is to go on junket trips where they get paraded around in groups on our dime and feasted while making international headlines.
- All decisions are made as a "group", so when the SHTF on a decision they made, they all point in other directions.
- The nature of the job is 180 out of phase from "the buck stops here" mentality.
- They essentially live in DC (area) and rarely even know what is going on in their "own back yard" (the place they were voted to represent). They rely on underlings to report sanitized and boiled down info on what is bugging their constituents.
- They are subjected to huge "donations" by corporate interests and end up "playing ball" to get ahead or stay in the job.
- They are never held accountable for what goes wrong, but always take credit for things that turn out right . . . even though they were only 1 of 100 (or more in the House) that voted for it.
Mayors/Governors:
- Someone said "all politics is local" and it is as true today as it was when it was originally stated.
- These folks are directly accountable for decisions that they make.
- They are on "speed dial" from a lot of ORDINARY people who have opinions on what's going on around them.
- Small town/state politics at this level is intensely personal. Many of us have called our Mayor/Town Manager at home on some issue. This becomes less likely the larger the community is (wrt population, not area). We run into our leaders in local supermarkets, stores, gas stations, etc. They live in the neighborhoods that they manage, so they see (and hear) the impact daily.
- If someone tries to grease their palms, everyone and their brother hears about it almost immediately.
- You are in a perpetual "hot seat" and expected to perform, without 100s of "handlers" and TelePrompTers.
- They ARE the chief executive of their city/town/state! They may not negotiate with foreign leaders (it's not part of any job but that of the President), but they are as close as you can get to people who negotiate with diverse interest groups to get something to work. So, they understand the concepts, even though they all have to do OJT to learn the nuances of negotiating with foreign powers (who may have different social/cultural norms then Americans).
- "The buck really does stop here" for those actions that fall under their domain.
I hope this helps put some perspectives around the decision making and why Senators aren't usually elected to the Presidency, while Governors are oftentimes elected to the ultimate position.
kevin9
NES Member
Let me define what I consider relevant experience; "being in charge", CEO, chief executive, commander, governor, even mayor. Biden's 35 years, Obamarama's 4 (or 11 if you count state level), even McCain's 24 years on the legislative side don't count so much for me because they're not in the position of making the final decisions on much of anything that the president has to. Yes it counts as exposure, but not experience IMNSHO.
And, as a right-wing, conservative Republican I'm darn happy to be appeased, not so much because it feels good, but because it signals the potential in the future for the party to move away from the current centrist/RINO leadership and back to the right under new leadership.
The bottom line for me is that the new hack/old hack ticket of Obama bin Biden scares the crap out of me, so even a less than perfect old hack/young blood McCain/Palin choice is way better than the Dimmocrat choice.
And, as a right-wing, conservative Republican I'm darn happy to be appeased, not so much because it feels good, but because it signals the potential in the future for the party to move away from the current centrist/RINO leadership and back to the right under new leadership.
The bottom line for me is that the new hack/old hack ticket of Obama bin Biden scares the crap out of me, so even a less than perfect old hack/young blood McCain/Palin choice is way better than the Dimmocrat choice.
Yes, because we all know that being a career liberal/socialist political hack in the senate translates directly into deep foreign policy and executive experience.![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
-Mike
Opinion of a person's political views doesn't subtract from his/her overall experience - or lack thereof - in the arena, like it or not. Same goes for a Jesse Helms, Lott, McCain, Kennedy, etc. Palin by her own admission had little knowledge about Iraq, never mind overall foreign policy! Sensibility should overstep political leanings everyday of the week when we're talking about the people who could be leading us in some pretty shitty times.
Again, I'd just prefer a third option to either of what I see as substandard choices.
I am sure Palin will be making a stop in CT....she is "friends" with our Governor and you can bet they will be in Farfield/Litchfield county doing $5,000 dinners....
Similar threads
