Subscribe by RSS
Where are the Elizabeth Doles of today?
The question is actually anachronistic, as Elizabeth Dole is still active as a Senator, running for re-election in North Carolina. But after serving as a Secretary of Labor and Secretary of Transportation, Sen. Dole’s experience would not help in recasting the McCain Campaign as youthful (Dole is 72 years old as well).
The Republican Party is not short of experienced female politicians. In the Senate there is Kay Bailey Hutchinson, the most senior female Republican senator from Texas, or Olympia Snowe, serving her second term in the Senate for Maine. Hutchinson is 65 years old and Snowe is 61 years old, but young enough to be among the The White House Project’s 8 female presidential picks of ‘08. Both Hutchinson and Snowe would have reinforced the moderate image in the McCain ticket. Hutchinson has consistetly refused to outlaw abortion and has advocated gun control. Snowe is also a moderate, most recently known for her actions in the Gang of 14 that forged a compromise between Republicans and Democrats.
But in this race of identity politics, one of the heavy criticisms by pundits and myself has been the candidates’ lack of executive experience. Neither Joe Biden, Barack Obama, or John McCain have served in an executive position. Fortunately, there are a few experienced female Republican Governors as well. Gov. Linda Lingle of Hawaii and M. Jodi Rell of Connecticut are both enjoying their second terms in office. But neither of them possessed what the McCain campaign was looking for, namely a youthful, ardent, yet staunchly conservative image for the Republican Party. So who could fill this position?
The McCain campaign will say it the answer lies in Sarah Palin, the newly minted Governor of Alaska. After serving as a mayor for Wasilla city, a small town of 6,000 people in Alaska (1992-1996), Palin beat out the Republican incumbent to become Alaska’s first female governor 18 months ago.
At issue with Palin’s nomination is her voter-attraction rating, which has its pluses and minuses. In respects to policies, she is an attractive choice for the disgruntled conservatives who feel McCain is too much of a maverick, and in the realm of identity politics she can appeal to a younger generation and disgruntled women, many of whom are still reeling from Hillary Clinton’s loss.
Yet, in naming Palin, McCain has removed some of the power and force behind his own candidacy. As a 72 year old Presidential candidate, McCain is the oldest to seek the office of the presidency, making Sarah Palin a more than possible replacement. McCain’s open endorsement of Palin for presidency removes his ability to criticize Obama’s lack of experience (who has spent ten years in the Illinois Senate and four years in the U.S senate).
According to Dan Balz of the Washington Post on August 29, 2008:
One Republican strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to offer a candid view, said in an e-mail, “I would rather be arguing with conservatives about abortion than with the Democrats about a lack of experience on our own ticket.”
“She really destroys the ‘not ready’ mantra,” another strategist noted.
And in reviewing Palin’s credentials, her policies as well as experience may turn off a wide variety of voters. Among Palin’s more conservative views is being a strong supporter of:
* teaching Creationism in schools.
* the Pro-Life agenda
* Drilling for oil and use of fossil fuels (see her rejection of McCain’s stance)
- She is also firmly against Man-Made Global Warming (she sued the U.S Department of Interior for placing the polar bear down as an endangered species)
Palin is a fresh face for an old campaign that was suffering the challenge of a new and youthful Democratic opposition (in fact, you can see a fashion image of her in the February 2008 edition of Vogue magazine). And at 44 years old, Palin is older than previous notable Vice Presidents such as Richard Nixon at 40 years old or Teddy Roosevelt, who was 42 years old (the youngest Vice President was John Breckinridge, who was 36 years old).
In respects to legislation, Palin mirrors John McCain in ethics reform, working as Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (2003-2004) and filing official complaints against the Alaskan Republican Party Chair Randy Ruedrich and former Alaskan Attorney General Gregg Renkes. Both officials resigned due in a large part to Palin’s disclosure of their misconduct. She has also tangled with some of the big oil companies, raising oil revenues for her home state.
But it is not her political experience that makes Palin the choice among choices for the McCain campaign. It is her image. Both young and dedicated to ethics reform, Palin also embodies many of the principles of the Republican Party. Palin has never divorce, having married her high school sweetheart, and embraced her five pregnancies, the last being a boy born with Down’s syndrome in in April of this year. The only dent to her familial armor is the recent scandal involving Palin getting her ex-brother-in-law fired.
In the end, it will come down to policies vs. identity politics. Which one will trump the other, remains to be seen.
(7 votes, average: 4.43 out of 5)
Loading ...Visit the You Decide 2008 Store »
Being a Captain in the Navy is executive experience.
I’m afraid McCain’s experience in the Navy does not qualify as executive experience in respects to a national office (or at least, any more so than being President of the Harvard Law Review).
Hey Michael,
How come there was nothing about Biden’s baggage and benefits when he was picked?
Good commentary Michael, thank you for giving us readers an inside look at Sarah Palin.
When it comes to the lack of executive experience I do agree that none of the candidates have what it takes to be president. This really had been a shallow election season when it comes to executive experience. Being a Senator and writing laws is much different than running a state government.
As for Sarah Palin, does she not bring to Washington the “change” that Barack swears he will bring? Yesterday I finally had that moment that I have been waiting for this whole election season, excitement! Finally conservatives have a voice and it’s a woman. She’s our Obama.
also michael you say her pro-life agenda will be a turn off to people??
The majority of the country is pro-life so that statement does not make sense.
O_S where do you get your facts that most of the country is pro-life? I would have thought that most of the country would be pro-choice.
Being pro-choice doesn’t make you a baby killer, it’s respecting the right of a woman (and man) to make a choice without feeling guilty about making that choice. What would you say or do to a 14 year old girl who was gang raped and ended up pregnant? that she has to keep the baby?!?!?!
I didn’t post a commentary on Biden since he was already vette quite well during the Democratic primay.
Conservative Gal– I am impressed with Palin’s accomplishments. You were right about Hillary winning over Ohio, but I think I can cash in on you supporting McCain due to his VP pick.
I don’t believe McCain solely picked Palin on her accomplishments as there’s far more people who’ve accomplished far more. The fact that she’s a woman, is pro-life with a downs child and has a son who’s about to go to Iraq are non-coincidental coincidences for McCains VP pick that will gain him extra support.
“teaching Creationism in schools.”
Yes, lets brainwash our children with fairytales in stead of techning them math and history.
JUST SAY NOBAMA !!!
Oh stop whining Democrats … for the past year, you’ve been trying every trick in the book to shove an inexperienced, empty suit, Barack Hussein Obama, down the throats of Americans. Sure, maybe you sweetened the bad taste by adding pretty speeches, big swooning crowds, and fireworks … but, you still tried to shove him down our throats, at every opportunity. Democrats, it was a lot easier to highjack the primary election than it’s going to be with the general election. Looks like America is going to elect McCain/Palin for President and V.P.. And, that means: No Wright, no Farrakahn, no Ayers, no Rezko, no mean Michelle, and, NOBAMA !!!
I can’t wait to see the debate between Palin and Biden. He is going to wipe the floor with her. I also don’t feel comfortable knowing that someone with such little experience is next in line for president if McCain (in his 70’s) should die of old age in office. Pretty scary stuff.
The_don,
First off you got it all wrong. Palin is going to do much better than Biden in the debate stop with your liberal bs there. Secondly Palin has been in government longer than Obama and she has more experience than him. Thirdly I would rather have a president with experience (McCain) rather than a candidate for president with no experience(Obama).You cant bringup the experience part about Palin when your presidential leftwing candidate is really inexperienced.
being the mayor of an alaskan town of 6500 people is not experience. the only thing she had to worry about is if there was enouph snow on the ground for her husbands sled race. And the only reason mccain picked palin is political not because of anything she can offer. he is only seeking to pick up hillary voters and try to show he is not attached to bush’s hip.
Regarding Polar Bears.
When an animal is on the endangered species list it is a punishable offense to kill it, even in self defense. Palin has gone hunting in the Alaskan wild and she knows the danger of polar bears. Making them an endangered species is condemning hunters to death or hefty criminality.
Regarding Drilling in ANWR.
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a tiny section of Alaska, which is environmentally identical to vast tracks of Alaskan wilderness. Additionally, there is nothing spectacular about the area. It is just normal arctic tundra, which is the technical term for frozen wasteland.
These are not real issues, so much as they are emotional wedges levered against her personally.
On a more lighthearted side of her polar bear stance. Maybe she is just trying to save the baby seals.
You people are to funny, your talking about how the republicans have a VP who is to inexperienced and your scared she might have to step in for McCain because hes old. YOUR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IS INEXPERIENCED TO SO YOUR ARGUMENT DOES NOT WORK YOU STUPID LIBERALS!!!
O.S.
It shows the Hypocrisy. And the ignorance of this Hypocrisy is just amazing. You all attacked Obama on every single type of angle possible on his experience. McCain has made attacks on this experience as well. Where you all just being assholes all this time? And didn’t believe this?
Because that is the only explanation for how you all could be excited about someone who is just as bad. It goes against what every argument you all have been raising for months. Now you all are trying to twist how her little experience is allegedly better than Obama’s little experience. But using your logic it shouldn’t matter if you think one is just a hair better than the other. I’m hearing 1.5 year of executive experience is better than all of Obama’s, alaska is closer to russia so there goes her international experience. (No joke Cindy McCain said this and Fox news in the morning made the same case i can show youtube links if you want)I mean come on. All of this from the people who have made the claim that Obama has no track record? Now McCain says “She is ready to be president right now!” ??? I mean the effort to not be seen as Hypocrites is Amazing.
Thanks O_S for your insightful responses and satirical wit, you never cease to amaze me
I am of course being sarcastic
Hmmm! If Palin were a guy and looked like McCain, how qualified would he be to be Prez? Just goes to show you there’s no fool like an old fool.
It really is the biggest flip flop of the decade, isn’t it? A week ago Obama wasn’t qualified to be president. Now he is
How exciting
Some people just don’t mean anything they say. Like every single republican on TV or radio in the past year. They all thought Obama was qualified the whole time, the assholes just wanted to fill me with doubt. I really really despise partisan politics.
Their Hypocrisy and Ignorance has no bounds. They have no shame at all. The V.P. isn’t the actual candidate argument is a load of bull too. Because this is what they said about John Edwards when he was running for V.P.
Mitt Romney (Washington Times, July 15, 2004):
He doesn’t personally dislike Mr. Kerry: “I find him to be a personable fellow,” Mr. Romney told me in a recent interview. But Mr. Kerry is too liberal, he says, as is his boyish-looking running mate, John Edwards. Mr. Romney says the North Carolina freshman senator is too inexperienced to be vice president - let alone only an incident away from the presidency.”
President Bush (Washington Times, July 8, 2004)
President Bush yesterday criticized Sen. John Edwards for blocking his judicial nominations and bluntly dismissed the one-term North Carolina Democrat as too inexperienced to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Asked by a reporter how the 51-year-old senator would “stack up” against Vice President Dick Cheney - a five-term congressman who served under three presidents and was secretary of defense during the 1991 Persian Gulf War - Mr. Bush replied: “Dick Cheney can be president. Next.”
Republican National Committee (AP, July 7, 2004):
The Republican National Committee (RNC) dispensed with niceties and unveiled a lengthy report on Senator Edwards highlighting his lack of political and national security experience.
Now look at what those exact same people have to say about McCain’s VP pick.
Mitt Romney (Boston Hearld, August 29, 2008)
Former Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney - considered a leading contender for John McCain’s running mate - praised the Arizona senator’s surprise pick today, saying Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s story is “inspiring.â€
“She’s a Washington outsider with a commitment to the conservative principles that will make our nation stronger. I look forward to campaigning for Senator McCain, Governor Palin and Republicans all across the country,â€
http://www.bostonherald.c.....Palin_pick
President Bush ( Channel 2 news Alaska 8-29-2008)
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — President George Bush has joined the chorus praising Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
In a statement released from the White House this morning, the president called Sen. John McCain’s decision “exciting.”
“Gov. Palin is a proven reformer who is a wise steward of taxpayer dollars and champion for accountability in government. Gov. Palin’s success is due to her dedication to principle and her roll-up-your-sleeves work ethic and serves as a wonderful example of the spirit of America. By selecting a working mother with a track record of getting things done, Sen. McCain has once again demonstrated his commitment to reforming Washington.”
Bush went on to say McCain’s choice is just one more reason he believes Americans can trust him to lead the country.
http://www.ktuu.com/globa.....?s=8922800
Republican National Committee (GOP.com 8-29-2008)
RNC Chairman Applauds Selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as Vice Presidential Nominee
Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Robert M. “Mike†Duncan released the following statement U.S. Senator John McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his vice presidential nominee: “I applaud John McCain’s selection of Governor Sarah Palin, whose commitment to reform and record of bipartisanship is exactly what our country needs. I am confident that this team will continue to keep America safe and make our nation more prosperous.â€
http://www.gop.com/News/N.....1a093349c8
They were disingenuous as all hell.
This has to be the biggest collective group flip flop I have ever seen This isn’t just one person flip flopping but it is all of the Republican media talking heads, talk radio and the whole damn party!
Instead of talking about how full of bull they were all of this time they deflect the argument to a comparison of Obama’s experience to justify the decision. Which has nothing to do with the point. The only relevance Obama’s experience has in this discussion is how his experience was allegedly inadequate or non existent all of this time until now. You will see this tactic over and over again.
Look, opinions are like assholes.. we all have them.. mine just smells better than everyone elses. lol.. seriously It makes no sense in why mccain chose palin. I think its only to win voters who may have been more likely to go dem. She doesn’t have the experience needed to be in the white house. She even said herself that she didn’t even know what a vice president does. I mean come on, its sloppy politics and mccain is going to get nothing out of it.
Palin is the choice that will win the election. She has more experience than Obama. the_don, to say her experience is as a mayor is ignorance. She’s the only Govenor on either ticket, including McCain. Stop whining dems, you lose this time.
Now I’m back to Gustav, I have family in harms way.
Later.
I’m sorry to hear that babs, what are they doing still there?! Not that it matters. Best of luck to then in getting them to safety, at least its down to cat2
Babs you all can stretch and twist that her experience is more than Obama’s all you want. She just got a passport for the first time in her life just in 2007. But this still does not take away from the fact that this amount of experience is what you all have said disqualifies Obama from being president. While McCain says she is ready to be president right now. Obama has also been vetted over 20 months in one on one interviews around the world, over 20 national debates so more people felt more comfortable with him. Maybe the argument would be more valid if this was when Obama first announced he was running for president. But this has come a long way since then. And for argument sakes lets say she does have more experience than Obama. It still would not place her out of the realm of you and the Republicans own logic which was applied to Obama being too inexperienced.
It just goes to show that everything is ok as long as it’s done in the name of the GOP
Here is a benefit that Michael forgot to add.
Palin’s strong point being Energy agrees with McCain that the War is for Oil.
Gov. Palin says War is for Oil
“We are a nation at war and in many [ways] the reasons for war are fights over energy sources, which is nonsensical when you consider that domestically we have the supplies ready to go.”
This is on page 2 of the interview. Nice interview. She also says Obama is smart to not take money for Lobbyist. Funny GOP still tried to claim that he does. She also has had no involvement with lobbyist which is good.
http://www.businessweek.c.....272692.htm
That is the interview. She and McCain have one thing in common. They have both believe the War is for Oil.
Remember when McCain said this ?
““My Friends I will have an energy policy which we will be talking about which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.â€
Here is John McCain saying it live at a town hall meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/wa.....cA7kAkvKGI
A Gaffe is when you actually say something which you believe by accident. The Hell fire came under McCain ass so fast about this he backtracked from his comments, denying that he meant to imply that the Iraq war was fought over oil.
McCain explains away this Gaffe right here.
http://elections.foxnews......ification/
McCain says war is for Oil.
Palin says war is for oil.
Greenspan says war is for oil.
3 people who had 3 different strong points come to the same conclusion!
Oh man this is right on Home base. Karl Rove is attacking Tim Kaine as being possible V.P. he talks about how small of a town Richmond, Virginia is the town he was a mayor of which is 10 times the size of the town Palin was a mayor of then attacks Tim Kaine’s executive experience which is twice as long as Palin! saying that He is too inexperienced to be vice president and picking him would be for political gain!
http://www.youtube.com/wa.....I&NR=1
If we apply our new founded logic He would be an excellent v.p. pick because he has more experience than everyone and executive experience no matter how small trumps all!
This has to go down in the Guinness book of world records and biggest collective ignored hypocrisy of all time!
I would rather have an intelligent president. A foolish man with under par experiences doesn’t bring the kind of experience I expect. Obama is very intelligent and he has proven how capable he is. I didn’t like him initially, but every time I listen to him, he doesn’t fail to show how smart he is. A smart inexperienced person will make better decisions than a person intellectually sub par. And by the way, McCain confesses his bottom of the class performance. Also Obama did graduate from top school, Havard with Juris Magna Cumlaude. He has my vote.
Please don’t tell me that there’s Republican flip-floppers, surely that title is only given to Democrats, so say the Republicans…LOL
Palin is the only governor present on a ticket, but this experience does not count. How hard is it to be a governor, I mean Arnold Swarzanegger is a governor, what was his previous experience……..The Terminator. He also was a body builder. So if you are a body builder or beauty queen, then you can be a governor. Also lets not forget that she was the mayor of Wasilla, Alaska with pop est. at 9000. SHE LEFT THE CITY WITH $20 MILLION DOLLAR DEFECIT- FOR CHANGES THAT SHE FELT WAS NECESSARY!!!! Sound familiar? Bush is leaving office with a TRILLION dollar defecit.On Fox News, Huckabee just stated that her experience as the head of the PTA was better than all of OBAMA’s 14 years in public office. Ok PTA vs U.S. and state Senator!!! I can not side with the GOP on this, they have obviously lost their minds. I AM VOTING DEMOCRAT!!!!
Again, I need to stress that Palin DOES NOT have more political experience than Obama. Obama served 10 years in the Illinois Senate and 4 years as a U.S Senator.
Palin served 6 years as a mayor and 1.5 years as a Governor. Please, people, I do not mind us debating about governor experience versus senator experience, but 14 years is not less than 7.5.
I think Arnie would’ve been a better VP pick.
Indi, thanks for the wishes. When I said I had family in harms way, I meant their homes - they evacuated of course. Both my sister and my nephew lost their homes in Katrina. My sister is in New Iberia, La., she lives on the Vermillion Bayou that flooded and took her home in Katrina. We’ll see today maybe if her new home is safe, there’s not much coming out of there yet, and they were in the line of the eye. The best info I can get is the Vermillion will crest sometime this afternoon. My nephew lives in New Orleans, I think they really dodged the bullet on this one. Thanks again for the good wishes.
I think bond_Dallas brings up an excellent point. Mere experience doesn’t necessarily mean that you will be a good leader - it takes intelligence and good judgement as well. However, mere intelligence doesn’t mean you will make a good leader either. There are many smart people who make terrible leaders. Values, good judgement, leadership ability, experience, etc. should all be taken into consideration when deciding who to vote for.
This whole business of Republicans flip-flopping is absurd. Experience alone does not determine whether or not you’d make a good President, nor were most Republicans claiming so. Dreadson, you make is sound as if the only reason anyone is voting against Obama is his lack of experience. That is most definitely not my main concern with Obama - his leftist agenda, socialist ideals and policies, and lack of patriatism come way before that. Then, add to the list his lack of experience and foreign policy naievette, and he is one scary candidate.
Palin’s relative lack of experience is, of course, a concern to be considered carefully. But what Republicans are saying is that IN SPITE OF her relative inexperience, her strong conservative policies, core family values, concrete achievements she’s achieved thus far, and strong leadership skills show that she is a wonderful candidate. She is the change and the breath of fresh air Washington needs - a change towards the fundamental ideals and values upon which our country was founded and that which makes us great. This is what we need, not change in the direction of socialist policies that will weaken our nation even more.
As an ironic sidenote, Palin has more executive expereince, meaning experience in running either a business or a government, than either Obama, Biden, or even McCain. Interesting.
Kevin
I was not talking about you in particular. There are some people out there who actually don’t like Obama for the policies he stands for. We need more people to voice that opinion. But lets not present the case that people using some reason like yourself (some) was the huge part of the political campaign against him. Experience was yelled across the roof tops from every talking head on TV, radio and internet websites for months. There were many statements made by high officials and the RNC making the case that lack of experience disqualifies. Instead of pointing at some of his scary policies we heard a lot of analogies of the fear of letting someone with lack of experience in office. I would have thought all of his policies were just fine but it was just a lack of experience if i was to take everything at face value. Lack of patriotism. Well if you are subscribing to the flag pins, won’t say the pledge and grouping that along with the reason of his bad policies. hard to argue that being that it is part of perception. Off of perception we can create anyone to have lack of patriotism. Even McCain doesn’t deny Obama that. Now with Palin everyone wants to talk about the policy, the rhetoric and what someone stands for. Which is what a lot of Obama supporters were trying to get him to be judge on all along. But all these analogies of how a lack of experience trumps all argument. Nice to see that we can look past experience now that someone on the other ticket also doesn’t have much either. It is still Hypocrisy.
Dreadson,
Don’t worry, I don’t take your attacks personally.
Of course Obama’s lack of experience was a huge part of the campaign against him - it’s a huge concern. But it is ridiculous to say that if you took the campaign at face value the only thing you would remember about Obama is his inexperience. Some other huge concerns about Obama include Jerimiah Wright and his foreign policies, not to mention his health care policy and wanting to give illegal immigrants drivers licenses. These were also covered, and unless you weren’t following the campaign anyone should also remember those.
But again, OF COURSE his inexperience was (AND STILL IS) a big issue. And it was across both party lines! There were plenty of democrats who denounced Obama for his lack of experience!! (Biden and Hillary to name a few.) You want to talk hypocrisy? Now Hillary fully supports Obama and says he is ready, and Biden is his Vice Presidential nominee!
It is asinine to assume that only conservatives were hypocrites here, or even that most Republican spokesmen meant that his inexperience was the biggest issue on the table or that mere inexperience immediately disqualifies a candidate; I believe they meant that, along with a host of other things, this also was something to be immensely concerned about. And it certainly is something to be concerned about in Palin. But her other qualities, I believe, trump her inexperience enough for me to trust her as a candidate, while Obama’s merely serve to enhance the concern of his inexperience and and show that he would not serve in the best interests of our country.
I agree, Kevin, and the Democrats now screaming gotcha because of Palin’s limited experience makes them look even more foolish. Obama isn’t running against Palin, he’s still running against John McCain.
That being said - who’s judgment would I trust between Obama and Palin? Palin.
Look guys I don’t think any of you who have been voicing concerns about McCain were going to be swayed by his VP pick anyway.
The truth is Biden and Hillary slammed Obama on the inexperience long before the Republican’s started and Kevin is right those who were doing it have been bought off (Hillary with her campaign bills and Biden with the VP spot) and now don’t have any issue with his experience. Remember how Hillary negotiated with the Obama camp over how and when she would endorse him ? She came out after he agreed to pay her bills. I added that to my reason’s not to vote for Obama then. Here we had a man promoting change and a new Washington then he gets punked into paying Hillary’s bills, come on guys.
The real issue for you guys or the Democrats is that McCain took your ability to use statements his Republican competitors made about him off the table when he picked Palin. You have no disparaging comments about McCain which came from Palin.
I would also seriously ask you this question. Who really has the most experience. Seriously now set politics
aside and be objective please.
I read today that Palin, in being the Governor of Alaska, oversaw a state operating budget of 660 million, 18 state departments and 25,000 state employees. We also know that as governor she was involved in the budget issues, bill signings (and the negotiations)and all the other stuff that goes with running a state.
Do you honestly believe that 4 years in the Illinois senate commanded that much management and oversight ? + 2 years in the U.S. senate before he hit the campaign trail. I don’t diminish the fact that both of those positions are important and that Obama is an intelligent man but do you really believe 1 senator out of 100 carries the responsibility that a governor dose ?
So are you saying Palin’s got more experience than McCain on an executive level then Todd?
LOL, the last few responses and the lack of responses from the dems that were bashing conservatives of their flip flop on inexperience has just made me seriously LOL in real life.
Seriously guys, try to keep the insanely hilarious moments out of these forums because I might get fired for looking at this website during downtimes at work after going on another laughing spree like I just went on.
Todd, excellent response. I am going to send your response and the url to this article to my e-mail so I can bring it up any time someone talks about inexperience and the conservatives flip flopping on this issue.
You can’t compare Obama’s experience or use him as a model because the logic applied was that he is too inexperienced to be president. Therefore you can’t use him to justify why someone is experienced. That is the argument which some Obama supporters used when comparing him to PAST presidents who had less experience than him. Unless you are saying that he was experienced enough all along so anyone who is better in comparison is therefore by default qualified. If so then you have a good point.
There are some Democrats who said that he was too inexperienced but it was not they who were in the position to set an example or practice what they preach. A couple of people in a debate have said this and Hilary’s campaign ran on this for a while. Hilary herself flip flopped because they started campaigning in Texas that he would be a good Vice president. And people called them out on that immediately. This killed their inexperience argument because they ran this argument for so long then later said he was okay to be one heartbeat away from being the president. But this argument was used in a campaign to sway voters. In the end it was the voters who decided. To say that this is a parallel to McCain’s pick would be to say that the voters who supported Obama in the primaries are Hypocrites or flip floppers. When they themselves were not the ones who made this claim. Nor was it them who were in a position to make a selection based off of the bar which they set.
http://www.youtube.com/wa.....Ckppx0gIE0
How can you undermine the standard which you set?
Unless you feel 18 months of executive Governor experience makes the argument of hypocrisy irrelevant.
If that what it is?
Dreadsen,
You are missing the point completely. What we are saying is that experience alone does not automatically qualify or disqualify a candidate. It is one thing, of many, to be seriously considered when deciding whether or not a candidate would make a good leader for the position he is running.
You are so stuck on whether or not Republicans claimed obama was too inexperienced to be President, when in fact his inexperience was ONLY ONE of the reasons they said he shouldn’t be. ONE of the reasons. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy of your criticisms and the absurdity of your argument; that you accuse Republicans of being hypocrites for choosing someone with relative inexperience while condemning Obama for his, when in fact by your standards many Democrats would be even more hypocritical for being derisive of Obama’s inexperience and then completely reversing their opinions OF THE SAME PERSON’S CHARACTER AND APTITUDE!!
nz, actually, yes, technically Palin’s got more experience than McCain on an executive level. Ironic, eh?
Babs, good point. Here’s a question: who’s judgment would you trust more between Palin and McCain?
Todd - Thanks for the stats; great point.
Obama has actually said that he has more experiece than Palin because he has run a campaign for the last 2 years…you have got to be kidding me. That’s like someone saying they have CEO experience because they applied for and interviewed for several CEO positions. Great logic.
They should give illegals drivers licenses.. because in order to get a drivers license you have to have insurance. so therefore if i get hit by an illegal i won’t have to fix my car out of my own pocket.. BRILLIANT
Kevin
If you are talking about people who campaigned against him and then changed their opinions all political parties are responsible for that. Lets look at Mitt Romney’s stance on McCain and many of the attacks he leveled against him and how he reversed his opinion. Or hell lets look at some of the opinions of some of the other candidates who were running against McCain. This is something that is always done in politics. Putting their differences aside and aligning for the general principles which they all support. And This has nothing to do with the argument of experience either.
So before i go any further let me ask you. Are you saying that the Republicans ran this campaign against him with multiple slices of a pie evenly cut and experience was only one of them? And that inexperience wasn’t a very very Major argument?
Todd and I are both off with Obama’s legislative experience (I had thought it was 10 years in the Illinois Senate). Barack Obama served the Illinois State Senate from 1996-2004, when he retired and became a U.S Senator. So he had 8 years as a State Senator and 4 years as a U.S Senator.
But this, like Babs says, does not put away the problem of comparing a VP to a P nominee. Also, as Todd puts it, McCain’s nominating of Palin obscures any ability to discredit any of the presidential candidates on the basis of experience, since Palin and Obama both have short resumes.
Governor experience, in my opinion, comes closer to resembling presidential experience, save for the issue of foreign relations (which you can get in congressional experience, or long-term governorship). However, Palin has only been on board for about 18 months, so her term as Governor is quite short– not even halfway through her first term. People were crying foul to allowing Obama to use his experience as a U.S Senator since it was close/overlapping with his campaigning (he had been a U.S Senator for only 2 years before hitting the campaign trails). The same logic applies for Palin — but then, I am comparing apples and oranges again.
Dreadsen,
I am not arguing the matter of experience, and whether or not it should disqualify a candidate. Nor am I trying to address the issue of how candidates “put their differences aside and align for the general principles which they all support.” (I know this has nothing to do with the arument of experience, by the way. You brought the issue up, not me.) These issues are definitely worth discussing, but when I merely use them as examples, you again miss my point.
I am addressing the issue of you accusing Republicans of being hypocrites for choosing a VP candidate with relatively little experience when they criticized Obama for his inexperience. What struck me was the IRONY OF YOUR HIPOCRISY in ignoring the fact that Obama was also denounced for his inexperience by members of his own party, who now have also seemed to change their opinions.
In other words, your criticism, as only pertaining to Republicans, is baseless and in itself hipocritical.
Dreadsen,
As pertaining to how Republicans took Obama’s inexperience: Of course they made it into a big issue - politicians will always press any and every advantage they have against their opponent. But it wasn’t the only issue they pressed, either. Democrats, will, can, and are trying to use Palin’s inexperience against her as well - and they have every right to, because it IS A CONCERN AND AN ISSUE. But the defense against it is that her other qualities trump her inexperience; and Barack’s other concerns, as I stated earlier, merely while Obama’s merely serve to enhance the concern of his inexperience and and show that he would not serve in the best interests of our country.
Kevin
How did i ignore this when i spelled it out with Hilary. read my post. There was a lot of gloating by the Obamabots when Hilary’s camp decided to campaign in Texas about Obama being V.P. because it showed their Hypocrisy. This was not ignored. This was pointed out and addressed when it happened and i just brought it up in my last couple of posts.I also brought it up when it happened. So there is no Hypocrisy there. And there was no need to bring up THEIR hypocrisy for this discussion because their flip flop has nothing to do with the Republicans. By the way I am not a democrat or a liberal. Read the Ron Paul thread. For all we know most or all of Hilary’s supporters May be voting for McCain.
Their flip flop was saying Obama was too inexperienced then saying that he would be good on the ticket.
The McCain camp and the bulk of Republicans flip flop was saying that Obama was too inexperienced. Even using the same analogy of Gov. Kaine’s executive experience as being too futile to be one step away from being president. I mean right now in the RNC they were just talking about this is not an election for on the job training.
The first link is a good neutral site—the other two is about
experience
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
http://i4.ytimg.com/vi/WQ.....efault.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/wa.....re=related
What is the population of the state Alaska? What is the population of the city of Chicago? How about the state of Illinois? I think things are all relative. She has to answer to a state with a few hundred thousand people and he answers to a state of millions.
Even aside from that, the Republicans need to state what they are going to do to change things and not just adopt the Democrats campaign slogan under the gise of “sharing ideas”.
With all this talk about who has the most experience Obama himself said he didn’t feel he would have enough experience to run for president in 2008. So there you go. Hillary, Biden and Obama himself all said the same thing.