More Thoughts on Palin
I've been doing some more reflecting on Gov. Palen...
I get why he took her. It's a threefold decision:
1. She's got the "reformer" label
1. She's a woman and may poach Clinton supporters
3. She's very conservative
That said, I don't think she'll pull away many Clinton voters. Hillary Clinton will be on television is weekend, if not next, running down Sarah Palin. Ideologically, she's very much so anti-Clinton and only a small margin of Clinton supporters will be so irate that they'll vote against their own politics.
Also, she is way not qualified in any way, shape, or form. You can say Obama is risky based on his qualifications, but he was an organizer in a large city, eight years as a congressman in the Illinois Senate, and four years as a U.S. senator. That's not shabby. He also spent years as a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago and was president of the Harvard Law Review. Obama may not have executive experience, but he's certainly accomplished a lot in his life.
Compare Obama's experience to Palin's:
1. She served two terms on the Wasilla City Council (population 6,000)
2. She served six years as mayor of Wasilla (population 6,000)
3. She served one year as Ethics Commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
4. She served two years as governor of Alaska (population 683,500)
That's not much experience at all. At all.
The city of Nashville, where I live, has a population almost three times the size of Alaska. The city of Washington, DC where she'll move if elected has a metro population of 5.4 million, almost seven times the population of Alaska. The defense by the McCain folks is that she has executive experience by being the Commander-in-Chief of the Alaska National Guard.
She's really, really, super-dooper, inexperienced. Paul Begala of CNN wrote, "In choosing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate he is not thinking "outside the box," as some have said. More like out of his mind." He's not far off the mark.
At the end of the day, I don't know if Palin has any business being a heartbeat away from the Presidency. Libby Dole or Kay Bailey Hutchinson would have been better female GOP candidates. If selecting a VP is the first real decision a potential president must make... Let's just say I'd hate to see his other decisions.
Labels: McCain, veepstakes
posted by Thunder Jones @ 2:09 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
It would be kind of jacked up if the Dems went after Palin's level of experience. Whenever pundits went after Obama's inexperience, the retort was always that this was a diversionary tactic meant to draw people's attention away from substantive matters. And, that it was the "old way" of doing politics. Now, when they see an opportunity to turn the tables, they're going to seize on the very tactics they've been criticizing? Also, it seems kind of off to me to figure Alaska's population base into this discussion. A state with a smaller population can still face complex problems. Isn't Alaska at the forefront of a lot of the hotbutton energy and ecological debates of our time?
I think experience matters. Obama has always cast his experience as unconventional experience: community organizer, legal scholar, and legislator. Even though he didn't spend 30 years in the Senate, he had 8 years as a legislator in Illinois plus his Senate term. He also had real experience struggling with legal issues and the problems that blight communities.
Palin, in comparison, has little experience. Running a town of 6,000 does not count. It just doesn't. It would be far more difficult to run a junior college. I'm not counting it as substantial experience. Fighting property taxes for a city of 6,000 (is that techincally a city or a village?) is not an anti-tax crusade.
Alaska is at the front of a lot of issues, but those issues are largely national issues, not state issues. The state has no say over the national parks that encompass much of Alaska.
I think population really does matter with these things because population adds complexity.
If McCain's age wasn't such a looming factor, I think he could get away with this one, but she's way less qualified than Dan Quayle was in 1988.
Potatoes.
Thunder, are you sure all this just isn't about Palin being a woman, and the fact that deep down you really wouldn't trust a woman to run the country?
Just kidding. She does have 5 children and works full time, which requires some skillza.
With regard to Obama's experience, I think it's helpful to note that he defeated the Clinton political machine: he's got the chops. Oh, and he was right about Iraq. Being qualified for the presidency has little to do with the length of your tenure in Washington, it has to do with your grasp of policy and your judgment. Obama has proven in record time that he is capable. John McCain has been in Washington for decades and has repeatedly demonstrated he doesn't understand what is actually happening in the war he champions.
Oh, Dr. Tom...really? Do you think if Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic nomination -- she almost did! -- that Thunder would be pondering John McCain because he has a penis? Really?
Bonus trivia factoid of the day: John McCain is 23 years older than the State of Alaska.
Ultimately, it's really about opportunism and hypocrisy, and this is politics - how surprising. I find the candidates and supporters to be so on both sides, both near and far.
I like Thunder. But notice how your tune, Thunder, has changed to accentuate Obama's experience. Before the inexperience was a good thing because it represented a change from politics as usual. Now Palin is the inexperienced buffoon, but you don't laud her position as a new beginning to the political machine. Obama has "unconventional experience". Palin identifies with the normal American as the wife of blue collar. Yada Yada.
It's all a flip flop battle of image, and you guys are part of the joke. The reason I especially loathe Obama about it is that he was the first to proclaim he was some sort of revolutionary of the political scene and that's his main "motto" of his campaign. Change. No. You're not. He's politics as usual. It's a pitch. Isn't it obvious?
This post has been removed by the author.
With all due respect, I don't think I've ever claimed that lack of Washington experience is a good thing.
I like Obama because of his experience. I think the work he did prior to entering politics is critically important to reviving the middle class and understanding the real struggles in the country.
Obama spent 3 years as a community organizer, his law career is largely as a civil rights attorney, and he spent 12 years lecturing law in one of the best law schools in the nation. He's got 12 years as a legislator in the book. I can't imagine better experience to rebuild the country after the past 8 years of decay.
If a Washington insider like Russ Feingold had run, I would have probably backed him over Obama. It's a focus on rebuilding civil rights after the Bush experience, ending torture, diplomacy over threats, creating a fair system for health insurance, progressive taxation, curbing poverty, and responding to the climate crisis that push me towards Obama.
Palin's real lack of experience does bother me, a lot. McCain's age matters in this thing. VPs have become president 9 times in US history. She was an ordinary jane. She got involved in politics from the PTA to the city council to the mayorship to the governorship. That's inspiring, but until she became governor, it was all part-time work. I don't think a drop of her experience counts prior to being governor. A lot of conservative folks like her because she is ideologically very conservative, but that's not a credential either.
I don't like Obama because he isn't experienced; I like him because I think his experience uniquely qualifies him.
Good points, Thunder, but we're speaking on two different levels. I can appreciate getting into the meat of matters on the issues, and I appreciate how thorough and involved you are but from an overarching perspective, I don't see anything in the political landscape changing. Obama promises this, but it's a sell. It still is and will be about self-interest and power. Obama wants power. Maybe he wants less and/or hides it better than the Royal Families of Bush and Clinton, but he does. And I'm sure Palin does, too. My point with her is that simply when she came into view you didn't accentuate her possibilites at renewing the political scene like you did Obama, even though she has that same sort of appeal (sort of why she was chosen - McCain got more Obamaish and Obama got more McCainish with Biden). You took the opposite sort of direction. That's because you're on Team Obama. You now have (and have had) presuppositions and everything now is just a molding and shifting procedure to fit your team and views and political interests, just like with 95% of everything else and everyone else. I'm not necessarily 100% anti-Obama like some of your other friends, but ideologically I'm displeased for him to be pushing that when I know it's only marketing. Ultimately, it's really self-contradicting.
Wow, Andy, you must have missed the part where I wrote "just kidding." I know sarcasm is difficult to pick up on the web, but I thought the "just kidding" tag would help. Ease up a bit, brother.
Since you did bring up Hillary Clinton, though, I think it's worth pointing out that Thunder didn't exactly have a great affection for her either. In fact, I remember him basically pleading with God that she wouldn't get the nomination. So, there is at least a bit of irony in the fact that the most passionate feminist in our circle of friends has strongly opposed both of the female candidates that have risen to the top. Of course, candidates should be judged on the basis of their politics, not their gender (or, race), so I can respect Thunder for that.
Post a Comment
<< Home