Sarah Palin

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
[...]
Generally speaking, executive experience is a better training for the presidency than legislative, for reasons that have been covered many times.

If that's the case, Box, then why did you try to paint the writer as anti-Palin? Here's what he said, according to the post:

Quote:
"In 2000, Palin was the mayor of an Alaskan town of 5,500 people, while Biden was serving his 28th year as a United States senator. Her major public policy concern was building a local ice rink and sports center. His major public policy concern was the State Department's decision to grant an export license to allow sales of heavy-lift helicopters to Turkey, during tense UN-sponsored Cyprus peace talks . . ."

Isn't this an illustration of Palin's 'Executive' experience, leading the charge for a new public facility? While Biden was mired in the swamp of trying to influence foreign policy from outside the Executive branch, but inside the Beltway/Georgetown cocktail party circuit? I mean, export licenses for helicopters? WTF? Why can't you just put those suckers on eBay?[/QUOTE]

I described him or her as anti-Palin for a couple of reasons. First was the reference to debating her twenty times or more. Presumably they were political adversaries, either in Wasilla or later in the state government.

Besides that, there was the general tenor of the comment. He described her as the mayor of a small town in 2000, which she was, but she later went on to become governor of the state. That last fact was not mentioned.

The problem with buying the choppers on ebay is that they are used and you might not be able to inspect them thoroughly before finalizing the deal. The government of Turkey would be smart enough to refrain from buying somebody else's castoff lemons.

 

[Huckleman2000]

[...]
This is pretty much the way I see it going, and why I think she's going to do pretty well.

You may be right on this. By many accounts, the format isn't friendly to follow-up questions, which is where she seems to get flummoxed.

There may be a fundamental flaw in this argument, though. It assumes that she's able to put words and phrases together in such a way as to convey a coherent thought. I have my doubts...

 

[Belegon]

While it would be best for my personal choice if this were not true, I agree with Zoot.

Palin's expectations have been set ridiculously low. She has to climb a ladder from her expectations to see the bottom of Dan Quayles shoes.

All she has to do is seem more intelligent than Britney Spears and Fox News will proclaim it a major triumph.

 

[cloudy]

http://bitsandpieces.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/imagesnewspapers.jpg

 

[Huckleman2000]

http://bitsandpieces.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/imagesnewspapers.jpg

ROFL!

 

[colddiesel]

There may be a fundamental flaw in this argument, though. It assumes that she's able to put words and phrases together in such a way as to convey a coherent thought. I have my doubts...

If I read the Doc correctly this is exactly what doesn't matter. All McCain wants is a warm, friendly, folksy, possibly cute feeling to be communicated to the viewer. If she can do that she wins. What she says or what it means doesn't matter much because the people to whom it does matter ain't gonna vote for McCain anyway.

 

[cloudy]

For the debate tonight, rather than try to make sense of Palin's "no answer" answers, play Palin Bingo instead. (honest...there really are bingo cards to print out).

http://www.yesbutnobutyes.com/Palinbingo.jpg

 

[jomar]

For the debate tonight, rather than try to make sense of Palin's "no answer" answers, play Palin Bingo instead. (honest...there really are bingo cards to print out).

http://www.yesbutnobutyes.com/Palinbingo.jpg

That looks like it would be way more fun as a drinking game. I'll let you know.

 

[starrkers]

For the debate tonight, rather than try to make sense of Palin's "no answer" answers, play Palin Bingo instead. (honest...there really are bingo cards to print out).

http://www.yesbutnobutyes.com/Palinbingo.jpg

They missed a biggie - hunting and feeding themselves with good Alaskan meat

 

[Huckleman2000]

They missed a biggie - hunting and feeding themselves with good Alaskan meat

Heh heh heh... you said "Alaskan meat." ^^^

 

[Boxlicker101]

While it would be best for my personal choice if this were not true, I agree with Zoot.

Palin's expectations have been set ridiculously low. She has to climb a ladder from her expectations to see the bottom of Dan Quayles shoes.

All she has to do is seem more intelligent than Britney Spears and Fox News will proclaim it a major triumph.

Did Quayle have a debate with Al Gore before the 1992 election? I don't remember seeing one. I did see Geraldine Ferraro against Bush the elder in, I think, 1984, and formed a much higher opinion of her than of him.

Quayle vs. Gore might have been pretty boring. Neither one had an ounce of charisma, and I didn't think either one was very bright. At least they didn't come off that way. More often than not, the incumbent eschews the debate because he feels it is more help for the challenger, although Ford debated Carter and Carter debated Reagan. Both incumbents lost.

 

[colddiesel]

I think she's going to do fine in the debate.

A debate is easier than an interview. There are only like 20 questions they're going to ask in a debate and she'll be prepped on those, and they're not going to press her or try to pin her down like they do in an interview. She'll be able to evade and sidestep and hide behind her charm and personality, and Biden will be more than happy to pick up the slack. When she can't answer, she'll just go on the attack and most people won't notice that she's not answering.

People prefer personality over brains. Bush proved that. I think she's going to do fine.

Good call Doc, leaving partisanship aside she was much better than I expected but so was Biden. They both did well .

Net result . This debate influences nothing of importance.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Did Quayle have a debate with Al Gore before the 1992 election? I don't remember seeing one. I did see Geraldine Ferraro against Bush the elder in, I think, 1984, and formed a much higher opinion of her than of him.

Quayle vs. Gore might have been pretty boring. Neither one had an ounce of charisma, and I didn't think either one was very bright. At least they didn't come off that way. More often than not, the incumbent eschews the debate because he feels it is more help for the challenger, although Ford debated Carter and Carter debated Reagan. Both incumbents lost.

You don't recall the '92 Veep debate? The one where Stockdale stole the show by seeming like a clean-shaven Santa?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Most recent presidents, certainly Ike and JFK and Carter and Reagan were products. LBJ was an accident, and he defeated Goldwater, something of an extremist, to be re-elected. Nixon was an exception. Although personally dislked, even hated by some, he was seen as having qualities that could take on the Soviets and win the Vietnam War.

Correction: he painted Senator Goldwater as something of an extremist. Goldwater was no more extreme than Jefferson or Madison.

 

[sr71plt]

Correction: he painted Senator Goldwater as something of an extremist. Goldwater was no more extreme than Jefferson or Madison.

Jefferson, at least, was quite an extremist for his day--so comparing Goldwater to him wouldn't wipe away any charge of extremism.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Jefferson, at least, was quite an extremist for his day--so comparing Goldwater to him wouldn't wipe away any charge of extremism.

If so, he was an example of how extremists can be right. He was right about independence. He was right about the need for a Bill of Rights. He was right about the dangers of excessive Federal power.

 

[sr71plt]

If so, he was an example of how extremists can be right. He was right about independence. He was right about the need for a Bill of Rights. He was right about the dangers of excessive Federal power.

I think you've been reading some of the older studies of him. Jefferson was a total opportunist, actually. What he talked and what he did were often two totally different things. (You don't have to look any farther than his slave quarters to figure that out.)

Among other things, he was one of the dirtiest political campaigners even Karl Rove could wish for. I'd think Goldwater would be done a disservice to be put next to him in this realm alone.

There haven't been too many balder assertions of (nonexistent) federal power than the Louisiana Purchase. Glad he bought the land, of course, and I find him very interesting. But these figures from the past don't quite fit in the dimensions of the traditional mold of American biography under the current brand of scholarship research.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Quote:
Originally Posted by sr71plt
Jefferson, at least, was quite an extremist for his day--so comparing Goldwater to him wouldn't wipe away any charge of extremism.

If so, he was an example of how extremists can be right. He was right about independence. He was right about the need for a Bill of Rights. He was right about the dangers of excessive Federal power.

Madison and Jefferson were both extremists, and both were right. Imagine, thinking that the people of a nation should rule themselves and elect their leaders, rather than be ruled by a king or emperor. What a crazy idea!

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I think you've been reading some of the older studies of him. Jefferson was a total opportunist, actually. What he talked and what he did were often two totally different things. (You don't have to look any farther than his slave quarters to figure that out.)

Among other things, he was one of the dirtiest political campaigners even Karl Rove could wish for. I'd think Goldwater would be done a disservice to be put next to him in this realm alone.

There haven't been too many balder assertions of (nonexistent) federal power than the Louisiana Purchase. Glad he bought the land, of course, and I find him very interesting. But these figures from the past don't quite fit in the dimensions of the traditional mold of American biography under the current brand of scholarship research.

He wasn't perfect. Especially about slavery. But I wouldn't call him a total opportunist. He had principles. He was just human enough to go against his conscience at times.

 

[sr71plt]

He wasn't perfect. Especially about slavery. But I wouldn't call him a total opportunist. He had principles. He was just human enough to go against his conscience at times.

Well, yes, that's certainly the Hollywood version. Here in Charlottesville we see what the cheese cloth on the camera lenses filter out.

And being in the neighborhood of both Madison and Monroe, as well . . . (actually a little closer with Monroe--I'm sitting on what was once his plantation before Jefferson finagled it out from underneath him to build something he wanted.)

 

[Elianna]

Well, yes, that's certainly the Hollywood version. Here in Charlottesville we see what the cheese cloth on the camera lenses filter out.

And being in the neighborhood of both Madison and Monroe, as well . . . (actually a little closer with Monroe--I'm sitting on what was once his plantation before Jefferson finagled it out from underneath him to build something he wanted.)

I'm not much of a Jeffersonian history buff, but I've also heard that he was not the type of man the rose-colored glass of history makes him appear to be. Actually, I think I find it comforting. It's good to know that politicians were no less the rank opportunists then than they are now.

People always bitch about how good things were back in the old days... but I think we're deluding ourselves. Humankind is no better or worse than we have ever been, and the same is true for politicians. (If you believe politicians are human ).

 

[Varian P]

Well, she actually answered a couple of the moderator's questions.

It's a huge leap forward for Sarah "I read, you know, all of 'em" Palin.

Still not convinced she has a thought in her head, beyond those the coaches put in front of her to memorize. But she's making progress. Soon she'll be almost qualified to be on Seattle's or, if she works really, really hard, L.A.'s city council.

 

[Varian P]

I'm not much of a Jeffersonian history buff, but I've also heard that he was not the type of man the rose-colored glass of history makes him appear to be. Actually, I think I find it comforting. It's good to know that politicians were no less the rank opportunists then than they are now.

People always bitch about how good things were back in the old days... but I think we're deluding ourselves. Humankind is no better or worse than we have ever been, and the same is true for politicians. (If you believe politicians are human ).

I don't argue that politicians were more moral (or human) back in the olden days. Just more eloquent and perhaps better read.

 

[sr71plt]

Well, she actually answered a couple of the moderator's questions.

It's a huge leap forward for Sarah "I read, you know, all of 'em" Palin.

Still not convinced she has a thought in her head, beyond those the coaches put in front of her to memorize. But she's making progress. Soon she'll be almost qualified to be on Seattle's or, if she works really, really hard, L.A.'s city council.

The thought breezed through my mind: Say two years from now, President McCain has croacked and Palin is the first American female president. Can you just imagine what all of those qualified woman floating around would be thinking of that?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I'm beginning to think that McCain is just senile.