Bob Herbert at the New York Times hits the nail right on the head, in my humble opinion. It’s definitely worth the full read (it’s relatively short) but here are some highlights:
With most candidates for high public office, the question is whether one agrees with them on the major issues of the day. With Ms. Palin, it’s not about agreeing or disagreeing. She doesn’t appear to understand some of the most important issues.
“Do you believe in the Bush doctrine?” Mr. Gibson asked during the interview. Ms. Palin looked like an unprepared student who wanted nothing so much as to escape this encounter with the school principal.
Clueless, she asked, “In what respect, Charlie?”
“Well, what do you interpret it to be?” said Mr. Gibson.
“His worldview?” asked Ms. Palin.
Later, in the spin zones of cable TV, commentators repeatedly made the point that there are probably very few voters — some specifically mentioned “hockey moms” — who could explain the Bush doctrine. But that’s exactly the reason we have such long and intense campaigns. You want to find the individuals who best understand these issues, who will address them in sophisticated and creative ways that enhance the well-being of the nation.
…
To burnish the foreign policy credentials of a vice presidential candidate who never even had a passport until last year, the Republicans have been touting Alaska’s proximity to Russia. (Imagine the derisive laughter in conservative circles if the Democrats had tried such nonsense.) So Mr. Gibson asked Ms. Palin, “What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?”She said, “They’re our next-door neighbors. And you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska. From an island in Alaska.”
Mr. Gibson tried again. “But what insight does that give you,” he asked, “into what they’re doing in Georgia?”
John McCain, who is shameless about promoting himself as America’s ultimate patriot, put the best interests of the nation aside in making his incredibly reckless choice of a running mate. But there is a profound double standard in this country. The likes of John McCain and George W. Bush can do the craziest, most irresponsible things imaginable, and it only seems to help them politically.
I still have faith that the American people are smart enough to see through this.
In the neo-con Republican world, it is not about competence,experience, or prior success. It is all about wealthy, connected, and white affirmative action. For all their blather about standing for meritocracy, it is easier to rise in the republican ranks based on white connectedness than merit.
Bush would have never gotten into Yale on merit. Serial Adulterer McCain would have never gotten in or graduated the Naval Academy. Affirmative action is most rampant among those elites. Palin is just another example. She is connected to the lunatic fringe, she white, and she is owned by corporate America. Qualifications be damned. It is why the neo-con party is falling apart. When you promote people who have been proven to be incompetant just because they are loyal, you get what you deserve.
OK, I’m not going to be sarcastic here, I’m making a serious point…
How can you all knock Sarah Palin, in the words of Matt say “I still have faith that the American people are smart enough to see through this” and in the words of Alec say “In the neo-con Republican world, it is not about competence,experience, or prior success”, and then turn around and try to tell people that the conclusion is that Barack Obama should be President? I just don’t follow that kind of reason.
I’m going to admit a little secret to you. Sarah Palin may not be ready to be the President. And that is coming from a guy who leans right. But in the same breath, I believe that Obama isn’t ready either. In fact, I have a very difficult time separating the experience of Palin and Obama when it comes to readiness for the situations one would encounter as the most powerful person in the free world.
Just being honest.
DantheMan, I agree 100%,
Just because Barack Obama can discuss all kinds of policy endlessly does not make him qualified. At least Sarah Palin doesn’t drone on endlessly about things like that.
She gets right to it, she mis-states the positions of people she disagrees with and ridicules them, much to the delight of her supporters. That is why she is the most qualified candidate to reach across the aisle and work with people she disagrees with, and is the only candidate who will actually get something done!!
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger DantheMan
Charlie Gibson doesn’t understand the Bush Doctrine either, according to the guy who coined the term, Charles Krauthammer: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html
What I would stress is the difference in the quality of the experience each candidate has.
I would also like to point out that examples like the Gibson interview prove one is vastly more intelligent than the other. The thing about history is that it’s easy to learn… it doesn’t progress as fast as we are able to learn it. You don’t need to have lived history to understand and learn from it. The same goes for the issues… one can learn much if not all there is necessary to know in the world of politics in a relatively short amount of time. Of course it takes hard work and determination but someone of Barack Obama’s caliber could accomplish it.
Even further when you look at how well Obama has conducted this campaign you can’t deny the man has an uncanny ability to run a large nationwide organization… and do it extremely well. It also take a lot of character and self sacrifice to turn down lucrative jobs on wall street to go work in the poverty stricken areas of Chicago in order to make a difference.
And then when you get down to the stances each candidate takes on an issue and evaluate them, Barack Obama’s direction for this country is much better than that of either McCain or Palin. Judgement and direction is important in a leader.
Claims of inexperience were also made against Lincoln and Kennedy.
Sean2: Krauthammer may have been the first to use the term (I honestly don’t know), but he’s not the definitive expert. This has been a hot topic in the political science world for the last 7 years. The point is that Sarah Palin (who’s running for an office, by the way — Gibson isn’t) isn’t even familiar with the term.
DantheMan: I think this is a fair point and one that is worthy of a debate. But I think you don’t quite understand our (or maybe it’s more fair to say “my”) viewpoint: First of all, Obama does have more substantive experience than Palin does, but that’s not really where the meat of my position is. The real point is that Obama clearly has understanding; he knows and is a master of most if not all the major policy areas facing our nation right now. Hell, he was a teacher of constitutional law at one of the nation’s best law schools; he’s discussed this issues at a level where most people would find hard to keep their eyes open. You may disagree with him on policies, but there’s no doubt that his understanding is thorough and impressive. Palin’s understanding, as evidenced by the above, is barely existent in some very important areas. Obama has been vetted thoroughly so far this race and he’s held up under the heat pretty dang well considering the (very reasonable but) persistent questions about his experience.
The way team Obama distills this is by comparing “judgment” to “experience.” Frankly, I think this is a bit of an oversimplification that actual doesn’t do Obama justice, but it does illustrate the core of the point.
DTM,
Well thought out post, honest, and has it’s merits. I guess from the Democratic perspective we would say that the difference is that Palin was merely appointed, which follows in a long, long line of neo-con appointments without merit. Obama was not appointed to his position. So, as you were honest, I will also be honest and say that you have some good points about questioning Obama’s readiness. I disagree with you, but logically you have good points. All that being said, it is the white, connected, cronyism appointments that disturb, and a fear that it will continue. So, the biggest difference is one was appointed by one man, the other was chosen by 18+ million.
Sick of the cronyism, Alec
Also good point Matt. Wouldn’t it be nice to see what it is like to have an intellectual in office for once after 8 years of frat boy, kindergarten mentality?
I once worked for an admitted racist. He had no problem with using slurs about blacks or making demeaning jokes about them. I actually had to tell him to stop, I didn’t want to hear it. Nothing funny there and it bothered me.
This guy, otherwise a nice guy but an anti-black racist, had a black primary doctor, a black dentist and a black accountant. His rationale was simple, if these guys could get ahead and get degrees in the America he lived in, they had to be good. He was of good German Minnesota stock but knew that those African American professionals would do their jobs well for him. Better than the Country Club set of professionals he avoided because they had been given every benefit of the doubt at every step.
While I do not appreciate racism in any form or sexism for that matter, Obama started out behind the 8 ball in America. It wasn’t just race, growing up with a single mom, ending up living with his Grandparents in Kansas, being dragged around the world at a young age. He had to be better than those around him just to get to square one because of his poor circumstances, then add the burden of being minority… and the guy did it.
Obama beat the odds and went to Harvard. He beat the odds and was the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review. He could have joined any top law firm in the country with those credentials, but he didn’t. He moved from working face to face with people getting the short end of the stick from the Steel Industry to politics. Obama spent years in the predominantly white Illinois State Legislature and won praise from both sides of the aisle. He was elected Senator in a landslide of voters of every race, color, and creed. He beat the odds because he knew how to motivate people.
Obama represents the people trying to better themselves and their country. He asks us to come together to make our country once again proud and strong. Obama has the intelligence and the experience working with people to change the direction this country is going. Away from torture as a policy. Away from taxing the middle class more and the rich less. Away from foolish wars that bleed us dry of treasure and truth. He is not against war, he is against a stupid war that John McCain is willing to see last 100 years. Obama offers judgement, experience, intelligence and most importantly hope for a better America.
McCain/Pallin offer the same policies that got us in trouble in the first place. I don’t trust these NEW Republicans to clean up the messes caused by the OLD Republicans no matter how much they pretend to be Mavericks.
Thanks for engaging in the productive dialogue, everyone. The points about Obama’s experience have some merit, but I keep coming back to the fact that comparing Obama’s experience to Palin’s becomes an interesting exercise, but comparing Obama’s experience to McCain’s is no contest.
I appreciate someone who has taught Constitutional Law. I actually think that would be a great thing for all public servants to have done (maybe all can’t teach, but at least be well-versed).
But one thing I’ve heard much of in the past week is the claim that by running a national campaign, Obama has “run something”. Let me just say that being the star of the Obama brand is not really running something in the way that being the Governor of a state is. Obama is the head guy in an organization of people who worship him. He essentially has staff that is 100% on board because, for one reason or another, they chose to sign up. That is a good thing in terms of charisma, but only loosely translates to the role of a President.
A Governor, on the other hand, leads a state that has 30%, 40%, sometimes 48% of the citizens who didn’t vote for him or her. They make decisions that affect the welfare of everyone in the jurisdiction, not just those who signed up to campaign for you. They need to comprimise with a legislature that may be split or stacked against them. They are the true executive branch. This is where Palin has an edge on Obama’s experience… as President, either Obama or McCain, by the looks of it, will be leading a nation where 45% of the citizens don’t endorse their ideas.
The more I hear Obama touting his “executive experience” as the headliner of his campaign, the more I cringe. He would honestly be better off talking about his Senate experience.
DantheMan: I agree that the executive experience by running a campaign argument is a bit of a stretch, but you didn’t really engage my main point: I’m not comparing experience, I’m comparing substance.
The reason we value experience is because it’s a decent proxy for knowledge and understanding: you learn by doing. So what might be reasonable to do when we can’t key into that easy proxy, is attempt to vigorously evaluate the candidate’s knowledge, understanding, and ability to lead. This is where the real debate is and there’s obviously much disagreement about each, but I definitely think that Obama has not only demonstrated his abilities in these areas, but demonstrated that he’s the clear leader in all three. Obama is not only more knowledgeable about American policy (domestic and foreign), but he has a deeper understanding of the policy areas than even McCain has demonstrated (I’m not going to devolve into a list of the mistakes about key policy areas McCain has made over the last year, but I could). Moreover, he’s just a more compelling leader: he changes the face of America at a point in our history when we need to reassert ourselves on the world stage as leaders, not introverted narcissists.
I could go on, but the point I want to make is that this isn’t as simple as just comparing resumes. Political experience is incredibly important, but what we look for in evaluating experience can be found by taking a look at other areas of a politician’s background and record. If one takes the care to make this closer comparison, Obama easily trumps not only Palin, but John McCain as well.
Lipstick & Dipstick
I’d be interested in seeing how many AMERICANS even know what “the Bush doctrine” is. It’s largely a Washington-insider phrase that is rarely even used outside the world of talking heads and pundits. Even the man who coined the term, Charles Krauthammer (sp?) says it has four different definitions.
Thanks for expanding, Matt. I see your point, that intellectual capacity is as important as experience.
Obama is an incredible communicator. One of the best of our generation, at least of the people who hit the national radar. But truth be told, he was an incredible speaker in 2004, when he gave the address to the DNC. I think he was so good that he could have effectively articulated a vision for the country at that point. Heck, maybe he could have at Harvard as well. The man has a gift.
But would we have elected him President in 2004, based on that speech? We would have said “who are you kidding — sure he can talk, but what can he do?” Being able to articulate something is only part of the equation.
I believe that in the past 4 years, since “The Speech”, Obama has honed his ability to communicate. During the 20 months on the campaign trail, he has added much range to his already great skills. But since that speech in 2004, has he demonstrated any more to us that he can “do”? No.
I hate to bring this back to the business world, but that is what I know. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve interviewed someone for an entry-level job who, through their inate skills, education, or speech / debate practice, is an incredible communicator. Knock your socks off interviewer. In fact, on communications alone, they are better than some of my senior level people.
But the world belongs to those who can execute, and unfortunately, I have found through years of building a successful business that there is disappointly little correlation to what someone can do and how they sound when they talk about doing it. In many cases, there is actually an inverse relationship between the two.
Obama can talk. Can he do? I’m not convinced, and I don’t think I can be between now and November.
Loris, 4 people are running for Pres/Vice Pres. I am guessing 3 out of 4 of those people really know what the Bush doctrine is.
for me there are 2 major considerations in choosing a president and Obama wins in both.
1) personal qualifications: experience, knowledge, judgement, honesty, integrity, record, leadership/communication, temperment etc. Both candidates generally do well from my perspective, though I dock Mccain in the areas of honesty and integrity for the campaign he has run to win the support of the far right conservative base. Also I think he is overly militaristic and a bit reckless in his decsion making (i.e. last minute pick of Palin for VP)
2) Vision and direction of leadership for the country, platform or policy proposals. I prefer Obama for greater tax cuts for the middle class and decrease in the deficit through raising taxes on the wealthy, ending the Iraq occupation sooner, major reforms in healthcare to reduce the # of uninsured and better, more affordable coverage for many others, commitment to social security, greater investment in renewable energy, general belief in good gov’t to make a positive difference through wise investments. I know parts may be unclear and I overlooked other important differences but my kid is demanding a turn at the keyboard.
You guys should do some research before posting these untruths.
According to Krauthammer, the reporter who first used the term, “Bush Doctrine”:
“The Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.”
“There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration — and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today.” http://tinyurl.com/5tmlmu
You know folks if you’re going to make fun of Sarah here:
Obama when he was giving an interview didn’t even know
she was a governor. He tried to compare his campaign to
the city that Pallin had been Mayor of. If he tried his
comparrison with the State of Alaska which she was governor
of Obama demonstrated by his standard that she had more experience
than he did. Oh my God Obama can’t read a newspaper and doesn’t
see the word Gov. in front of Pallin. He has obviously shown by
the standard you’re trying to apply to Pallin that he isn’t qualfied.
Now on to this silly about not knowing the Bush Doctrine. One
person pointed out that there was about seven different definitions.
So it’s only logical for Pallin to ask which one of the defintions
that Gibson was using. Once again Pallin isn’t dumb for asking here.
Furthermore and this apparently is overlooked. Once she knew which
definition Gibson wanted answer she knocked it out the park!
So once again the people defending the sinking ship Obama are raising
a phony issue.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
4 separate and distinctly different versions of the “Bush Doctrine”.
Palin was certainly not clueless. She had every right to ask for a clarification of Gibson’s “gotcha” question.
Ah well, it doesn’t make any difference. The Obama campaign is collapsing in on itself. The repeated gaffes, highly questionable past associations, strong support of abortion into the 4th trimester, poor judgment skills such as selecting Slo Joe Biden, the left media’s lovefest and his difficulty in public speaking (without a teleprompter) are all reaching a crescendo. Even some of the democratic pundits are questioning the viability of Obama’s campaign.
Walter Hanson, I agree 100%,
There are some who might read your comments
and consider them to be the incoherent and unreliable
ramblings of a Minnesota Republican blogger desparate
to believe any and all exagerrations as reality.
They are just people who disagree with Minnesota Republican
bloggers on issues, so I wouldn’t worry about them.
The fact is, if we Minnesota Republican bloggers do not
continue to repeat every exagerration we hear as fact we
will not only alienate our base, who relishes that behavior
, but we Republicans will lose elections.
ALl that matters is winning our permanent election campaign.
Honor is irrelevant. Honor is for losers. Blind repetition
of half truths, exagerrations, and spin rule this election now,
since the nomination of our attack dog Sarah Palin.
We must continue to exagerrate the positions and actions of people
we disagree with, because Republican leadership demands it.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger Walter Hanson
@ Walter
Coming from a guy who spells Palin as Pallin…
Did anyone ever think this was all intentional to take the pressure off of Serial adulterer John McCain? Seriously, no one has ever elected the VP, they elect the top of the ticket. Even Dan Qualye couldn’t derail Bush SR.. So maybe Serial Adulterer John McCain did this on purpose so we would focus on Palin, knowing full well no matter how terrible the VP is, it still doesn’t matter, it is all about the top. Palin is terrible and a “wedge” issue of all wedge issues. We focus on her at our peril. Let’s go back to revealing how serial adulterer John McCain sold his soul to Karl Rove and his henchmen. Alec
Walter, the Bush doctrine is the only rationale for The War in Iraq. Since you seem very concerned about taxes… we now owe, just for that war,
$4,681 per household.
$1,721 per person.
It costs $341.4 million per day. This useless war that John McCain is willing to fight for the next 100 years.
Could I suggest that every person in the next administration had better understand the Bush Doctrine and everyone who doesn’t think that is important is a complete fucking idiot.
I’m only using tax dollars because it is obvious that Republican idiots only care about money, human life is meaningless to them.
By the way which kind of Republican are you? The BAD Republicans who got us in this complete mess or these NEW Republicans who are supposed reform Washington? I mean how stupid are you people to think that by doing all the same things you are going to come up with new results.
When will John McCain repudiate and reject President George Bush for being the complete failure he has been? Until I see a speech where John McCain calls for the impeachment of Cheney and Bush for high crimes against our great country… he will just be another Republican liar pretending to want something besides a third Bush term.
Here is what I am talking about, the cronyism and white, connected affirmative action. I just read that Palin appointed a high school buddy to be head of the 2 million dollar state dept. of agriculture. The friend actually said she was qualified because “I loved cows when I was a kid.”
Seriously, she will appoint a high school buddy to a top post who has no business being there. Republican affirmative action at its best.
Source:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
” So when there was a vacancy at the top of the State Division of Agriculture, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.
Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five schoolmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages. ”
Amusenic:
First of all George Bush did exactly what President Clinton
signed into law. A law that said Saddam Hussein had to be
removed from power. A lot of Democrats such as Hillary Clinton
who carefully and more importantly researched it independently
along with John Kerry (didn’t he run for President), John Edwards
(didn’t he run for President), along with other voted for it and
believed that there were weapons of mass destruction.
Second, the Bush doctrine applied to terrorism. You know if
you’re going to support terrorists we reserve the right to attack
you. The fact that Iraq was a very serious threat (I read Richard
Clarke’s book and in it he said that Iraq was very close to having
nuclear weapons in the early 1990’s)to develope nuclear weapons plus
was a fund and supporter of terrorists groups.
Three, apparently Obama thinks that if he talks nicely to Iran they
won’t develop nuclear weapons and won’t give them to terrorists. If
you believe that I got a bridge to sell you New York not to mention
some great real estate in Florida. The costs you cite don’t mention
the worst costs of nonaction. In the 1930’s Britian and France thought
they didn’t have to spend money on defense if they were nice to Hitler.
Remember that lesson?
Of course I forgot Obama is a citizen of the world. That’s why I’m
supporting John Mccain who will put the United States of America first.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Walter,
First of all that is complete and utter BS lies, typical of the McCain campaign… since I was alive and not institutionalized during the run up to the Iraq war, there was never a single reference to President Clinton or anything remotely resembling a law signed by him as a justification to the invasion. The only references made by the Neocons to Clinton was that he failed to do his job according to them. The Bush administration spent months lying this country into a war, duping Congress with cooked intelligence information. All revent information shows that Vice President Cheney and President Bush developed a campaign of untruths to be fed to the Congress and the people.
Secondly, by its’ definition the Bush Doctrine was about state to state violence and never focussed on anything but a perceived or future threat from any source. Theoretically it could have been used as an excuse to ivade or bomb any country any where for any reason.
It is also incredibly stupid as an idea, because it goes against 250 years of American policy and diplomacy. You can not use a past fact of Iran having nuclear research in the 1999’s as a rationale for an invasion in the 2000’s… unless you are just looking for an excuse to invade. The book you reference also points out that there was NO Nuclear program in Iraq after the first Gulf War.
Al Quieda was never a factor in Iraq under Saddam, and in fact terrorists groups were attacked there as a threat to his regime. The only terrorist camps were in the Kurdish section near Iran, completely protected by our allies Kurds. CIA information at the time said they were there to train terrorists to go to Turkey and Iran for Kurdish liberation. Not a threat to America.
Your rationale of supporting terrorist groups by Iraq are references to Hammas and its’ ongoing war with Israel. That country while an ally is not the United States. Hammas has never attacked an American outside of collaterally in Israel. Hardly justification for a multibillion dollar invasion of Iran. If we were to take the fiscal support of Hammas as a justification for war, we would be obligated to invade every Moslem country in the Mideast including Saudi Arabia and Egypt for their ongoing support.
Finally you are completely missing Obama’s reasoned view of Iran… why am I not surprised.
Finally your even bringing up any foolish concept of appeasement shows you have no concept of modern politics and foreign policy. For all the saber rattling that McCain, Palin and you are doing, it doesn’t matter any more. Our military has been broken by Republican foolishness and could not fight any more wars than the ones it presently has. A case could be made that we are losing in both Iran and Afghanistan because of Republican stupidity now. The only step militarily we have left is tactical nuclear weapons and the world will not let us use them. Do it and you have just sunk our economy and our country from the reaction around the world.
America is in debt to the Communist Chinese to the point that they are able to tell us what to do on the world stage. Because of this war and the refusal of the Republican administration to pay for it with anything but borrowed money, the Chinese act with impunity in Tibet, Darfur, and anywhere else they have influence. For all your concern about Iran, you do realize that their number one customer for oil is Red China, which means they have some serious friends.
You may be willing to destroy the American economy, world power and military over a war we were lied into, but I am not. You may be willing to have America torture prisoners in direct violation of the Geneva accords, but I am not. You may be willing to give up your citizen rights to privacy and allow the government to spy on citizens without judicial oversight, but I am not.
You are not an America Firster in any shape or form. You are willing to destroy this country for less than nothing. We have been in Iraq longer than it took us to defeat the Nazis with no end in sight. We have more mercenaries and Halliburton employees war profiteering in Iraq than soldiers. This is a boondoggle to soak the American taxpayer for centuries.
If you love our country you will get us out of that mistake and use that money to strengthen this country from the inside with energy independence, education and infrastructure. Pouring money and blood down a rathole in the desert, as John McCain and you want to do, only makes us weaker and more friendless in a dangerous world. I really wonder if this country can withstand a John McCain presidency as the BUsh administration has all but sunk us already.
Walter,
You are such a dupe. If we really were free to attack those who support terrorists, and it wasn’t just about oil and power, we would have attacked the terrorists schools in Saudi Arabia a long time ago. Where the hell do you think the extremists were indoctrinated, trained, and came from. “Pre-emptive” war is just a slogan to get people like you on board the neo cons corporate colonialsm bus. The people you support have sold this country down the river to the Chinese for a pretty profit. If came down to country or profit, they would choose profit every single time. And you support them and their hollow slogans against the people and constitution of the United States.
Sincerely, Alec
According to Rasmussen, twice as many Republicans believe McCain will work across the aisle with the other party than Democrats who believe Obama will. When you ask nonpartisans the same question, they believe McCain is more likely to reach across than Obama.
I’m sure many of you in the left 20% would be fine with Obama, Pelosi, and Reid calling all the shots for the next four years. But for msot of America, they want to know that our leaders will take the best bits of pieces of Republican, Democrat, and Independent ideas and make them policy.
I realize that there is alot of pent up anger out there, and that many of you believe that a President obama needs to “get back” at the Republicans for 8 years of Bush. Heck — I know lots of Democrats who still think they need to exact revenge for the Reagan years of policy. That kind of thinking gets us nowhere. I personally believe that the most productive time in DC in the past 15 years was when we had a Newt-led Congress working with a Clinton-led administration. They arrived at comprimises that made everyone happy. They created the last balanced budget that we had. That kind of thing doesn’t happen often when one party has carte blanche to do whatever they want (the GOP is just as guilty of this as the Dems).
I’m confident, as are more Americans, that McCain will be more willing to do that than Obama.
DantheMan, I agree 100%,
John McCain’s ability to mis-state and exaggerate the positions of, ridicule, and insult people who disagree with him makes him the most qualified candidate to work across the aisle with the other party that disagrees with him.
That is the lesson the American people are obviously learning about him in this election campaign. Everybody knows this election is going to be a divisive one because of it, but dividing America is a small price to pay for winning an election, as it always has been for the current generation of Republicans who are in power.
I’m confident, as are more Americans, that McCain will be more likely to win this election, because he takes no prisoners. He is proving his bold, strong, steady leadership, and is giving us a glimpse of how he will run the White House, and what choices he will make filling cabinet positions.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger DantheMan
I realize that there is alot of pent up anger out there, and that many of you believe that a President obama needs to “get back” at the Republicans for 8 years of Bush. Heck — I know lots of Democrats who still think they need to exact revenge for the Reagan years of policy.
Exact revenge? NO
Repair the incredible damage done as a result of the Reagan years? YES
If there are any Republicans left in Congress then President Obama will work very hard to bring them around to work at repairing what 30 years of criminal behavior by the GOP has done to our country. 80% of the country believes we are on the wrong track. McCain and his airhead VP are the continuation down that wrong track.
DtM. Your moderate tendency has been quite pronounced in this post. I would enjoy a beer and a bump with you. I agree with much of what you have said, especially that this has been an unusually thoughtful and civil discussion. Thanks for facilitating that.
However.
It’s not about revenge, it’s about repairing the damage done. That’s what Obama talks about the most. Rebuilding the American dream.
It’s about experience, but it’s far more about intelligence, judgement and a leaders ability to inspire those he leads.
That and a host of other ideals that lead us away from the single issues, the sound bytes, and toward nuanced discussions, informed electorates and ultimately, the leader who will help America be the nation that so much of the rest of the world aspires(aspired)to be like.
Insisting on comparing Palin to Obama on the experience issue only is one of those sound bytes in the making and you see the results of going there; in the comments that people here are throwing back at you. There is so much more to say, to think on and to do…
It’s heartening to see some of that passion for deep, wide ranging issues here over the Sunday coffee. It’s been a sad week. One that makes me see Sarah Palin, like American Idol, as more of a “weapon of mass distraction” than a credible candidate for VP. I’m sure there’s more to Ms Palin than what we’ve seen this week, but how can we get to that when we’re so busy wiping lipstick off our collars?
Here’s hoping that in this coming week we’ll see less Sarahmania and more focus on issues. This election is important. To see it bogged down and distracted by the type of poo poo it faced this week was awful.
I liked, (of course I would), what Obama’s campaign manager said about not making a big election about little things.
Two stray thoughts, one of which fits closely…
To me, the early George W, pre-9/11, sounded like a mouthpiece. His speeches and speech pattern came across like an incompetent actor reciting a script for the first time. 9/11 at least put a little genuine emotion into his voice. The last few years he’s sounded like an aged actor who simply gave up trying to make his voice authentic.
The point is: it sure seems that some one or some group scripted the Bush Administration and just as actively scripts the McCain/Pailn campaign. McCain has steered all of his rhetoric far to the right of the positions he took years ago which gave him the maverick reputation. Unfortunately, that is long gone. One similarity between McCain and Bush is their inability to deliver consistently credible speeches. McCain forgets his stands on issues and thinks there is an Iraq - Pakistan border. His mind is not there. The script writers chose Palin not only because she is female and attractive, which grabs any normal person immediately; but that she can deliver the script well-memorized, fluently and credibly. How many people believe her “thanks, but no thanks” lie because she has repeated it so often?
Who’ll run America if the GOP wins? McCain’s mind is going; Palin is obviously lacking in the experience necessary to steer the American ship of state; the script-writers (who also control the campaign money and machinery) will assure a consistent transition from the Bush debacle to the McCain disintegration of the United States.
Second thread…
Obama’s community organizing is more akin to entreprenuership than executive experience. He built a huge community service organization essentially from scratch. McCain and Palin’s executive experiences were pulling the strings in extant organizations (Navy and Government). There is a lot to be said for people like Obama who can create worthy organizations from scratch. I’d trust the proven change-creation ability of Obama over that of a McCain administration.
Matt,
Bob Herbert doesn’t understand the Bush Doctrine. Sarah Palin was right to ask Gibson “in what respect.” There are several aspects to the Bush Doctrine. First is the doctrine of if your government harbors terrorists you are as guilty as the terrorists. Second is the doctrine of pre-emptive war. And third is America’s desire to spread democracy throughout the world as enunciated in the President’s second inaugural address (which I was present to see and hear). The idea that Charlie Gibson “got” Sarah Palin is asenine. You ask who is more substantive between Palin and Obama. And you cited Obama as being a Constitutional Law teacher as an example of Obama being more substantive. I’m glad you said teacher and not professor because Obama never served as a law school professor or even an associate professor. He was basically an adjunct brought in to teach the occasional class. Regardless of that fact, there are 199 ABA accredited law schools in the U.S. Presumably each of those law schools has at least one Constitutional Law professor. Most probably have at least two. I highly doubt you would argue that there are 300 people qualified to be President of the United States because they teach Constitutional Law in a law school. Others have cited the fact that Obama was the editor of his Law Review as evidence of his qualifications to be President. Again, there are 199 accredited law schools in the U.S. with just about every one having a law review. In most cases, there is a new editor of the law review each year. That would mean there would be thousands of people qualified to be President of the United States. My point about Obama is just because he was an outstanding law student doesn’t make him a superior candidate for President. The question is what he did with his life after being educated. He became a community organizer. Then a State Senator. Then a U.S. Senator where he spent one year in the Senate before beginning his campaign for President. Sarah Palin has more life experience. She’s owned and ran businesses and she’s a governor. Far more governors have been elected President than U.S. Senators. Charlie Gibson’s line of questioning and the substantive reactions like that of Mr. Herbert are perceived by many Americans — especially Reagan Democrats and working women — as elitist. I hope the liberal intelligencia, like Bob Herbert, keeps picking on Sarah Palin. It will be a McCain-Palin landslide if these attacks continue.
“If there are any Republicans left in Congress then President Obama will work very hard to bring them around to work at repairing what 30 years of criminal behavior by the GOP has done to our country. ”
And what a great mentality that would be, Richard, when trying to begin an era aof nonpartisan cooperation. There is no doubt that having that intro meeting with GOP members of congress, where Obama says “let’s fix the criminal stuff you all have done since Reagan” would set the right tone
Don’t forget that if Obama is elected, 45% of voters will likely disagree with his direction for the country, or at least elements of it. Same goes for McCain. In all fairness, Bush had 50% of people against him and seemed to forget that.
Bush has 70% disagreeing with him now and I look forward to the day he’s incarcerated for his war crimes, but that’s a whole different topic. The Democratic party will pick up a significant number of seats in the House and Senate, Obama stands a much better chance of working with Congress and making legislative progress. McCain, should the nightmare scenario play out and he gets elected, will be reduced to insignificance. His vetoes will be overturned and his initiatives will be ignored. If, again the nightmare of all nightmares play out so that McCain can’t fulfill his obligations and Palin takes office, we are looking at an extreme far right wing religious zealot selecting 2 maybe three Supreme court justices. How long can this country function without a judiciary? Her picks will never make it past Congress. There is no doubt Obama offers the country a much better chance of getting back to some semblance of a sane economic, domestic, and foreign policy. McCain will be more of the same failed policy of debt and war and divisiveness.
DtM
Has Mccain proposed any new specific solutions to problems in healthcare, jobs, economy/taxes, deficit spending, social security, very costly occupation of Iraq, energy, etc. Mccain of yore had some bit of maverick crediblity (i.e immigration and opposing tax cuts.) Modern Mccain has caved to the far right and is more of the same in terms of policy. Can’t imagine big enough dem gains in the senate to override Mccain vetoes of good legislation. The best hope for bipartisan solutions is through enough repubs in senate to wield influence and put a check on dems overreaching.
Mccains campaign is completely based on false contrasts on character because he’s got nothing else.
Richard,
I love your hubris over the upcoming election. The polls do not reflect your view of politics. If the majority of Americans felt as you do, Obama would be up by 10-15 not down by 4-5. Democrats have controlled Congress now for two years and they haven’t gotten anything done. No energy plan, no middle class tax cuts, no immigration reform, nothing. A recent Gallup poll shows that Democrats only have a 3 point lead in the generic Congressional ballot. The last time the Democrats had that small of a lead, Republicans took control of Congress. Richard, the majority of Americans don’t want Bush tried for war crimes, they don’t want us to lose in Iraq and they don’t want their taxes to go up. What they know is gas prices are killing our economy and they want more drilling for gas and oil to bring prices down. They also know that Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the majority of their Democratic Congressmen and Senators refuse to do anything about it.
Gee, Democrats haven’t got anything done. Hard to do when the GOP sets an all time record for filibusters! When you have a one vote majority in the Senate by the skin of Joe Lieberman anyone who pays ANY attention and knows ANYTHING at all about how the Senate works should be frustrated by the lack of action there and be mad as hell AT THE REPUBLICANS!
The Reagan, Bush, Bush doctrine of unfettered unregulated capitalism has brought this country yo the brink of financial collapse. No one talks about it, not the media, not the GOP, not the Dems, because if people truly realized how precarious the financial markets are people and institutions would withdraw their money and we would fall into a depression on a scale not seen since the 1930s.
Conservatives talk on and on about the “Market”, there is no free market, only a system currently rigged to enrich the very few at the expense of 99%. What is truly sad is how many middle and lower middle class
people have fallen for this pack of lies. You people talk about transfer of wealth through tax policy, its already happened to the very wealthiest from the middle and lower classes. Class warfare is upon us from the TOP down! Quit being duped by these robber barons and wake up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv0smG7ptcM
Couldn’t have said it better.
Minnesota Republican blogger Chris, I agree 100%,
Everybody knows that Minnesota Republican bloggers are the spokesmen for the American people. That is just common sense. A vast majority of Americans agree with Minnesota Republican bloggers, because we say they do.
We Minnesota Republican bloggers have a track record of success that is distinguished, and honorable. We have consistently been the oracle, correctly predicting the outcome of any policy being discussed by the American people. We are always 100% corect.
Democrats, on the other hand, do not relate to the kitchen table issues most Americans care about. Their policies will fail because we Minnesota Republican bloggers say they will.
The American people are tired of the same old worn out talking points that are designed to divide America for political gain. That is why they are going to vote Republican this fall. The American people know the Republican party represents unity and tolerance.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger Chris
Rick,
What’s being filibustered right now? The only thing being blocked that I know of is oil drilling and that’s being done by Reid and Pelosi even though there are majorities to pass drilling in both houses. And thanks for showing that liberal Democrats are against capitalism.
“The best hope for bipartisan solutions is through enough repubs in senate to wield influence and put a check on dems overreaching.”
Amen, SMD. I strongly believe the the best results come out of Washington when we have a true check and balance and a faction in the middle who are able to make a comprimise work. It also helps when there is an Executive Branch who is interested in making incremental progress rather than being hellbent on “winning” the game of media and public perception.
For all the faults Clinton had, he excelled in putting the incremental policy advancement ahead of getting every detail his way.
Okay folks. To the two people who went and attacked me.
There was a lie signed into place that called for Saddam
Hussein to be over thrown. As for the Republicans not quoting
Democrats. Dick Cheny appears on the Meet The Press and digs out
quotes by President Clinton and other Democrats.
The Republicans are accused of false saying that there were
weapons of mass destruction yet Democrats who not only voted for
the war resolution (are those people telling me that Hillary voted
against the war along with Kerry and Edwards)but against thought there
were weapons of mass destruction. So I guess somebody had been committed
and missed all of those things. Of course liberal Democrats like to try
to avoid their words when it’s used against them.
To Richard who wants to brag about how Mccain’s vetos will be overriden
even if you gain your dream of nine in the senate that gives you sixty
or is that 59 if you don’t count Liberman. Last time I looked you need
67 to override a veto. Not to mention it looks like the Republicans
have a chance to gain seats in the house instead of losing seats. The
generic ballot is now in the margin of error.
Rick wow there is an actual record of filibusters. Take a look at the
house. Nancy Pelosi is currently bringing bills for votes using closed
rules because she can’t even afford an amendment fight. How about since
you folks have 230 plus seats in the House put a bill up and allow amendments
so you can pass it with 218. Rick you folks have what Harry Truman called
a DO NOTHING CONGRESS!!!! They even chickened out on not funding the
war.
As for the nut that wants Bush prosecuted. This President made a decision
approved by the Congress. He didn’t do anything wrong!
I’ll wait for you insane lefties to attack me again and defend myself
once again.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
I’m not against capitalism you moronic blow hard, I’m against greed run amok to the point of destroying our economy in the name of the myth of free markets by an Administration that is absolutely corrupt from top to bottom.
Rick,
It’s funny you’d call me a moronic blow hard yet you don’t back up any of your statements about Republicans filibustering or corruption in the administration. I guess you’re the blow hard. At least the American people aren’t buying into it. McCain leads by 4-5 points and the Democrats have their 15 point generic ballot lead down to 3.
You say greed is wrecking our economy. But what’s really wrecking our economy is Democrats who refuse to allow our own oil and gas to be explored in our own country. It’s not greed, it’s ideology and the fact that Reid and Pelosi are beholden to far-left special interests who do not want oil and gas prices to come down.
Do you people not even know basic math… 3% of world oil reserves are in the United States. 25% of oil usage is by the United States… drill all you want but you will never make those two numbers work.
On top of that, you seed corn eating republicans do not seem to realize that in coming years that oil is going to be more and more important. Why do you want to use up our reserves now and put us completely in the power of the foreign oil producers in the future. You would think a little forward thinking would suggest that we hoard our oil and use up our enemies… even if it costs us more to gill that SUV now. Or do you want to be like Bush and be forced to kowtow to both the Saudis and the Chinese. So much for America First.
A good question to ask is who do you blame for a lie? Do you blame the liar who uses the pomp and circumstance of our higher office for their lie or do you blame the people who at first believe the office of the liar? I personally forgive those who originally believe a lie but have no forgiveness for those who continue to push that lie.
Amazing how Republicans admit the debacle of Bush/Cheney and then turn around and tell us the answer is McCain/Palin… Why should we believe you lying Republicans now? NO BUSH THIRD TERM!
Pound sand you troll. By the way, how’s Lehman Brothers doing?
Corruption? How about Alberto, can’t remember Gonzalez, Monica Goodling, Jack Abramhoff, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham and on and on and on. The GOP leadership in the Senate has filibustered or otherwise blocked more legislation than in any previous Congress, you know perfectly well it’s true. Yet you deny it, how perfectly Rovian of you, you simpering troll. How about total disregard for the Constitution? Please do me a favor and go away, just go away, you don’t add to the debate, you just troll and troll repeating the same weak shit you always bring.
amuseinc,
We have 15.6 billion barrels of oil in ANWR and something in the neighborhood of 34 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The Minerals Management Service estimates there are 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natureal gas off of the outer continental shelf. That’s enough oil and gas to eliminate all imports in the U.S. for more than three decades. And just think when President Carter told us we were going to be out of oil by the end of the 1980s.
Rick,
You are a meathead repeating the talking points you’ve been told to repeat on the Daily Kooks or whatever lefty blogs you get your misinformation from. The fact that you cannot cite a single bill being filibustered in Congress right now says it all. Because you don’t know how our government works, let me give you another example of the Democrats’ failures. Budget bills cannot be filibustered for any reason. Only policy bills are subject to filibuster rules. Congress has yet to pass a budget this year. In fact, if they don’t pass a budget soon, the government is at risk of shutting down. They are ones who are failing to lead. And you want to talk about scandal? How about Charlie Rangel who writes the tax laws for the rest of us but doesn’t claim all of his income on his taxes. Or what about William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana and his $90,000 extortion loot in the freezer? Or Congressman Alan Mohollan who is being investigated by the F.B.I. for getting rich off of steering earmarks? Or Sandy Berger who stole sensitive intelligence documents from the National Archives and stuffed them down his pants? Or Elliot Spitzer and hookergate? Please do yourself a favor and educate yourself instead of repeating others’ bogus claims.
A thread like this shows us why people are sick of politics. This sounds like a debate between Keith Olbermann and Sean Hannity without the preparation. If any of you think Olbermann and Hannity are impartial journalists who are right on the mark all the time, by the way, you just may be part of the problem….
Amuseinc - Is the fact that we can’t solve all of our problems with oil a reason not to drill today? We have the infrastructure in place to send twice as much oil from alaska without building a single pipeline. We also know if we don’t explore deep sea drilling off our coasts, other nations will. We’re only stopping ourselves, we can’t stop them.
Rick - Is Lehman Brothers a reason to socialize industry? I don’t know where you are going with that. The free market is not without its warts, but when Government controls too much, it becomes exactly what it abhors: A Monopoly.
Chris - You forgot James Traficant
He received 15% of the last election vote even though he is in Federal prison.
Don’t feed the trolls! Thats how you keep them from coming back. It’s a waste of time.
People are sick of politics because of politicians. Bipartisan energy solutions won’t be happening.
“After all of this caterwauling, they (house conservatives) are about to get their wish. Later this month, Speaker Pelosi will bring up the Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act. This bill would open up both coasts to oil drilling, speed the transformation to clean renewable energy and efficiency, and reduce energy costs for families. Interestingly, despite their relentless “drill, baby, drill” campaign, House conservatives indicate that they will oppose this energy bill that includes their wish—offshore drilling. They refuse to accept “yes” for an answer.”
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/drilling_clean_energy.html
“The average (conservative) participant in the protests to urge drilling in protected coastal areas voted against clean renewable energy 95% of the time.”
“According to a study by the House Natural Resources Committee, big oil companies already have access to nearly 80% of all offshore oil and gas in the lower 48 states. These companies hold leases for 44 million acres offshore, but are only producing oil or gas from 10 million of these acres. Before opening the protected coastal areas from Malibu to Miami to Maine, oil companies should develop existing leases.”
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/pressroom/2008/08/mi_reps_drilling_protests.html
Seems clear to me that one party control (by dems) is needed for real solutions on energy (and most other policy areas.)
Palin — the skirts McCain is hiding behind?:
A clueless unknown woman, who is suddenly famous for being unknown?
One has to wonder why he looks so lame standing next to her.
He looks like her grandfather, not the “alpha male” leader he’s supposed to be.
Why EXACTLY should we be distracted by a middle-aged woman from Alaska?
She looks OK for 44 with 5 kids.
So does the lady up the street & she’s older than 44. So what?
The lady up the street didn’t lose the Miss Alaska pageant.
That’s roughly the equivalent of losing the Miss Minneapolis pageant.
We might as well elect Miss Teen South Carolina who thinks the answer is sending MAPS to the disadvantaged.
After all, you can SEE Russia from an island in the Aleutians!!!!!
Here’s more on the topic of revenge from one who knows something about situations that might encourage the hunger for it:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/09/13-2
Desmond Tutu
Mockingbird,
Keep up the sexist comments. This is the same kind of crap that caused Hillary to trounce Obama in the later primaries and to cause millions of her supporters to sign up with McCain.
Minnesota Republican blogger Chris, I agree 100%,
Everybody knows millions of Hillary supporters have signed up with McCain. They did a complete 180 toward the Bush ideology of success,….. the Republican, Conservative ideology that has a track record of not only triumph after triumph, but a track record of 100% accuracy predicting the outcome of any and all policies.
We Republicans are bold, strong, and steady. People know what we stand for, because we all agree on every issue. We are very good at winning elections, that is common knowledge. We Republicans are winners and Democrats are losers.
Republicans are good, and Democrats are bad.
R +, D -
Hopefully enough people can understand that.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger Chris
Chris, how many Hillary supporters truly signed up with McCain? Most of the PUMA sites were run by right wing activists as they fed stories to a gullible media about millions of disgruntled Hillary supporters. This was a pretty good ruse for opening up the GOP to accept an utterly unqualified governor (with lipstick) to fill the VP slot.
Mr. Tom:
She’s more qualified than Obama. After all Obama gives an
interview where he doesn’t know she’s a governor. And then when
he tries to do a comparison to show he has more executive experience
he compares his campaign to her city budget. How about the State of
Alaska which she became governor of basically at the same time
he started running for President. Using that comparison she has
handled more employees than Obama. She has dealt with a far large
budget than his campaign.
Oh she understands the crisis of energy which is the key to the US
economy in the future. She wants to create energy. Obama doesn’t.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Thank your readers of MN Publius for not admitting on your own
post that Pallin is more qualfied than Obama!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Walter Hanson, I agree 100%,
Your bitter, one sided take is what we Minnesota Republican bloggers must keep on consistently doing, or we will lose elections.
Everybody knows Barack Obama does not want to create energy. He has never said anything about it. That is just common sense!!!!!!!
Lordy Lordy…where are my pills!!!…..The vapors are kicking in.
It’s just so so extremely upsetting to us, Walter Hanson, when people who disagree with us say things on Liberal blogs…..
Anything we can say or do to tell them they are wrong is justified, and truth is irrelevant, because we Minnesota Republican bloggers are 100% correct on every issue.
Great Job Minnesota Republican blogger Walter Hanson