I can't believe the spin being put on this situation. One candidate who is accused of not having enough experience explained his plans and won his nomination in a year-long campaign against nine other candidates, getting the vote of more than 10% of Americans.

The other candidate with little or no experience was appointed and is only now beginning to let Americans "see who she is".

Yet if you listen to the conservative spinmeisters, you would think that the appointed candidate is a newly-discovered Joan of Arc. Is her position on her devoutness, right-to-life, gay rights and gun control all it takes to satisfy folks that she could assume the presidency if required?

Kahuna, I agree. But the digging into her will go on. Just this morning I heard one journalist refer to her as "The Perfect Storm" With the investigation of her by her home state and other things yet to come out that they are investigating.

Originally Posted by barefoot at last

I am amazed at the continual references to the fact that Ms. Palin was the runner-up as Miss Alaska. Surely being good looking and a mother doesn't disqualify you from running for political office.

Ms. Palin is new, believes in change, has minimal political experience, and is running for VP. Mr. Obama is new, believes in change, has minimal political experience, and is running for the most important position in the world. Hmmmm.

Barefoot:
I agree with you on this one. This on is a no brainer.. :bigthumbsup: :bigthumbsup:

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I can't believe the spin being put on this situation. One candidate who is accused of not having enough experience explained his plans and won his nomination in a year-long campaign against nine other candidates, getting the vote of more than 10% of Americans.

The other candidate with little or no experience was appointed and is only now beginning to let Americans "see who she is".

Yet if you listen to the conservative spinmeisters, you would think that the appointed candidate is a newly-discovered Joan of Arc. Is her position on her devoutness, right-to-life, gay rights and gun control all it takes to satisfy folks that she could assume the presidency if required?

When you refer to spin, have you considered the spin that the Obama folks are putting on this? First and foremost, as barefoot points out, there is a HUGE difference between the requisite experience expected of a President, the leader of the free world, and the VP. Secondly, Obama's year and a half of campaigning didn't garner him one iota increase in "experience". The only thing it provided was a vetting in front of the American people. So, from an experience perspective, Obama is on roughly the same level as Palin - just that Palin is not stepping into the top job.

During Obama's vetting, I saw enough things in him in terms of his positions and judgement to be convinced that I don't want to see him as president. Other's saw him in a different light and agree with his positions (at least I hope it is his positions that they agree with and not just his ability to read a teleprompter in a very dramatic way.) Now we can vote on whether Obama's experience, positions and judgement make him more suitable for president than McCain, judged on the same attributes.

But, with respect to Palin's experience for the VP role, here is an intellectual honesty question: It was widely speculated that Tim Kaine was on Obama's short list for VP. Here is a candidate whose experience is very similar to Palin's (mayor then governor for the exact amount of time). The pundits and many Dems were extolling what a great pick he would be - not because of his knowledge or experience, but because he might deliver Virginia with all of its electoral votes to Obama. Had he been chosen, would anyone now critical of Palin really had made the same accusations of inexperience and political pandering against Kaine that they are against Palin? I think you know the answer to this one.

This conversation is extremely funny. Obama is so unqualified to be President that in order for supporters to fight for him, they must compare him to a VP pick rather than the qualified man he is running against.
Keep it up, you make Obama's detractor's points perfectly.
Obama supporters should check up on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and then tell the rest of us how throwing away $110,000,000 dollars meant to improve the Chicago school system reflects well on his leadership and judgement.

All this focus on Palin will soon be gone and the main focus will then be on McCain and his 1st important decision and that is on not choosing who really wanted as VP (Joe Lieberman) and letting a former big lobbyist who now is the head of McCain's campaign bully him into picking Palin. This should tell the American public the real truth about McCain.And I hope Obama/Biden make this the issue when the debates start and not fall into the trap that the Republicans would love to happen and that is by arguing that Palin is not qualified (which is true) but they (Obama/Biden) need to expound on the fact that McCain is NOT qualified to be President based on the way he chose his VP pick,and that is he can be bought by others and he isn't the maverick he claims he is (alot of false hype for yrs on that issue,I should say) anyway this will be a major issue I think.

That's exactly right Bare.....it is what makes the choice so difficult this election.

And remember when we judge Ms. Palin for being "only" a governor......Jimmy Carter made the leap from Governor of Georgia to President.

I think the question that should be asked is "Was she the most qualified woman?" The answer is patently no.

Interesting article on McCain's choice of Governor Palin. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/...ca/01palin.php

Tal, this quote from your article and McCain's book is interesting.
"At the very least, the process reflects McCain's history of making fast, instinctive and sometimes risky decisions. "I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can," McCain wrote, with his top adviser Mark Salter, in his 2002 book, "Worth the Fighting For." "Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint."

Samhass,

No, the question is, is she the most qualified person that extols the image of change, reform and tenacity that McCain wants in his presidency. The answer to that is an unqualified "yes".

Contrast that to Obama's pick. Obama's primary message during his campaign was "change", yet what was his first major decision as the nominee? Picking a VP candidate who has been around Washington since Obama was a teenager.

chelsea,

Just wondering ... are you as critical of Joe Biden abandoning his two young sons who just lost their mother and sibling in a car accident? Does his decision to continue as a senator, working many hours away from his kids with no parent back home to provide support make you question his fathering like you seem to question Palin's mothering (who has a supportive husband at hand)? Or, just perhaps do you have a double standard (different rules for men than women; or different rules for Republicans than Democrats)?
Something to think about.

Chels, as a fence sitter at this point, I think I heard a collective crotch-grabbing noise when Palin was announced from all the men who are terrified of having a women in the position of president or vice president. Perhaps pandering is the fact that Barrack Obama is the DNC presidential candidate rather than Hillary Clinton. I have been fact gathering and watching the election process since day one and the main theme I got from anti-Clinton voters was, "I can't stand that woman"! When I delicately questioned what was the policy or policies promoted by Hillary they found most offensive, hoping to garner info I didn't have, they could provide no basis for their dislike. They just didn't like her! I'm sure many of us watched Hillary speak at the DNC and were extremely impressed by this woman and what she stands for. Why isn't she the presidential candidate? It is said that her detractors when she took her senatorial seat admire her now. I even heard on one of the programs that her haircut was too short and she wore pantsuits, our media at work! Obama's past has some unsavory details that are not being promoted as are Palin's details. Enough of that junk! From my viewpoint, their experience is neck-in-neck. I don't want to hear anymore bull from the press so they can promote their candidates. I want to see Obama and McCain debating in town meetings and broadcasted public forums, then I can see the candidates through my eyes. The slanted press has election day to place their vote, they need to give us an unbiased report and nothing more about our candidates. I don't think the world will see a woman in any presidential or vice presidential office in the next fifty years. Sexism is a bigger problem at this point than racism, IMHO. Now should I post this or read it once more and delete.... Guess I'm only going round once here goes.... :dontknow:

NJBlue I've wondered the same thing.

Originally Posted by tucson

All this focus on Palin will soon be gone and the main focus will then be on McCain and his 1st important decision and that is on not choosing who really wanted as VP (Joe Lieberman) and letting a former big lobbyist who now is the head of McCain's campaign bully him into picking Palin. This should tell the American public the real truth about McCain.And I hope Obama/Biden make this the issue when the debates start and not fall into the trap that the Republicans would love to happen and that is by arguing that Palin is not qualified (which is true) but they (Obama/Biden) need to expound on the fact that McCain is NOT qualified to be President based on the way he chose his VP pick,and that is he can be bought by others and he isn't the maverick he claims he is (alot of false hype for yrs on that issue,I should say) anyway this will be a major issue I think.

Any actual proof to this (a Keith Olberman rant doesn't count) or is this whole thing something you originated after too many adult beverages?