Sarah Palin for Vice President!
Can't sleep. And, evidently, the clowns ARE trying to eat me:***As has been noted in several reputable editorial venues, Governor Sarah Palin, AK, has come across for many as too "green" — unseasoned — for the demands of the presidency, despite any potential the GOP might see in her candidacy. There *is*, I think, a solution in sight, and one that is both simple and time-tested:Run Governor Palin for the Vice Presidential slot! Think of the advantages. Ms. Palin, in the subservient role of VP, could learn how to play executive politics at the federal level under the guidance of a more experienced and seasoned veteran presence in Washington — say, Joseph Biden, or John McCain. Then, after four to eight years of seasoning — attending ceremonies, shoveling "ground-breaking" dirt, meeting dignitaries and going to funerals that don't rate the president's attendance — she could, if she worked hard, and attended cabinet meetings regularly, and occasionally popped over to the Houses to schmooze, yes; she could be ready for that presidential run everybody seems to be talking about this year. And that four-to-eight-years is important, too. One wouldn't want to run someone for a federal, executive position who had less than a year of executive experience — not for president, anyway! That's just asking for trouble down the line. But, see? In the VP slot? Those "noobs" would have access to the presidential milieu while not having to bear the main load directly. It would be like Steve Young carrying Joe Montana's clipboard all those years in San Francisco. Now, I think all we Californians and New Yorkers and Texans can agree that running governors of "backwater" hick states like Alaska for POTUS is a poor idea. Without seasoning? You'd just as soon run a governor of Vermont or Utah or Arkansas or Georgia for high office! You silly!But whether Governor of hick state or inexperienced legislator, the coveted VP position perfectly fits the bill for readying them for their own campaign a few years down the line. So — Sarah Palin for VP! It's not just a nice idea; it's necessary!I'm ;o/, and I wrote and approved this message.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
My concern is not so much her short tenure or sparse constituency. (And BTW, I'm not one who thinks that ANY 'executive' experience necessarily trumps a legislative resume. Abraham Lincoln was a one-term Representative who had been out of office for two years when he ran.)
My problem is what I have seen of her intellect - in both content and agility. Does that make me some kind of intellectual elite? I don't care: I want the leaders of my government to be smarter than I am, and I *certainly* want them to be smarter than the other countries' leaders. I want the smartest guys and gals in the room.
Content: I have yet to see any - and I mean ANY - substantive policy or strategic discussion from Sarah Palin. As I said in another post: Read the transcripts of her remarks - you pick which ones - as if they were answers to a middle school civics exam, and explain to me how anyone could give them more than a 'D'.
Agility: She gets flustered at seemingly simple questions or challenges. She recites talking points and then cannot speak to the underlying issues: She allows that some climate change MAY be man-made, then cannot name one possible human caused factor (burning carbon-based fuels perhaps? Ms Energy expert?). She can rail against Roe v Wade but cannot name one other Supreme Court decision she disagrees with. The feeling one gets is that she could not name another Supreme Court decision at all. She considers "what newspapers do you read" a 'gotcha' question.
My other problem is that so far, all I have seen from her is the same hyper-partisanship we have had since 2001, and it has not served the country well. Yes, I know it's a campaign and yes, the VP nominee is traditionally the attack dog, but still, it's good form to give at least SOME lip-service to bi-partisanship, or a 'we're all Americans' theme. I've not seen that from her. Quite the opposite: she has shown pure 'us vs them'. I've had quite enough of that, thanks but no thanks.
Ethics: Got some problems there too. Yes, so do the rest of them. But these are current issues, and at least as indicative of character as plagiarism or real estate deals: A finding of abuse of power. Interference in state personnel matters. Backchannel email accounts. Spouse performing official executive functions. Expense accounts covering family travel. Per diem claims for home stays.
And here's the elephant: She may not HAVE four or eight years to prepare to be President. That's true for anyone, but in her case the President would be the oldest ever elected to a first term, and who has a history of serious health problems.
Now McCain may live to be 115 for all I know - and I hope he does - but it's my opinion that even 20 years of prep would not be long enough for Sarah Palin. I just don't see that she has what it takes. As John Dean has pointed out: would she receive Senate and House confirmation if nominated for VP under the 25th Amendment? Would McCain even nominate her under those circumstances? Questions to ponder.
And that's the real shame. Off the top of my head, I can name a half-dozen far more qualified GOP women who could credibly step into the White House tomorrow: Kay Bailey Hutchison, Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Condoleezza Rice, Christine Todd Whitman, Elizabeth Dole. I'm sure there are many more from academia, think tanks and state and local governments. I'd rather McCain had put country first and selected one of them.
Reply to this
I love Condi, too.
But let's face it. Look up the average lifespan of presidents after, say, 1960. Consider the Codger, who is older than McCain will be when he EXITS office in 4 years (if elected).
I don't vote based on whether McCain's gonna die or Obama's gonna get (knock on wood) assassinated. That's a fool's reasoning, and poor risk assessment.
IMO
Reply to this
PS I should note again that the satiric thrust of the article is to underline (which, to me, is silly, but there ya go) the fact that Palin is a VP candidate, which many, many people are ignoring in favor of the false alternative hypothesis that she is running for president, or that the GOP is running her for president.
Not to take away in the slightest from your mostly high-caliber critiques of her.
You and I know (or at least I do) that the GOP may want her in the White House for one major reason -- to cut the legs out from under a fading, McCain-like Hillary Clinton in 2012. I saw that within about 5 minutes of the announcement; didn't you? ;o)
Reply to this
Despite what Cheney and Palin may think, there are only two jobs for the Vice President specified in the Constitution: Break ties in the Senate and replace the President.
It's not fool's reasoning to assess Palin's qualifications based on that job description. Especially given the physical condition of the President in this case, which is not optimal.
The Codger, youthful as he is, does not have a more-than-full-time job that involves making policy, economic and security decisions that affect the entire world. You've seen how even four years in office ages guys in their 50s and 60s. The chronological time is almost irrelevant.
And my point was that <4 years training for Governor Palin was a very real possibility that you did not address in the original article.
But, succession aside, in my view she's innately unqualified for the job based on the reasons I listed.
Reply to this
Innately? A sitting governor? I'm honestly wondering how Obama has more experience. And he's up for president, not "maybe president"
Every one of your critiques of the GOP #2 applies to the Dem #1 - without exception. Be honest about it.
Off script he's a nightmare.
There is no substance in his policies beyond vague promises to be "different." You choose any transcript of any debate. There's nothing there except prepared talking points and no understanding or plain avoidance of underlying issues.
Talk about repeating the last 8 years, you like his potential and his reliance on his advisors? That's Bush 2000 all over again - the Accidental President.
Who are Barack's advisors today and are they the same ones he had in February? Are they the same ones he will have in January? People don't trust the puppet masters, especially those who try to hide themselves... those guys no one would vote for...
You need to pick Obama over *McCain* and instead you pick Obama over Bush or Palin
in spite of the observation that sometimes when you describe who you want, you describe McCain more than Obama. You have respect for McCain.
re: the "see Russia from Alaska" gaffe from Palin and others - is this as egregious as I'll serve for "eight or ten years or whatever." or I've been to "fifty-seven states with two to go."
If you're grading elementary school civics, I think missing the term of service for the President and number of states questions warrants a D at the most.
I DON'T hold those mis-statements and others from Obama as significant, and I wonder why you hold the same level of interaction as significant from Palin.
It's a losing battle if you persist on that one, especially when you open up Mr Biden, the guy you say is smarter than you... how long would we ridicule Dan Quayle for saying FDR went on TV the day the stock market fell to ease the nation?
I don't trust any one source on any Obama matter unless it's my own ears (a no-fly zone in Darfur?! citing the "best educational system in the world" as the one in the Phillipines.) I need more than two un-related sources and I never trust or use any entertainer as a source.
That said, it is slighty possible that your sourcing *might* be underestimating Ms Palin, *and* that that it's perfectly okay with her to be underestimated...
... *if* true, how cool is that?
Southern Californians know the lesson of Sonny Bono. Ridiculed for his "aw shucks" and idiot personna by people "smarter" than he, he let them have their opinion. He just went on to be successful at five different careers to the highest level.
As far as DC went, a DC lobbyist I spoke with in the 90s (whenever Sonny was still alive, I don't remember the year) volunteered that Sonny was the toughtest guy in DC at the time.
... BECAUSE he truly didn't mind if anyone considered him a fool or even consider themselves his intellectual or social superior... he beat them anyway.
Reply to this
I had a 1,500 character, brilliant riposte that somehow got nuked before it published. I don't have the time or energy to respond now, raymurgy, but most of my points I probably already covered in my email response to you the other day.
More later!
Reply to this
Just to be clear, I don't love Condi, but I do think she'd be a credible replacement for a sitting President.
Reply to this
Cog: I feel your pain on the 1500 word thing. :o(
Also, if you don't like Condi, well -- we have nothing further to discuss. hmph. She's my total crush.
;o/
Reply to this