Obama's Response to Palin's Speech

Senator Obama issued this response to Gov. Palin's speech:

The speech that Governor Palin gave was well delivered, but it was written by George Bush's speechwriter and sounds exactly like the same divisive, partisan attacks we've heard from George Bush for the last eight years. If Governor Palin and John McCain want to define 'change' as voting with George Bush 90% of the time, that's their choice, but we don't think the American people are ready to take a 10% chance on change."

Obama took a few hits tonight from Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee on his experience. I think unless he confronts that argument head-on, the attacks will increase and begin to resonate. He can't do it by relying on Biden, unless it's in the context of combined ticket experience.


From my vantage point, it's playing Russian Roulette to put Palin so close to the presidency. She doesn't even have a grasp on the important issues facing the nation let alone any idea how to respond to a crisis. Obama's been surrounded by experts for 17 months. His presidential team is probably already selected. Should something happen to him, all Biden needs is a different nameplate on the door. You can't prepare for the Presidency in 60 days and McCain is recklessly endangering the country with his Palin pick.

< Move Over John Edwards, The Enquirer Goes After Palin | Late Night: The Road to Nowhere >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    One small correction (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:23:13 PM EST
    Even starting with your assumptions that she is not ready and somehow Sen Obama is ready because of campaigning I'd like to point out Gov Palin would have at least four months to get ready, even assuming something happened to a theoretical president-elect McCain.

    If Obama is read because of campaigning (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by demchick on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:30:08 PM EST
    then should we not take into account the campaigning the other candidates, including Sarah Palin, have done?

    her three days of campaigning (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:46 PM EST
    for national office? Sure, you can count that. Then compare it to 17 months of prepping for debates, retaining policy advisers, reading position papers, testing them out on other experts and refining them, on every issue from social security to foreign policy. The latter makes me feel much more comfortable than the idea of someone who rides in as the Hail Mary pass of an unpopular Reoublican who is dead wrong on almost every issue.

    What effect do see the VP having (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:29 PM EST
    on foreign policy, assuming the president is Sen. McCain?  

    my point is you can't make that assumption (4.14 / 7) (#87)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:59:08 PM EST
    with a 72 year old president with a history of cancer. It's russian roulette. His vp has to be ready on day 1. She's not even close. I could do a better job. At least I know the functions of our agencies, about the separation of powers and the Constitution and how to interpret a piece of legislation. How long would it take her to understand the issue of warrantless wiretapping or Guantanamo? Or Medicare or social security? Running highway services and land use planning adn giving tax incentives to businesses or knowing a bit about energy is not remotely equivalent.

    no President reads legislation line by line (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by ChuckieTomato on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:18:59 AM EST
    they get briefings. And rarely do Congressmen write legislation.

    Their staff do the work, and they participate.


    I thought (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by txpolitico67 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:52:35 AM EST
    lobbyists drafted legislation, or had big say so's in it (being serious here).

    Dunno. (none / 0) (#165)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:56:29 AM EST
    McCain's 94 or whatever year-old momma was at the convention last night and she looked to be in pretty dam good shape.

    That's 658 in dog years.


    You know that this (5.00 / 3) (#47)
    by demchick on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:30 PM EST
    is a losing argument. even the dems on CNN said comparing campaigning to actual experienc was prbably a mistake. Come on.

    Can we be real?


    can you? (none / 0) (#92)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:01:05 AM EST
    Palin's record on issues of national import (apart from oil) is non-existent. Can you say the same about Obama? or for a more apt comparison, Biden?

    Can we be real?


    It is (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by frenly on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:47:48 PM EST
    a losing argument.  Saying Obama is more qualified or experienced because he's been running for president is a weird and weak argument.  Obama needs to take the gloves off, but I don't think he can

    Wouldn't that apply to other former presidents? (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:57:44 PM EST
    Campaigning gaves one much experience in campaigning but there is a world of difference between campaigns and leading the government.

    For example, GWB campaigned at least as long as Obama did - he was surrounded by foreign policy experts and had his famous "tutorials" in texas.  that did not make him equipped to deal with the situation when that American plane went down over China, not to mention the 9/11 attacks.

    Now look at his running mate - a person who had about as much foreign policy experience as any VP.  Did that make him a good VP?  or one who has exercised excellent judgement on foreign policy?


    I don't live in the past (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:00:52 AM EST
    I'm looking to the future. Even Rudy said tonight we should do that. Having her in our future as the #2 in command with a better than average chance she'd be number #1 is not in the best interests of our future.

    But this goes to your argument (5.00 / 3) (#116)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:17:27 AM EST
    Briefings on the campaign trail do not make one an expert in foreign policy.  They may enhance knowledge a little bit; more likely they provide readily available sound bites if a reporter asks about the topic du jour. Given that a candidate is usually given simultaneous position papers on the economy, health care, local isssues for whatever community they are visiting, newspaper articles, etc, etc, a campaign trail might - in fact - be one of the worst areas to truly delve into and understand a complex issue.  It's not like these folks can spend 2-3 hours discussing the geopolitical ramifications of tariff levels in East Africa.  They are lucky if they can sit down to eat lunch.

    Frankly, few presidents are truly prepared for the job once they get it - if they are lucky and smart, they surround themselves wth experts on the particular issues facing the nation and know enough to ask the right questions.  But people work for decades to get that kind of expertise - it takes longer to get a masters in international affairs than Obama has been on the trail.

    I understand you think Palin is far right wing - I don't disagree.

    But claiming a campaign prepares one to be president is quite a stretch.


    Intellectual interest (none / 0) (#132)
    by indiependy on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:32:10 AM EST
    I would also say that a strong intellectual interest is key. Obama, but especially Biden, have shown a strong desire to understand all angles, parameters, situations, etc. involved with foreign policy. There's numerous accounts of the insightful questions and discussions they've had with those closest to the situations.

    You don't see them make obvious Sunni/Shiite flubs, like McCain repeated has. He's also been less than accurate in describing the situation on the ground more than once. It's too similar to the cavalier way Bush acts in regard to foreign policy. As is Palin's comments of "I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq" or that it's "a task that is from God".


    Speaking of Rudy (none / 0) (#110)
    by indiependy on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:12:55 AM EST
    Tonight he claimed that Palin's executive experience shores up a weakness that McCain had. With friends like Rudy...

    Those who don't (none / 0) (#162)
    by txpolitico67 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:53:59 AM EST
    learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

    Experience doesn't make a good Prez (none / 0) (#147)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:46:03 AM EST
    ... but it is a necessary condition.  That's the difference.

    Nixon had tons of experience in 1968, but because he had other failings, well,  you know the rest.

    Conversely, however, having virtually no experience at all is a problem.

    I can't see Palin dealing with a world crisis, where she's squeezed by some politicians on one hand, some foreign policy emergency on the other, and generals in the Pentagon on the third hand.

    It's not that she lacks hands-on experience (after all, who gets that?) -- but she lacks any evidence that's she ever given any thought to foreign policy.  I don't blame her -- she was in town and state govt and had no need.

    Obama has obviously given great thought, had advisors, been on various foreign relations Senate committees, etc.

    Again, experience isn't everything -- but it's still needed.  


    Lincoln? (none / 0) (#151)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:48:01 AM EST

    Lincoln was in the Illinois state senate (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by lastamendment on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:35:49 AM EST
    Something that Palin apparently thinks amounts to nothing.

    I'm only partly joking here. Even if we accept Palin's tortured calculation that Obama has no more experience than she does, he certainly has no less. Biden has a lot more than she does anyway.

    Experience certainly helps but that is far from relevant here. I think the point is that Palin will use whatever experience she has to further the wrong causes and push the nation in the wrong direction.

    Even Hillary Clinton herself urged those who voted for her to vote for Obama. It may be a bitter pill to swallow, but Obama-Biden is the only sensible vote as far as I can see.

    Splitting hairs over mayor versus community organizer is just the kind of argument Republicans want, because it will distract from the real arguments such as, how can we improve health care? how can we end the war in Iraq? and so on.


    Foreign policy? (none / 0) (#164)
    by txpolitico67 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:56:12 AM EST
    I am no Lincoln scholar but the biggest crisis President Lincoln dealt with was the Civil War. If you want to equate that with foreign policy...I guess if you consider the southern part of the USA foreign back then.

    What? (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:07:11 AM EST
    Actually, the Civil War involved quite a bit of foreign policy.  Namely, keeping good relations with the French and the British so they wouldn't intervene for the South.  And there was trouble brewing south of the border pretty much the entire time.  Keep in mind too that there were constant military actions against and diplomatic negotiations with Native Americans throughout the 19th Century.

    However, I am hard pressed to debate the idea that the CIVIL WAR was less of a problem than foreign policy.  


    Obama camp not good with quick response: (5.00 / 3) (#122)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:23:58 AM EST
    The speech that Governor Palin gave was well delivered, but it was written by George Bush's speechwriter and sounds exactly like the same divisive, partisan attacks we've heard from George Bush for the last eight years."

    The charge that she didn't write her own speech is not a good point of emphasis. Not after the cross-over we've seen in the speeches of Deval Patrick and Obama. And of course, Obama has a speechwriter of his own, as does every politician.

    As for Obama's criticism that the speech was "divisive and partisan". Well, yeah: it's called firming up your base. She's a Republican and the GOP has NO inclination, and no incentive, to be post-partisan. It's the Dems who've made that MISTAKE for the past two election cycles, and now again for a third time.

    *Hillary, however, was not headed in that direction, and the Party STILL can't see the wisdom of her strategy. Can we MAKE them see it before November?


    you are missing the point of Obama message (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:36:15 AM EST
    The point IS NOT that she did not write her speech. The point they are making is because it is George Bush's speechwriter it is GB's tired old politics and policies. They are going to begin to tag her as being the same as Bush. Nothing to do with her speech writing.

    i dont think many watching (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by sancho on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:02:49 AM EST
    palin tonight were thinking of george bush. and that's the problem. unfortunately, i dont think that telling people she's like bush is going to work. she's not like bush. and i understand the point that she will help mccain govern like bush but her appeal (or not) is visceral. you cant argue it away. you have to change the subject.

    or slime her out of the race. maybe that will work if enough media outlest pile on.

    hard for me to support that approach.


    I agree, it could be a big problem (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by daria g on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:09:29 AM EST
    She's clearly not Bush.  I think a lot of hardcore conservatives are PO'd at Bush for spending a lot of money and expanding government (albeit in an utterly incompetent way), and she argued just the opposite.  It could turn out to be brilliant, I don't know yet - but if the Dems didn't effectively define what they would do, McCain/Palin are laying out the case for what they would do, and it's not Bush.  (Not to say it wouldn't be the wrong direction for the country and terrible for the general public IMHO, but it's a different wrong direction than Bush.)

    That was petty IMHO (5.00 / 2) (#174)
    by daria g on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:04:59 AM EST
    Does Obama write all his own speeches?  Does Biden?  Hate to sound like a broken record but I have not heard one pundit or opponent, after a male politician goes out there and gives a speech, criticize the guy for not writing his own speech.  In fact the only time you hear about it is in the unusual circumstance that one of them THROWS OUT the written speech and writes their own speech, a la Webb giving the Dem response to State of the Union two years ago, or Schweitzer doing his own thing last week at the convention.

    Exactly- why this patronizing focus on the witer (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by AlSmith on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:53:30 AM EST

    We dont hear men "delivered" the speech. And endlessly about how there are speech writers- and yet they are all using them.

    Why is Palin the only one who gets slighted with "delivering" the words a man wrote? We cant say that the woman gave a great speech and leave it at that? The "brainy" part has to be given to her by a guy?

    MSNBC (who else) has a poll up about her speech- one of the options is "It remains to be seen what she can do on the campaign trail without a teleprompter and speech writer." Classy.


    it's not about her writing a speech (none / 0) (#208)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:08:19 AM EST
    Folks, the mention of the Bush speechwriter has absolutely nothing to do with belittling her ability to write a speech. It is 100% about linking her to Bush by suggesting they both use the same speech writers and therefore sound the same and have the same policies.

    This is the Obama strategy...while they will hit him for experience, he will hit back and tie them both to Bush.

    That is all it is. It is not a sexist comment.


    Odd (none / 0) (#194)
    by lastamendment on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:41:55 AM EST
    but I have not heard one pundit or opponent, after a male politician goes out there and gives a speech, criticize the guy for not writing his own speech.  

    How then did we all find out that Obama was suspected of plagiarism? Somehow it got to the media's attention, so that's at least one counterexample to your claim.

    I don't think this is sexism at play here. I think the Obama camp made too much of a tepid response, and botched trying to link Palin to Bush via the speech.

    They should have ignored the speechwriting stuff and gone straight for Palin's hypocrisy and distortion in the speech itself.


    I know, but it's a dicey point because (none / 0) (#149)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:46:56 AM EST
    It allows the opposition to dredge up the issue of plagarism, which has plagued both Obama and Biden. I don't want to see that happen.

    I wish these guys had enough common-sense and/or street-smarts to spare themselves this plainly forseeable BLOWBACK.


    Plagarism (none / 0) (#167)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:56:52 AM EST
    Won't be an issue. BO is well known as a wonderful writer who writes much of his own speeches. They won't waste their time. And the only data point for BO is the borrowing of Deval Patrick speech which Deval has already said he let BO use.

    Biden...too far in past and not much to politicize at this point.


    The point in your last paragraph continues (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:25:05 PM EST
    to be, with all do respect, nuts.

    And it's hard for Obama to confront this issue head on. Because he really doesn't have much experience. About 10 years. 8 of them part time. That's why he always talks about judgement.

    Obama's experience... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34:09 PM EST
    ...comes in one of the largest and most populous states in the union.  His senate district in the Illinois state Senate had a hundred thousand more people in it that in all of the state of Alaska.  He has been politically answerable to millions of more people than she has.  Also, she has spent her entire life in relative isolation and segregation.  Sorry, that means something.  Something important.  Also, with an interracial brother and sister of my own, with whom I share a mother and not a father, Obama's experience required more than just political will.  It took personal strength, and a belief in himself and his country that is so easy to lose when you are essentially abandoned by your father and considered, by many, as neither black enough or white enough.  

    Being interracial is not Presidential (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:29 PM EST
    experience. It's great to know that representing 600,000 people prepares a person to be President of 300,000,000 while representing 500,000 does not.

    The last (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by JThomas on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:49:26 PM EST
    four years he has represented 13 million people along with Durbin ...

    Again, the last two years have been (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:51:57 PM EST
    spent (out of necessity) campaigning. Durbin has been a Senator for 12 years. I really would have prefered him as our candidate.

    She has barely seen the world for crying out loud (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:43:36 AM EST
    She had never been anywhere where she needed a passport until 2007 when she visited her Natl Guard troops overseas.

    Talk about a lack of a world view

    No matter what you say about Obama...he has been about the world, he has life experiences that are much more relevant to our national needs then someone who has basically never left the state of Alaska her whole life. Think of it...a Vice President who has never been to Europe or Asia? Never been out of this country until she was 43 years old?

    Obama has been Senator for a populous state. A state senator for many years. A Harvard Law graduate. Been around the world. And, as Jeralyn said, the fact that he has spent the last 18 months campaigning, developing policy, arguing his position...Frankly there is no comparison.


    She went to school at Univ.of (none / 0) (#199)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:48:25 AM EST
    Idaho.  went to Germany.  Obama went to Kenya and Indonesia, and recently on his tour abroad.  

    University of Idaho??? (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:03:41 AM EST
    You are kidding me, right? Seeing the world and you throw Idaho at me? Alaska and Idaho don't even represent much of a cross section of the US let alone the world.

    I believe she went to Germany on her way to visit her natl guard...ah, let's see, when she was in her 40's.

    I believe that is the trip that required her to get a passport for the first time...


    Illinois has a full-time professional legislature. (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by Llelldorin on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:07:01 AM EST
    You're thinking of states like Alaska that have part-time legislatures.

    Illinois state senate districts represent a bit more than 200,000 people each, by the way--they're more than 30 times the size of Wasilla, or about a third the size of Alaska.


    Stop with the facts! (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:15:26 AM EST
    They're interfering with my narrative!



    In reality (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by Steve M on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:24:09 AM EST
    The Illinois legislature is essentially a hybrid between full and part time, not to interfere with your moment of triumphalism or anything.

    Maybe people should just get in the habit of posting "Thanks for telling me what I wanted to hear."


    right (none / 0) (#192)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:40:35 AM EST
    That's me all right. I'm all about the triumphalism. The basic point is that the introduction of facts into the narrative that "Obama's experience is equal to or less than Palin's" is welcome. But if you feel the need to play gotcha, don't let me stop you.

    Uh huh (none / 0) (#195)
    by Steve M on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:43:40 AM EST
    Well, introducing facts is always nice, but it's nicer if those facts are, you know, factual.

    Someone made a factual assertion that the Illinois legislature is part-time.  Someone else made a factual assertion that it's actually full-time.  Oddly, you chose to cheer on the second person for introducing "facts" into the debate without having any idea yourself whether they were right or wrong.


    Uh huh (none / 0) (#202)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:55:36 AM EST
    Factual facts are, of course, preferred. But I was applauding (snarkily, to be sure) the actual attempt to ground the discourse on something more than nonsensical opinion. And at least the fact was half-right! ;-)

    If you prefer to mind-read my comments, that's your privilege, but I don't appreciate your condescending tone.


    Look here, factually incorrect (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by Marvin42 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:20:59 AM EST
    NY Times


    Asked why he ran for the Senate ... Mr. Obama said: "Part of it was that the seat opened up. I was living in the district, and the state legislature was a part-time position. It allowed me to get my feet wet in politics and test out whether I could get something done."


    Yeah, it's a hybrid... (none / 0) (#139)
    by Llelldorin on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:36:07 AM EST
    Steve M has the best link... the NCSL rates them as "Red Lite"--session time somewhere between full-time legislatures like CA and NY and hybrid states like CT and OR.

    As little experience as Obama may have (4.00 / 3) (#11)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:29:03 PM EST
    He has significantly more than Palin. That so many here refuse to acknowledge this is really pretty amazing.

    I don't give a damn about Palin. She (5.00 / 4) (#20)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:32:14 PM EST
    isn't running for President. And no, 8 years as a state Senator and 2 as a national Senator isn't significantly more. Than 4 years city council, 6 years mayor, a couple years on the commission  and 2 years as governor.

    not that it matters to you (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:41:13 PM EST
    but he's been a Senator for 4 years. I suppose you want to discount the last two because he's been actively campaigning, but that's not entirely fair.

    Palin is not running for President, but does it not concern you that she would be tabbed to become President if something happened to McCain? Does his judgment in picking this particular person to be in that position concern you?

    It does me.


    I'm more concerned with McCain being (5.00 / 0) (#57)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:45:10 PM EST
    President (because he is unacceptable) then with McCain dying and the equally unacceptable Palin taking over (because it is unlikely).

    Get your math right (4.00 / 3) (#63)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:47:16 PM EST
    Obama has been on the Foreign Relations Committee for 3 and half years....And was a State Representative for a major constituency for 8 years....

    City Council of a 7000 person town?  Mayor who wanted to ban books and fire the librarian?  Your bias is showing.....


    Obama has barely been in the Senate since (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:49:37 PM EST
    2006. I don't fault him for that. But it's silly to count time he spent campaigning as time in office. I live in a large State Senate District (all State Senate Districts are large here). State Senate experience doesn't really prepare anyone for the Presidency.

    Nonsense (2.00 / 1) (#204)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:58:49 AM EST
    Obama has still cast Senate votes, done Senate work, and worked with his colleagues.

    And re State Senate experience--it has been very good experience for the Presidency....

    But continue with McCain talking points if you must.....  



    exuse me (3.50 / 6) (#44)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:14 PM EST
    but if John McCain dies in his sleep on the first night in the oval office, we get her. I'm not rolling those dice.

    Perhaps you should worry about (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:42:32 PM EST
    Obama's demise also, given how strongly opposed you are to Biden on crime, druge war, etc. I just don't see it.  A recent poll of people McCain's age or older showed a majority did not think his age or health history was a negative to his being President.

    you would base the future (4.25 / 4) (#97)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:03:25 AM EST
    of our country on what polls say?

    As much as I dislike Biden on crime issues, he's far less of a threat than a Republican. Plus, aside from crime, he's okay on foreign policy, civil rights, education, social security and health care.


    I completely see how (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Jgarza on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:53:37 AM EST
    Jeralyn comes at this.  In the context of the primary it is hard to stomach Joe Bidens crime record.  But compare it to all the junk we just heard at the RNC and it seems wonderful.  There are lots of Dems better on crime than Biden, but this is a race against republicans, and they frighten me.

    No, I wouldn't. I have never (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:10:47 AM EST
    supported a Republican ticket and won't now.  But I'm not worried about Sen. McCain dying his first month in office either. Life's unpredictable for either candidate.

    My first instinct is to respond to your (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by tigercourse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:43:01 PM EST
    post by pointing out that the similarly inexperienced Obama will be President without anyone dying. But I know you don't like people to be negative about Obama.

    I think it's sufficent that things will be pretty darn bad if McCain DOESN'T die his first day in office because his policies are so bad.


    The probability that McCain (none / 0) (#137)
    by frankly0 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:34:48 AM EST
    would die in his first day of office, or his first few months, is close to zero - especially from cancer, which you can't seem to stop yourself from bringing up.

    If you really wanted to figure out the probabilities, I posted a comment on them.

    According to the table, someone of 72, knowing nothing else about him, has about a 97.5% probability of surviving until he's 73.  But McCain is a far more favorable case. He is otherwise healthy (and, sorry, you've given no evidence that the type of skin cancer he has survived -- and for which he is regularly examined -- makes him any more likely to die from cancer than anyone else, despite your insinuations). That would likely reduce his chance of death over the next year very considerably, probably so that his chance of survival is 99% or better.

    Compare that ~1% probability of Palin taking over because of McCain's death with the 100% probability that the inexperienced Obama would take over if elected.

    I mean, if you're playing the odds, and you have any kind of rationality, whose inexperience do you consider to be a greater concern?


    And one further point (5.00 / 0) (#143)
    by frankly0 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:43:15 AM EST
    There's someone else who certainly has a heightened risk of death from disease in this election cycle.

    As best I can make out, he is still very much a smoker, as he has been throughout his adult life. If there's anyone who has a heightened risk for death, it's a lifelong, chronic smoker, who can die from many, many diseases.

    I wouldn't be surprised to learn that a man who is a lifelong, chronic smoker, is now 47, and will be 51 by the end of his first term, might be every bit as likely to die as a basically healthy 72 year old.

    If we must all discuss endlessly what it would be like to have Palin as President, maybe we should equal time talking about what it would be like to have Biden as President, because that strikes me as possibly being equally likely.


    Obama is already in that high risk age group (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by JavaCityPal on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:20:38 AM EST
    for men and heart attacks and the office of POTUS is very high stress.

    I've never heard of anyone suddenly falling over dead from skin cancer that is in remission.


    McCain's history of cancer (2.00 / 1) (#205)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:01:42 AM EST
    is not the sign of good health.....He is old and shows it.....

    It seems the link to the relevant (none / 0) (#154)
    by frankly0 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:50:58 AM EST
    government document is not working in the post of mine that I linked to.

    Here's a link that should work.


    I think I've made it clear (5.00 / 2) (#156)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:52:11 AM EST
    I believe she has zero relevant experience and Obama has some. So obviously, I prefer him on the experience issue. Coupled with the fact that he has the right position on issues and she is an extension of James Dobson and the radical right, it's a no brainer.

    I totally agree (none / 0) (#200)
    by lastamendment on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:51:29 AM EST
    You summed up my opinion perfectly.

    Think of it this way - it's my scenario for those who are claiming that Palin beats or matches Obama on experience:

    George W. Bush now has 8 years of experience as president. Suppose he could somehow run again. He would automatically be the most experienced candidate in the field. Indeed, it is the most experience possible for a candidate given the current system. Would you therefore vote for Bush over Obama given Bush's giant advantage in experience?

    I know I wouldn't. Because I know that Bush has used whatever experience he had, and all that he gained, to move this nation in the wrong direction. I'm willing to take a chance that Obama's relatively slight resume won't be as important as his movement in the right direction. And his resume is no lighter than Palin's, by any calculation.


    Obama's mortality (none / 0) (#203)
    by AlSmith on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:57:48 AM EST

    I saw an article on this somewhere today.

    Since Obama is a black life long smoker, his mortality rate for four years is higher than you'd suspect. Thats with out adding in the assassination factor that people assume.

    I think its bunk on both side. Presidents get the best health care and continual checks. No one is dying.


    Getting old and losing (none / 0) (#207)
    by MKS on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:05:30 AM EST
    mental vitality.....

    No one is as good at 72 as they were in their early 60s....Especially the very old looking McCain.

    Wise old man giving advice, perhaps.  But in the saddle doing battle every day, no.


    Palin isn't running for president? (none / 0) (#197)
    by lastamendment on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:44:55 AM EST
    Neither was LBJ, then?

    By what metric? (none / 0) (#34)
    by ineedalife on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:36:31 PM EST
    Please illuminate us.

    huh? (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:27:01 PM EST
    you want Obama to jab like Jerry Quarry?

    i want Obama to jab like Muhammad Ali

    what (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by mymy on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:29:23 PM EST
    difference does it make who wrote the speech? That a pretty lame criticism.What politican writes their own speech?

    Very, very lame (5.00 / 8) (#17)
    by demchick on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:31:35 PM EST
    And Anderson Cooper pointed it out. He said they never harp on who wrote Biden's speech or Obama's speeches. It's time to stop talking about Palin that way.

    She gave a great speech and exceeded expectations. We need to get used to the fact that she isn't going away.


    I think you're missing the basic point (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34:29 PM EST
    that the speech was, in large measure, written before the candidate was selected. It is literally a template speech with a few homey, Palin-specific details written in -- kinda like Mad-libs for politicians: <Insert touching family story here>.

    That is the point about who wrote the speech, not that she didn't do it herself.

    I hope we can aspire to a greater level of insight than that provided by Anderson Cooper.


    Obama writes his own speeches (3.66 / 3) (#70)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:51:36 PM EST
    for the most part--they represent his thinking, not a packaged set of sarcastic attack lines...

    I am sorry but I can't let this go (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:55:47 PM EST
    Did he also used to write Deval Patrick's speeches before to make extra money? Or they happen to channel a strange common line of thoughts, because parts of their speeches are identical.

    You should have let it go (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:52:34 AM EST
    First, Obama writes many of his speeches.

    Second, it has already been established that Obama asked Deval about using those lines. Regardless, it is absurd to pick out one or two phrases that he borrowed and make a generalization given that it is already well known that he writes most of his own speeches. Give this one a rest because no matter what you want to say about him, he is a brillant writer.

    Third, Obama campaign comment about George Bush speechwriter..i said this already elsewhere. The point they are making has nothing to do with whether she wrote the speech. What they are doing is tying her to Bush. That's it. Just saying that here is another person from the Bush camp.They are trying to tag her with the "more of the same, another Bush term."


    well they're friends (none / 0) (#168)
    by borisbor on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:57:14 AM EST
    and he has said they often discuss the issues and themes they talk about in their speeches. k?

    Im sorry but I can't let your comment go either (none / 0) (#188)
    by ps911fan on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:27:22 AM EST
    Ignoring your desire to subtly slam Obama, the issue is that Barack and Deval are very close friends...as a coordinator and organizer for both campaigns Obama worked with Deval Patrick to get him elected.

    They share and collaborate on speeches.....can you let what ever it is that you want to do snark on go and lets get back to looking at Palin and McSame and putting them to rest.

    The argument of experience in a change year can easily be rendered moot. People want to go in a different direction. Its one of the reasons Obama won. This argument should continue to parry against either McSame or Palin's inability to escape the far right who have destroyed the GOP, thats the argument. Neither of these people can escape the same tired rovian rheoteric.

    You may not be willing to accept it but a lot more people are weary and are just a vote away from rejecting the old, no idea GOP.

    However its time to move ahead positively.....thats something to grab on to....


    Phonetic spellings (none / 0) (#119)
    by indiependy on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:20:39 AM EST
    Apparently the  prepared text of Palin's speech that went to the press had this:

    "Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay"

    Anyone who saw her acceptance speech as well as this one knows she definitely changed her pronunciation of nuclear. Not that it's a huge deal, just kinda funny that they'd be so sloppy in releasing the text that way.


    *sigh* (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Brillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:59 PM EST
    It's a reference to how snarky/divisive/negative in tone the speech was.  As well as an attempt to tie (yet again) Bush around the necks of the McCain/Palin ticket.

    It's not a criticism of her having used a speech writer.  As you said, everyone does it.


    Really? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by indiependy on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34:07 PM EST
    Is that a serious question with Barack Obama on top of the ticket?

    Beyond that a key thing is this speech was not just written by someone else, it was written before it was decided she was to be the VP nominee. McCain's campaign said they had to change some of the language because they wrote it for a man.


    are you serious? (1.00 / 0) (#18)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:31:53 PM EST
    Politicians may hire speechwriters, but they are their OWN speechwriters, hired to convey their own point of view. Serious, experienced politicians do not need or read speeches prepared by other candidates' speechwriters, especially generic ones that were prepared before the candidate was even selected.

    Her speech was a lot about oil and Alaska (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by hairspray on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:39:22 PM EST
    I think she at least dictated that part to a speech writer. She knows that topic quite well. She did a good job in her delivery and she is quite captivating.  Unfortunately she talked only about national security in terms of energy (oil & gas) security. Nothing about diplomacy, or economic stability although she did mention nuclear power, alternative energy as ways to free ourselves from the clutches of foreign oil princes and we all know we have to do that.  Global warming? nope!

    I thought the wonkish 'foreign energy' part (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Don in Seattle on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:24:23 AM EST
    of her speech was cleverly crafted -- not by Palin -- to make it LOOK like she had some real foreign policy expertise.

    Interesting points... (none / 0) (#135)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:34:06 AM EST
    Palin didn't mention "global warming" as you've pointed out Hairspray. She talked about oil, gas, nuclear power and mentioned alternative energy - as did Obama in his acceptance.  

    To my recollection, OBAMA also failed to mention global warming (or climate change/crisis) in his acceptance speech. Does anybody remember it differently?


    She didnt talk about much of anything (none / 0) (#190)
    by ps911fan on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:36:58 AM EST
    Biggest MIA issue was the economy.,..outside of the words (as Bill Maher says) that make "values voters" hit the petals....there was zero substantive material about the economy, true energy independence which has more to do than drill drill drill

    The speech was just a screed of tired one liners, a warm bucket of red meat to excite the thugs in the audience, and an effort to make a person with the gravitas of helium more substantial.

    The fact that it was a template speech didn't help but i do agree its not a showstopper, but it does show that she was unprepared to step up and make her own substantial points.....

    I think that was the crux of the Obama response.

    We can do a lot here or at least those who are willing to fight for saving this country from McSame by helping those who are wanting to buy the Palin "values" meme by returning them to why their pocketbooks are hurting and why their economic situation is dire. And returning to a bad war as economic and country killer, we can tie Iraq easily to the plight of so many today.

    Its not difficult...if the desire is there to make this point clear as polished glass


    Some would say... (none / 0) (#103)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:07:05 AM EST
    GW Bush is too dumb and intellectually lazy to be President; and he may have slept-walked through his years as Governor of Texas.

    Anyhow, I don't think many people believe GW Bush has actually functioned as President for the last 8 years. So, who was running the show: Cheney, WHIG (White House Iraq Group), the Neo-Cons? I trust the show would have gone on if either Bush or cheney had croaked.

    So, how experienced and/or smart does one need to be to fill the office of POTUS or VP nowadays?

    Will any old meat-puppet suffice?


    Obama need not have included the (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:30:15 PM EST
    reference to Bush's speechwriters.  First of all, does he know any of Bush's speechwriters helped write the speech she delivered?  Next, it is common knowledge amongst those who follow politics that Ted Sorensen is a consultant to Obama's campaign and there is that 26-year old (he's probably 27 by now) churning out copy for Obama.

    Well reported (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by indiependy on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:03 PM EST
    It was all over the press that former White House speechwriter Matt Scully wrote the speech.

    It's yet another example of McCain & co. trying to claim they're different than Bush yet using the same old faces and attacks.


    Yes... (5.00 / 0) (#59)
    by EddieInCA on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:45:43 PM EST
    ...Not only did Tucker Eskew (former Bush speech writer) help Palin write the speech, but it gets better...

    Tucker Eskew is one of the Rove protoge's who smeared John McCain in S. Carolina in 2000.

    The sellout of John McCain is complete. He's actually hired the very guys that slimed him in 2000 to help him win in 2008. The guys who he slammed over and over again in 2001.

    So, yeah. Obama should point out the Bush connections as much as possible.


    I hadn't realized (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:54:16 PM EST
    that there was a big backlash against Ted Sorensen.

    The comment wasn't a criticism of speech writers.


    The American People... (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Brillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:31:27 PM EST
    Have pretty much decided that Obama is experienced (even if it is 'experienced enough') and ready to lead.  I don't see them suddenly changing their mind because of Palin.

    You are gravely mistaken (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:45 PM EST
    the polls indicate that on at least the surface.  Not everyone lives in Chicago of Hawaii where Obama will poll at 80%.

    Obama's lack of experience IS a problem.  Why do you see his supporters and the netroots freaking out over Palin?  


    Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Brillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:40:45 PM EST
    Check any of the post convention polls that have asked that question.  Obama's doing fine on them now.  

    heh yourself (none / 0) (#71)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:51:37 PM EST
    Clinton42 was in the SIXTEEN points.  Kerry's was six percent.  Obama's was in the 6-8 point range.

    We know what happened with Kerry.  Should we guess the same for Obama?

    And neither one of these guys AIN'T Clinton42.


    I... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Brillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:59:14 PM EST
    Was responding to your comment about how the people felt as far as how 'ready to lead' Obama was, not how many points he was up in various polls.  

    The 10% in the middle won't decide (none / 0) (#51)
    by Exeter on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:42:22 PM EST
    until the last week.

    You state this as fact: (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by ineedalife on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:32:13 PM EST
    She doesn't even have a grasp on the important issues facing the nation let alone any idea how to respond to a crisis

    Can't you at least stipulate that every sitting Governor does have a better than average grasp on the important issues facing the nation? And how do you know what her grasp of the issues are? Alaskans seem pretty happy with her.

    And to the second point: a Mayor, Governor, and especially a mother of five, has a pretty good idea of how to act in a crisis. And once again you state as fact something you cannot have personal knowledge of.

    And if this is such a deal breaker, tell us what crisis Obama's leadership skills have been forged in?

    The best piece of snark on this that I read is that if it happens that John McCain passes, Palin can fix her experience problem by picking Joe Biden for her VP. It worked for Obama.

    There is no reason to stipulate (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:37:03 PM EST
    facts that are not in evidence.

    She has no public record on any issue of national/international significance. Will you stipulate that?


    for the lawyers here (5.00 / 2) (#169)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:57:49 AM EST
    did anyone notice Rudy saying he learned as a trial lawyer if you don't like the facts, change them? Rule number 1 of trial law is to accept the facts beyond change and build your case around them.

    Good thing he's not practicing any more.


    Well how bout you (5.00 / 3) (#73)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:52:13 PM EST
    go over to ontheissues.org and see what they have for Sarah Palin on foreign policy issues.

    Let me help..

    "No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.org"

    on immigration..

    "No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.or"

    she has one comment on free trade she made this week.

    on poverty..

    "No issue stance yet recorded by OnTheIssues.or"


    She keeps repeating (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by JThomas on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:15 PM EST
    that she did not support the Bridge to Nowhere when there is plenty of documentation and video of her supporting it. That should catch up to her. Joe Klein had a laundry list of inaccuracies that are being spouted about her in his blog tonite.

    They will seek to keep her in a total bubble as long as possible. Would America elect a vp without a single freestyle Q & A from the press?

    She is like a rookie QB in the NFL...they cut down the game plan to just basics and hope they will not lose the game for them.
    Her nasty tone did not appeal to independents.
    The GOP base loved it. We must bury this ticket or she will be president even if McCain stays healthy.

    I don't even know what to say (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:36:21 PM EST
    Really honestly. This is like being in the coliseum and listening to the crowds chant for the lions.

    funny (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:22 PM EST
    that was my reaction listening to the crowd at the RNC cheer for her lies and unAmerican views. YMMV.

    same here (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:59:03 AM EST
    mindless people leaving their brains in their hotel rooms.

    Confused? (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by indiependy on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:46:33 PM EST
    Shocking that a site who's principal and contributing writers are unabashedly pro-Dem would have a discussion that would be critical of the GOP VP's speech. God forbid that there should be any of that here.

    I'm starting to see how Jeralyn got frustrated and felt the need to reiterate her policies.


    Errr I was referring to (none / 0) (#84)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:57:57 PM EST
    "We must bury this ticket or she will be president even if McCain stays healthy."

    Not the topic of the post. I just thought that was going a wee bit over the top.

    But please, by all means, do carry on.


    dear Jeralyn, YESSSSS! (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by obamahasmyvote on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:58 PM EST
    I don't have a blog and I have been waiting for someone to point out that anyone who runs for President in a serious manner, as Obama, Senator Clinton, Biden, and many other democratic candidates have done, STUDIES the issues and thinks about how, when, and where to use American Power, both its Diplomatic/Cultural Power and its Military power.

    By her own admission, Sarah Palin knows nothing about Iraq, much less what role America should play in the world.

    McCain is dangerous, hot-tempered, and impulsive. And any fair-reading of Palin's beliefs show her to be a dangerous Fundamentalist Christian even less concerned with reality or opposing information than George W. Bush.

    If McCain/Palin wins, run your credit cards up to the maximum, because our Nation will be playing craps with a loose cannon and fanatic at the helm.

    I disagree (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Exeter on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:46 PM EST
    She is clearly smart enough and competant enough to assume the presidency in the unlikely event McCain is unable to finish his term.  Plus, unless McCain gets shot immediately after he gets sworn-in, Palin will most likely serve a long time as VP, before she is asked to serve as President.

    I strongly disagree (4.00 / 5) (#55)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:44:43 PM EST
    And no need to use violence as examples. As Letterman said last night, he could die in his sleep on his first night in the oval office.

    And no, she's not ready. Virtually every lawyer I know is more prepared than her. Tinytown and 1 1/2 yrs as Gov. in the most remote state of the country has zero to do with running this country and managing its many complex parts.


    BIden (5.00 / 1) (#212)
    by jxstorm on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:30:12 AM EST
    had 2 aneyurisms I think.  Isn't he more likely to die than McCain from skin cancer?

    I was born in TinyTown (2.00 / 0) (#98)
    by jes on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:03:55 AM EST
    Emmett Idaho. Bill Clinton was born in TinyTown Hope Arkansas. I've spent 3 summers in Alaska. But since there isn't even a Law school in Alaska, seems as though they don't believe that having  LAWYER after your name is the be all and the end all of American politics.

    Get a grip J. Or just vaporize me.


    troll rating the host? (5.00 / 0) (#109)
    by progrocks on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:12:53 AM EST
    something tells me you may get your wish

    J's not vindictive (none / 0) (#134)
    by jes on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:33:42 AM EST
    I said I was gone from here a few nights ago. Never commented much and rated rarely until I thought my favorite commenters were leaving the site a few days ago.

    But you are right, I will take it back out of respect for her.


    btw. Were you born (none / 0) (#160)
    by jes on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:53:26 AM EST
    in a small town?

    She was mayor of tinytown (none / 0) (#107)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:11:41 AM EST
    and governor of the most remote state in the union for 1 1/2 years. Clinton way Gov. for 12 years. Obama was a legislator of a very big state for 8 years and Senator for 4 with a Harvard Law degree. We're talking about the highest offices in the land.

    The "get a grip" in your ocmment was insulting, don't do it again. The rest was appropriate disagreement.


    Also Alaska is a special case (none / 0) (#163)
    by Maggie on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:54:33 AM EST
    They have a huge revenue stream from oil and hand out rebate checks to their citizens annually.  That's not the same sort of problem confronting us on the national scene at all.  

    sorry, I was unhappy with (none / 0) (#187)
    by jes on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:24:44 AM EST
    TinyTown. You don't think that is a bit insulting?

    Jeralyn (none / 0) (#81)
    by ding7777 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:57:32 PM EST
    I think Palin's experience is a losing arguement.

    It would be better to emphasise the McSame argument - with either Mcain or Palin at the top

    Another Bush term - same players - same policies - same results.


    Jeralyn could you please (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Marvin42 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:00:10 AM EST
    clarify something for me? I know you insist on not allowing people to name call or improperly use the name of candidates (pro or against the candidate). So is it ok to refer to a sitting US Senator (even if you completely disagree with all his positions) as "McSame?"

    It's a losing argument (none / 0) (#108)
    by Exeter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:12:00 AM EST
    and one that the McCain argument wants us to have. People are not going to vote against McCain b/c of Palin's experience, but they WILL vote for McCain because they (rightly or wrongly) feel that she is being attacked on experience while Obama's lack of experience is conveniantly forgotten.

    Sorry, but there's more to (none / 0) (#60)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:45:45 PM EST
    being President than being smart (not that our current President is any example). Carter was a nuclear engineer and not an especially successful President. As for competence, I am curious as to your basis for that opinion.

    She is the most popular governor (none / 0) (#114)
    by Exeter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:16:37 AM EST
    in America.  She was re-elected mayor and to the city council.  She would have been re-elected governor.  She is not done anthing in any of those positions that would lead one to the conclusion that she is not competant to do the job.  She certainly is more competant than Bush.

    Bush (none / 0) (#118)
    by flyerhawk on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:20:28 AM EST
    was a popular governor of a much larger state, population wise.

    That's true... (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Exeter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:36:13 AM EST
    ...but by all accounts, she's very, very smart.  Look, I'm voting for Obama.  I just think this line of attack against Palin does much more harm than good.

    and a yale and harvard grad (none / 0) (#183)
    by sancho on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:20:22 AM EST
    one of the best and brightest, clearly. not to mention a member of the same frat as john kerry.
    a plum from the governing class. thank god the kennedies and kerry adopted obama or his harvard/columbia degrees might not count him fit to be a member of the offical governing class since he came from an unwed mother.  psst. and we know what those people are like. . .

    thanks for sharing (none / 0) (#198)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:46:08 AM EST
    the GOP talking point.

    Your confidence in her competence goes beyond the facts at our disposal. We have no information about her positions on national issues, and her ability to maintain the trash getting picked up in Wasilla, or whatever the city council does there, is scant evidence of her ability to govern the country.

    And no, I am not discounting that she is a popular governor. You brought up city council. She has been a governor for a short period of time and managed to be investigated for abuse of power. Sounds very Bushian to me. Whether she "seems" more competent than Bush is in fact the issue: we have no basis to judge.


    I do not think (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:43:28 PM EST
    there is anything Obama can do to DIRECTLY rebut the experience argument.  His experience is what it is.

    He can indirectly address it by demonstrating competence and facility with the issues, like he did in his acceptance speech.  But it's not a matter of just making some clever argument.  As with Palin's experience, the doubts are rooted in something real and they can't just be wished away.

    He should come up with specifics (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:48:50 PM EST
    as he started to do the night before Gustav broke. He rebutted the inexperience comparison between him and Palin by pointing out that he got legislation passed on emergency measures after Katrina and that many of his proposals are in use right now by FEMA.

    It's not just issues, it's what he's done. He's done some things on campaign reform and ethics. He's devised plans on every issue from health care to social security to education.

    He's worked on criminal justice issues in the Illinois legislature.

    As much as I hate the meth bill, Americans don't, and he was a co-sponsor and big proponent of the bill that passed in the Senate. She talks anti-meth but what has she done to walk the walk on it?

    He's got a record of accomplishments that he could tout. He needs to do it.


    Rather than expound on his experience (5.00 / 3) (#148)
    by Grace on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:46:37 AM EST
    once again, I wish he would just lay down a set of concrete things he will do when he gets in office.  

    His Healthcare plan!  
    His Economic plan!
    His Energy plan!
    How he will save Social Security.  

    I'd like to see him get wonky for us for once.  I'm like the AARP -- I want to see his facts and figures and I want to know exactly how he plans to accomplish his goals.  I want some more Hope and Change but I want specific Hope and Change.  


    He's got to... (none / 0) (#155)
    by prose on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:51:31 AM EST
    hit back on community organizer.  He should do what Repubs so often do and point out that that is a position in and among the people.  MLK was a community organizer, etc.  It's not enough to demonstrate experience, but it wins points against some of Palin's punchiest lines.

    Bill was Governor for 12 years (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:50:26 PM EST
    not 20 months.....Bill was also a Rhodes Scholar....And I am so over this anti-intellectualism of the GOP.  Being a dumb*ss may make you like everybody else but it gets you into trouble....

    I want the return of JFK's Best and Brightest.

    ah yeah (none / 0) (#209)
    by AlSmith on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:08:29 AM EST

    that would include Robert MacNamera who is a triple play of fail. You could even make an argument that he was on the wrong side of the Edsel project.

    There is no simplistic answer of who is the best at government- brainy academics, real people, or business people. My feeling is that is better for government to take on a small set of issues work those to completion.


    Can't speak for Dadler (5.00 / 0) (#74)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:54:09 PM EST
    but I presume that some of the "millions" that Obama has been accountable to are primary voters, who had ample opportunity to judge his level of experience, expertise, and qualifications.

    I don't like the way the primaries/nomination process ended up, but Obama has convinced nearly 18 million people that he is ready. You're free to disagree, but he's been scrutinized publicly and had to provide position papers on every major issue in the campaign. He is a prominent national Democrat (and was before he entered the race).

    To compare this record to Palin, who is to most observers, a political non-entity, is really pretty funny. Even Peggy Noonan - Peggy NOONAN! - today referred to McCain's choosing her as evidence of "political bull"-fritters.

    It is amazing to me that even when partisan Republican hacks can see how inexperienced and unqualified for selection to the ticket Palin is, so many readers of lefty blog TL can't.

    In the long run (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by onemanrules on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:55:41 PM EST
    her speech tonight won't matter. Joe Biden will eat her lunch and her backwards policies. All she did tonight was lie about her record and Obama's record. It will come back to bite the republicans in the end.

    Snarklin (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by womanwarrior on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:57:45 PM EST
         I hope that that Obama comes out strong on the issues.  I grew up in the west in a middle class family and Governor Palin reminded me of the smug know-it-all mean women who didn't care about anyone but themselves and being right.
         I don't think Obama and Biden will descend to that nasty tone, but they have got to stop agreeing McCain and Palin are qualified.  They have got to go strong on the issues, and the mess W's policies have made for most of the people in this country and stay away from personalities, imho. And they have to point out the misrepresentations.
         Now I have to send in more money to Obama.  This scares me a lot.  

    I don't care much for this response (5.00 / 0) (#85)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:58:36 PM EST
    It's a little too pat using previous catch phrases.

    Compare Ms. Palin's speech (5.00 / 0) (#128)
    by flyerhawk on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:25:19 AM EST
    with a speech Obama gave this week in Wisconsin

    Night.   And.  Day.

    Here's what my response would have (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by txpolitico67 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:26:21 AM EST
    been, if I were Obama:

    "Governor Palin's starck level of enthusiasm is matched only by the starck realities of the failed policies she and McCain embrace. Those policies have lead us to where we are today in America with regard to the poor state of our economy, health care and crumbling infrastructure.  In the coming days, our campaign will highlight the way we differ from our worthy opponents in ways that will benefit all Americans, not the type of policies McCain and Palin espouse that benefit the few, as we have seen for the past 8 years."

    Seriously (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by The Gimp on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:37:18 AM EST
    Why are we even remotely allowing that they are of comparable experience?

    Obama represented almost as many people in his State Senate District for 8 years as Palin has as Governor of her entire state for not even 2 years. As a US Senator, he has represented 13 million people for about 4 years. As Mayor, she left her town of 8,000 over 20 million in debt. How in the name of all that is holy do you even DO that?! She left them with roughly $2500 of debt PER PERSON.


    And there are people who think she is even remotely as experienced?


    Making speeches with a teleprompter is (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by codekeyguy on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:21:05 AM EST
    a given for most politicians.  However, Obama has had several gaffes when speaking "off the cuff", and came off with the "uh's" and "er's" quite vocal.  If Palin is better at extemporaneous speech, it could prove troublesome.  (disclaimer:  I am a McCain/Palin fan)

    She is very good (none / 0) (#196)
    by Prabhata on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:44:53 AM EST
    when speaking extemporaneously.
    Here is a link when she was interviewed in Newsweek Green Room

    It's a good start (none / 0) (#4)
    by Key on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:25:50 PM EST
    But he does need to come out harder on the lies.  I like your Russian Roulette metaphor.  

    But I think strongest response on Palin really should be coming from Hillary, although even there, there needs to be some finesse with how it's done.

    Why Hillary? She isn't on the ticket.... (5.00 / 5) (#6)
    by Angel on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:27:29 PM EST
    I hope Hillary Clinton does (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:32:20 PM EST
    not denigrate Sarah Palin.  

    Obama's taking the high road... (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Key on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34:37 PM EST
    And good for him that he is.  I think he needs to continue to take the high road.   He needs to remain firm and presidential in his responses, and not take the bait and get caught up in their muck.

    Clinton, as a surrogate, can get a bit rough with Palin.

    You know, one thing really struck me about tonight's convention, and I'm wondering if anyone else felt this way - the Republicans came off looking like high school students who were taunting the opposing team, looking to start a fight.


    We were not watching the same convention (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by shoephone on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:00:27 AM EST
    They were hostile and petty to a person.

    It was more like junior high school, with the Republicans as the Mean Girls. What an embarrassment to the nation.


    Pelosi would be a better surrogate. (none / 0) (#131)
    by Grace on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:30:54 AM EST
    She's very good at showing great displeasure.  

    Because... (4.33 / 3) (#40)
    by Brillo on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:38:54 PM EST
    Many people like her?  She's a strong voice in the party?  She can laugh off the sexism charges the McCain camp is going to make everytime Palin is questioned?  She's really good at attacking people?  

    Why wouldn't the Obama camp use her?  Like it or not, she's a surrogate for him.  She's campaigning for him.  She's doing what she can to help him win, and part of that may be to attack Palin.  Or at least to push back against her attacks on our ticket.  


    When does Hillary (5.00 / 3) (#127)
    by echinopsia on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:24:58 AM EST
    get to stop doing Obama's job for him?

    He's the candidate. Let him do his own damn dirty work, or let Biden.

    She is not a thing to be "used." And Obama and Biden need to learn how to attack without being sexist. They can't call on Hillary every time they're over their heads.


    She won't laugh off (none / 0) (#80)
    by Jeannie on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:57:23 PM EST
    the sexism charges.

    Oh Come Off It. (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Brillo on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:01:39 AM EST
    Do you really see anyone making accusations of sexism towards Hillary, and it working?  Carville can go out and criticize Palin and get called a sexist, and it may work.  Clinton goes out and criticizes Palin, no one's gonna try and claim it's sexism.  

    Palin understands Russian roulette (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:28:59 PM EST
    because she lives in Alaska and understands what's at stake.



    Yes (none / 0) (#13)
    by dws3665 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:29:48 PM EST
    they play this kind of roulette right next door to her state!

    Sorry (5.00 / 6) (#33)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:36:23 PM EST
    the DNC and the media wanted Hillary gone.  They got their wish.

    WHY is it up to HILLARY to fix what Obama can't?

    Move on people, Hillary has.


    Neither would (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by echinopsia on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:43:55 AM EST
    a lot of so-called Democrats.

    Obama knows how to box. Really. (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:27:58 PM EST

    Is it the same way he bowls? (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by Angel on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:28:37 PM EST
    Lol! (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by CaptainAmerica08 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:35:07 PM EST
    hahahah (none / 0) (#152)
    by borisbor on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:50:04 AM EST
     a bowling joke......!

    Jeralyn: How About Posting (none / 0) (#27)
    by JimWash08 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34:21 PM EST
    Dem. Majority Leader Harry Reid's statement about Sarah Palin tonight. That should provide some helpful contrast to Obama's statement.

    Except for rearranging some chairs (none / 0) (#61)
    by ding7777 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:45:58 PM EST
    McCain's team is already in place and currently running the Executive branch.

    [Obama's] presidential team is probably already selected. Should something happen to him, all Biden needs is a different nameplate on the doo[r].

    The Obama response... (none / 0) (#76)
    by Oje on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:55:37 PM EST
    The guy on CNN and this piece by Obama... are too weak and certainly not forward looking for the rest of the campaign.

    I favored Clinton, for President and Vice President, so take this with a grain of salt. It was, at a point in the past, the consideration of quite a few people on this blog that Obama drifted to the finish line during the primaries.

    When Obama chose Joe Biden, his team began the general election drift. A commenter linked the most recent SUSA poll of the VP candidates, and it shows that Sarah Palin had a greater impact on voters making less than $40K per year than Joe Biden -- that was the reason, the media reported, that Wilmington Joe was selected to be the Vice President, a friend of "the working man." (I am sure, if the left notices the SUSA results, it will spark a new round of discussion about low-income, low-information voters.)

    I doubt that Palin's speech tonight will undermine, and may considerably improve, her initial standing among American voters on the lower half of the median. Here is to hoping that the Obama campaign has learned something from running a team of 2,500 people in the past 17 months (drink) or that the impending revelation comes before the finish line drifts into sight or that someone (other than Harry Reid's office) engages Governor Palin as a politician with a complicated record that does not match the rhetoric coming from the Republican party.

    They're golden (none / 0) (#89)
    by indiependy on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 11:59:37 PM EST
    If, as the SUSA poll was done, 32% of the entire vote comes from the South. Otherwise, me thinks reading too much into that polling might be a mistake.

    It isn't about experience (none / 0) (#96)
    by carlosbas on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:03:17 AM EST
    It's their visions on how to put the country on the right track. Tonight one thing became crystal clear, Palin is a disciple of the most extremist elements in the Republican Party, and she came across as that.

    I holding my breath (none / 0) (#99)
    by gentlyweepingguitar on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:05:06 AM EST
    til the debates. Palin's gonna blow it.

    Thread cleaned of comments (none / 0) (#104)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:09:10 AM EST
    tring to change the topic to sexism. That has nothing to do with this post and if that's what you want to discuss, as I've said repeatedly today, do it elsewhere.

    The repubs chose Palin to hightlight Obama's (none / 0) (#106)
    by WillBFair on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:10:59 AM EST
    lack of experience. The response should be from both Obama and Biden: notstop attacks on Bush and McCain's disastrous policies.

    That's silly (none / 0) (#111)
    by Exeter on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:13:44 AM EST
    This isn't the 1800s.  It is highly unlikely that McCain will die of natural causes.  For men his age that are healthy, the odds are they will live well into their 80s.

    I am not sure if I understand Obama's response (none / 0) (#113)
    by coast on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:15:53 AM EST
    John McCain voted against his party more often than Sen. Obama or Sen. Biden have against their own party.  The Congress has had two years to do something but has not done much of anything except go from approving rating of about 35% (not great) to an approval rating of less than 20% (not sure of how to describe this except maybe Bush like).  I'm not excited about McCain, but I know that someone who votes with their party over 95%, as Biden and Obama have, does not really represent change.  Neither party is really offering change.  

    Except... (none / 0) (#146)
    by The Gimp on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:44:52 AM EST
    McCain's party has also been wrong on almost every issue. That comparison is not exactly solid.

    That this needs to be pointed out (none / 0) (#210)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:08:40 AM EST
    is telling.

    Palin has the potential to change the election. (none / 0) (#115)
    by Green26 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:17:26 AM EST
    Some of you are underestimating what a genuine and plain-talking candidate with good communication skills can do. I think issues and her views will be overlooked, if she can continue what she started tonight.

    Trying to point out Palin's lack of experience or qualification is going to get thrown back in Obama's face. I'm not so sure that being a Senator or state legislator outweighs being a governor and administrator--in terms of governing and leading. That's like saying going to school is better preparation than working at a job.

    Sure, I think that Harvard law school seems better than U of Idaho, but I don't think the majority of the country thinks that way.

    She is going to be a force to be reckoned with, unless she goofs up badly or the press has a basis to turn on her.  

    Palin (none / 0) (#153)
    by onemanrules on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:50:06 AM EST
    lied enough about her record tonight that the press (whom was trashed) and the dems have plenty of ammo to dicredit her.

    genuine? (none / 0) (#180)
    by borisbor on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:10:39 AM EST
    She's lied in every speech she's made about her so-called reformer image.

    Bridge to nowhere? lie.

    Denouncing earmarks? lie. Alaska had the highest per-capita amount of earmarks in the country.

    Went against the 'good ol' boys? That's why she was endorsed by Ted Stevens and ran his PAC (amusingly named "Ted Stevens Excellence in Public Service" or something like that)

    But hey she sold a plane on eBay.... MAVERICK.


    This is ridiculous (none / 0) (#150)
    by lynnebrad on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:47:06 AM EST
    Obama's wife is African American. Even if he were raised by a white family, he has had to deal with racist types of issues.

    Give me a break.

    A problem in my mind.... (none / 0) (#157)
    by Oje on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:52:17 AM EST
    The Obama campaign did not run an "issues campaign". As we saw with Clinton's campaign and speeches, the candidate has to work up to the tone and cadence, and more importantly, the connection with television viewers (not crowds). Repeating "Bush's third term" over and over again is not exactly an "issue campaign". So far, most of Obama's ads tauted online (I have seen only a few live on CNN) are attack pieces on McCain/Bush. It seems unlikely that the whole campaign can suddenly retool its message and its content. The media, the surrogates, the staff, have all memorized the Obama talking points memo by now.

    I noticed that too (none / 0) (#166)
    by Jgarza on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 12:56:50 AM EST
    It was in HUGE writing.

    Making light of Palin's small town experience (none / 0) (#172)
    by Manuel on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:01:34 AM EST
    (i.e. tinytown) and lack of a law degree from an Ivy League institution isn't going to help with the elitist view people have about the Democrats.  Dems need to make inroads with the Reagan Dems to have a better chance of winning the election.  How can it be done? It's the economy!  Reagan Dems must be made to stop voting against their interests.  Dems also need to stop comparing Obama and Palin.  Palin should be ignored.  It is McCain Dems need to go after.  Notice that Palin and the other Republicans hardly mentioned Biden.  They concentrated their fire on Obama.  When contrasting on experience Obama should argue that McCain has the wrong experience to lead the country in a rapidly changing world.  New out of the box thinking is needed to deal with our problems.  Congratulate Palin on using eBay to sell the jet.  Nail McCain on not understanding new technology and being stuck on the same old tired solutions that have not worked in the past.  WJC's line about over twenty five years of failed Republican ideas which McCain/Palin would follow could help here.  Experience doesn't matter when it is the wrong experience.  McCain is a mainframe man in the age of the Internet.

    A female member of a panel on cable (none / 0) (#181)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:18:15 AM EST
    dissecting Palin's speech then opined that, although Palin may have been interviewed by small market media, she ain't seen nothing 'til the hard hitting national media interviews her.  I immed. thought of Randy "Duke" Cunningham, whose criminal conduct was actually reported by investigative reporters working for the San Diego Union Tribune.  Very much a "holier than thou" moment by the talking head.

    San Diego (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by dws3665 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 02:14:02 AM EST
    is the 8th largest city in the country, hardly a small market.

    Anchorage is the 65th largest city.

    (Per the infallible folks at Wikipedia).


    The Obama campaign looks (none / 0) (#175)
    by frankly0 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:05:29 AM EST
    like it's going to have its hands full trying to strike back at Palin, who's clearly able to give every bit as good as she gets.

    My own impression of her was that she reminded me in manner and accent of Police Chief Marge Gunderson in Fargo.

    Absolutely competent, forceful, completely no-nonsense, and not in the slightest way intimidated by the games of the good old boys.

    Frankly o (5.00 / 0) (#177)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:08:17 AM EST
    you have a ton of comments here today touting the Republican candidates. Please limit your support of them to four comments a day. This is a Democratic site and we allow both sides but you are trying to campaign for your candidate here and that's not okay.

    Hillary Rosen sets out the (none / 0) (#178)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:08:56 AM EST
    reasons she doesn't support McCain/Palin ticket:


    Warning:  link is to Rosen's opinion piece on Huffington Post.

    Obama is qualified because of campaign experience. (none / 0) (#182)
    by DaveM43 on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:18:21 AM EST
    ....follow that logic, Pat Paulsen was qualified to be President.

    As for Obama's state senatorial experience, voting "present" on bills hardly qualifies as representing his constituency.  As for his US Senate experience, true he's been an elected Senator. In actuality he has exactly 143 days of working experience has a US Senator. Consisting of no bills introduced by him, nor doing anything of any consequence.

    In point of fact, this country rarely elect sitting Senators has Presidents. For the very reason they lack any executive experience, and they have a voting record to dissect.  Except in Obama's case.  Which maybe was his plan all along.  Don't vote on any legislation, thus no voting record to analyze. Unfortunately, this year we will be electing a sitting Senator, Rep or Dem.  God help us all.  

    Or Harold Stassen, a perpetual (none / 0) (#184)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:20:32 AM EST
    joke back in the day.

    Important policy issues (none / 0) (#191)
    by Prabhata on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:39:07 AM EST
    Except for foreign policy issues, any governor or mayor has a deeper understanding than those in Washington about the important issues facing the nation.  As to responding to a crisis, I disagree. Few states are without dangers of crisis, and the governor must be ready to act.  Many states must be ready to respond to earthquakes, hurricanes, cyclones, etc.  Their ability to respond must be timely.  A crisis is a crisis.  It's true that Sarah does not have experience about foreign issues, but those can be learned quickly.

    Interesting NYT article on (none / 0) (#193)
    by oculus on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 01:41:34 AM EST
    governing the State of Alaska:


    Healthcare (none / 0) (#213)
    by allpeopleunite on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 07:58:31 AM EST
    She did not once mention healthcare in her speech, very dissapointing.

    Alaskan Independence Party (none / 0) (#214)
    by bison on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 08:27:49 AM EST
    Was she wearing an Alaskan First Flag pin?