Painfully Pointless Palin

[N4mddissent]

Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed? You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does. But I would like a little more specificity. What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience? What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President? What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.

And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.

Palin - 1 semester at Hawaii Pacific University; 2 Semesters at N. Idaho College; 2 semesters at the University of Idaho; 1- term Matanuska-Susitna College; Returned to University of Idaho for 3 semesters
Graduated B.S. in Communications and Journalism (Irony?)

McCain- U.S. Naval Academy

Barack Obama- 2 years Occidental College; 2 years Columbia University
Graduated B.A. Political Science w/ International Relations specialization;
3 years Harvard Law School (served as editor, then president of Harvard Law Review
Graduated Magna Cum Laude Juris Doctorate

Joe Biden- 4 years University of Delaware
B.A. Double Major- History/Political Science;
3-years Syracuse University Law School
Graduated with a Juris Doctorate

I think Obama has more educational qualifications than any other candidate. Columbia and Harvard are both Ivy league. Of course, the Naval Academy is also very prestigious, but finishing ranked 894 out of 899 tarnishes that accomplishment for McCain, especially when compared to graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law. I am sure that McCain did learn a lot of leadership there. It is also obvious that a background in political science specializing in foreign relations (Obama at Columbia) would also be helpful to a future president. The fact that Obama, after graduating, taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School also has clear relevance to someone seeking to be president. Biden has also studied political science and law. A degree in communications and journalism could be valuable to a president although seemingly more suited to white-house spokesman. In addition, Palin did not demonstrate much ability to apply the communication skills she studied.

I think the education gap between Palin and Obama is far greater than the experience gap.

 

[sealybobo]

Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed? You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does. But I would like a little more specificity. What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience? What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President? What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.

And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.

Palin - 1 semester at Hawaii Pacific University; 2 Semesters at N. Idaho College; 2 semesters at the University of Idaho; 1- term Matanuska-Susitna College; Returned to University of Idaho for 3 semesters
Graduated B.S. in Communications and Journalism (Irony?)

Barack Obama- 2 years Occidental College; 2 years Columbia University
Graduated B.A. Political Science w/ International Relations specialization;
3 years Harvard Law School (served as editor, then president of Harvard Law Review
Graduated Magna Cum Laude Juris Doctorate

Joe Biden- 4 years University of Delaware
B.A. Double Major- History/Political Science;
3-years Syracuse University Law School
Graduated with a Juris Doctorate

I think Obama has more educational qualifications than any other candidate. Columbia and Harvard are both Ivy league. Of course, the Naval Academy is also very prestigious, but finishing ranked 894 out of 899 tarnishes that accomplishment for McCain, especially when compared to graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law. I am sure that McCain did learn a lot of leadership there. It is also obvious that a background in political science specializing in foreign relations (Obama at Columbia) would also be helpful to a future president. The fact that Obama, after graduating, taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School also has clear relevance to someone seeking to be president. Biden has also studied political science and law. A degree in communications and journalism could be valuable to a president although seemingly more suited to white-house spokesman. In addition, Palin did not demonstrate much ability to apply the communication skills she studied.

I think the education gap between Palin and Obama is far greater than the experience gap.

McCain- U.S. Naval Academy



Ever watch Great Presidential Speeches on David Letterman? Where he plays a great speech from a past president like Kennedy and then he plays one of Bush's speeches.

The bar for Commander and Chief are way too low. We vote for who we'd like to drink a beer with and call smart people elitists? It is clearly time to start voting for exceptional people, not good old boys like Bush.

And while I respect McCain, he is wrong on every issue. He is also right on every issue too.

 

[N4mddissent]

On Television

In May 1928, General Electric launched the US’s first regular television schedule using Alexanderson’s transmitter, broadcasting one and a half hours a week to an audience consisting of RCA lab technicians and a handful of amateurs who had bought or built their own sets. A few weeks later, Jenkins began broadcasting from Washington’s W3XK, America’s first licensed television station. His programming consisted of animated silhouettesin various scenes. By early 1928, Baird’s company, Baird Television, was transmitting a daily experimental signal and was manufacturing receivers.

History Magazine August 2006 p. 27

I apologize if I was a bit harsh in my assessment. Still, I stand by my view that such responses are pointless. In addition, I am continually astonished that otherwise intelligent people are willing to engage in self-delusion to try and defend a poor position that Sarah Palin placed herself in.

You cannot honestly believe that Palin's non-answers and drawn out confused statements completely lacking of substance about important matters are in any way comparable to Biden's use of the word TV instead of Radio while making a point about Roosevelt's leadership. This should be a prima facie conclusion that needs no further discussion.

Why stretch the bounds of reasonableness and cast a shadow over one's own credibility in an attempt to defend this? I mentioned Palin's comment about Russia's proximity to Alaska as a clumsy attempt to hide her lack of foreign policy experience. She could have stated:
"It's true that my foreign policy experience was limited as mayor and then governor. But many past governors like Roosevelt have gone on to become great presidents. I am willing to work hard to understand and familiarize myself in foreign policy and fortunately Senator McCain has a deep well of experience that I can draw from."

Sure, such a statement would have had criticisms. But any statement would. And this would have been much more honest. Instead of being up front and honest, she tried obfuscation and deflection and mishandled the situation. She has no one to blame but herself. Support her or not, it is questionable whether her response should be defended at all, and to stoop to the point of compromising one's own intellectual rigor by trying to equate it with the Biden comment is really disappointing and far more than she deserves.

 

[Larkinn]

Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed? You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does. But I would like a little more specificity. What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience? What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President? What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.

And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.

Palin - 1 semester at Hawaii Pacific University; 2 Semesters at N. Idaho College; 2 semesters at the University of Idaho; 1- term Matanuska-Susitna College; Returned to University of Idaho for 3 semesters
Graduated B.S. in Communications and Journalism (Irony?)

McCain- U.S. Naval Academy

Barack Obama- 2 years Occidental College; 2 years Columbia University
Graduated B.A. Political Science w/ International Relations specialization;
3 years Harvard Law School (served as editor, then president of Harvard Law Review
Graduated Magna Cum Laude Juris Doctorate

Joe Biden- 4 years University of Delaware
B.A. Double Major- History/Political Science;
3-years Syracuse University Law School
Graduated with a Juris Doctorate

I think Obama has more educational qualifications than any other candidate. Columbia and Harvard are both Ivy league. Of course, the Naval Academy is also very prestigious, but finishing ranked 894 out of 899 tarnishes that accomplishment for McCain, especially when compared to graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law. I am sure that McCain did learn a lot of leadership there. It is also obvious that a background in political science specializing in foreign relations (Obama at Columbia) would also be helpful to a future president. The fact that Obama, after graduating, taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School also has clear relevance to someone seeking to be president. Biden has also studied political science and law. A degree in communications and journalism could be valuable to a president although seemingly more suited to white-house spokesman. In addition, Palin did not demonstrate much ability to apply the communication skills she studied.

I think the education gap between Palin and Obama is far greater than the experience gap.

I agree, but the problem is that intellectualism has become a curse, as if knowing more is somehow bad.

Unfortunately they don't subscribe to that idea when seeing a doctor, only when picking a president, otherwise evolution might take care of that problem.

 

[mdjgirl7]

I think the real issue here is judgment and intelligence. Experience is only as good as the wisdom that comes from it. Sarah Palin lacks wisdom, intelligence, "GOOD" experience, and many of the other qualities that would make a good VP and potentially a good president. McCain, from my perspective, has some great qualities (many of which have disappeared since his 2000 campaign), but his judgement is not once of those qualities. He may have a lot of experience as a polititician but that may or may not be a good thing, and his experience may not have taught him the wisdom to be a great leader. Obama's judgement may lack in experience, but he has spent his whole life fighting for the working classes, working for community, for equal rights, for fairness and justice, and his policies are directed to benefit the majority of US citizens. He isn't running a campaign a vanity simply because he desires that title of President of the United States. He actually believes in what he is doing. I believe McCain also believes in what he is doing. McCain, however, has recently undermined his own integrity with the kind of campaign he is running, the spin he's put on Obama's policies, and his own voting record, and he's undermined his judgement by choosing Palin as his candidate. Not to mention his adherence to Bush's policies, and his belief in the flawed and greedy ideologies of the Republican party. Obama stands for peace, love for humanity, and community in the true sense of the word. McCain stands for military might, business over fellowship, and the almighty dollar. Palin, despite any misplaced belief in a liberal press (which from my liberal point of view is hardly liberal) does not interview or debate well. The press asks questions, it's up to the candidate to have the knowledge to answer those questions honestly, skillfully, and articulately. Don't blame the press. If the Republicans can't stand up to a biased media, then it's no one's fault but their own.

Sarah Palin lacks wisdom and intelligence wow really you can make such a broad judgment about her? Sounds like you know her personally which I doubt you do. I also doubt a woman could be elected mayor then governor of Alaska which is predominately male if she were as stupid as you claim.

John McCain all about the almighty dollar really? Where have you been? McCain has NEVER accepted any pork. How much did Obama ask for? Millions right but he suspended that when he started to run for president. I say he is a wimp man up own it if you asked for those ear marks claim it don't suspend it. Obama also voted to raise taxes on those who make only $42,000 then lied about it. That is what we need a wishy washy president. One that cannot own up to his responsibilities.

McCain has not shown he can be a leader? Again where have you been? Who has voted against their own party it sure as heck not Obama he has NEVER voted against his party but McCain has. McCain will not stumble under any party he will stand up for us. McCain will not be passing out ear marks wish I could say the same for Obama. But it might be to late this country has been baptized by the Obama Mania God help us.

A leader huh let me see and I have said this before on this board. When McCain was offered freedom in that POW camp he refused to leave his men behind and was brutally tortured. What more can you want out of a leader? John McCain and Sarah Palin have something more precious to lose in Iraq then most of us their own flesh and blood.

McCain has the foreign policy experience that Obama lacks. That should be a big deal to us. That nut job that runs Iran has threatened us on more then one occasion. I don't think he wants a tea party with Obama like Obama wants either.

Russia is not acting all warm and fuzzy towards us either. How about North Korea the world is moving on weather we want to realize it or not. This could be our end. And Obama could be the one to lead us into it.

Obama is inexperienced
A liar
A racist check out his book and see for yourself.
BTW Biden thinks it is patriotic to raise our taxes.

 

[kane3o1]

no fucktard, she isnt a joke
you are just too much of a fucking moron to understand it
and you will NEVER have that kind of a conversation with me
iu supported her being picked BEFORE she was picked, asshole, i know a bit more about her than you do, it is clear
she will surprise you and i was shocked that McCain actually made such a gre4at choice

and you are the one bringing Clinton into it
i dont give a shit what he was, he was still a lying asshole
and if he didnt have a GOP controled congress all those years you would have seen how bad he could have been

You can't be serious..........
He's just playing guys, don't listen to him. And what's a "gre4at choice"?

 

[elvis]

On Television



History Magazine August 2006 p. 27

I apologize if I was a bit harsh in my assessment. Still, I stand by my view that such responses are pointless. In addition, I am continually astonished that otherwise intelligent people are willing to engage in self-delusion to try and defend a poor position that Sarah Palin placed herself in.

You cannot honestly believe that Palin's non-answers and drawn out confused statements completely lacking of substance about important matters are in any way comparable to Biden's use of the word TV instead of Radio while making a point about Roosevelt's leadership. This should be a prima facie conclusion that needs no further discussion.

Why stretch the bounds of reasonableness and cast a shadow over one's own credibility in an attempt to defend this? I mentioned Palin's comment about Russia's proximity to Alaska as a clumsy attempt to hide her lack of foreign policy experience. She could have stated:
"It's true that my foreign policy experience was limited as mayor and then governor. But many past governors like Roosevelt have gone on to become great presidents. I am willing to work hard to understand and familiarize myself in foreign policy and fortunately Senator McCain has a deep well of experience that I can draw from."

Sure, such a statement would have had criticisms. But any statement would. And this would have been much more honest. Instead of being up front and honest, she tried obfuscation and deflection and mishandled the situation. She has no one to blame but herself. Support her or not, it is questionable whether her response should be defended at all, and to stoop to the point of compromising one's own intellectual rigor by trying to equate it with the Biden comment is really disappointing and far more than she deserves.

Apology accepted. I would probably trust History Magazine over wikipedia,so I would say you were probably correct.

While I thought McCain's choosing Palin was extremely reckless, I had to laugh at Obama supporters who made fun of her experience, or lack thereof. First of all, they weren't comparing apples to apples. Palin is vying (sp?) for the Vice Presidency. Obama is vying for the top job. They attempt to say they are comparing apples to apples by saying that McCain is old and Palin would be a heartbeat away, but I don't think that works. I think they should compare Obama to McCain, not Palin.
I think that, in your comparing resumes segment, you should include leadership experience, if you haven't already. When I say leadership, I don't mean it in the sense of "leading by example". I mean was the candidate actually in charge of something.
Being governor of a state or mayor of a city, no matter how small, involves governing. When it comes to experience, I think she has the advantage over Obama for sure, and possibly the other two we are discussing as well. This doesn't mean I think she is more qualified for the job overall, for there are many other factors that go into choosing any candidate for any job or position. But I feel that, in the generic definition of experience on a resume, she would be more qualified.
As for me not posting intelligent responses, I think you have a point. It becomes difficult not to play the "cheap-shot" game when everyone seems to be playing it. It was a frustrating few days. I had my cousin defending everything Obama has ever said or done, and even defending Jeremiah Wright.
I felt McCain won the debate the other night hands-down, and yet the country didn't think so. When I say I think he won, I don't mean win in the sense of one candidate being more right that the other, but rather that Obama was defending himself most of the debate. When Obama would attack McCain, McCain would act as if Obama hadn't even said anything. How many times did Obama say "That's not true"? or "John is right".
Maybe people think Obama won because they agree with him more.
All for now,

The King

 

[N4mddissent]

I also doubt a woman could be elected mayor then governor of Alaska which is predominately male if she were as stupid as you claim.

Well, 43 showed the world that you don't have to be exceptionally bright to get elected to president, much less Governor of Alaska.

That is what we need a wishy washy president. One that cannot own up to his responsibilities.

McCain opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 calling them irresponsible, but now supports making them permanent.

"But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operations." -McCain August 1999

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned..." - McCain February 2008

"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right." - McCain February 2000

May 2006- McCain gives commencement speech at Falwell's Liberty University. Falwell stated, "He is in the process of healing the breech with evangelical groups," and had committed to support a Federal Marriage Amendment.

When the campaign finance reform bill he originally helped create in 2003 was brought up again in 2006 by the other three original authors, McCain would no longer support it. It was speculated that he did not want to tie his hands while planning for a election run in 2008.


Wishy washy? Really? I think if nothing else, this statement by McCain himself should make you question how steadfast he is.

When McCain faltered back and forth over the confederate flag, first opposing it-then supporting it during the SC primary- then opposing it again he responded when asked about why he changed:
"I feared that if I answered honestly, I could not win the South Carolina primary. So I chose to compromise my principles."
I applaud him for being honest. But when you think about this and then consider all of the other issues McCain has had a recent change of heart that happens to pander to the conservative base, it appears to be happening again.

When McCain was offered freedom in that POW camp he refused to leave his men behind and was brutally tortured. What more can you want out of a leader?

While very brave, it was not just a choice he made. It was against the code of military conduct for him to be released before the other prisoners.

McCain has a lot of good qualities and I used to have a great deal of respect for him. There are countless times when I wished he, rather than Bush had won in 2000. But, and I am not alone in this (including some friends and family who are veterans who used to sing McCain's praises frequently), McCain seems to have lost his way, perhaps in bitterness over his defeat in 2000. He not only compromised his principles in S. Carolina, but I think he continues to do so today. I am disappointed, because I think he could be an inspiration, but has chosen to walk a bitter road, perhaps too long under the long shadow of Rove and the Neocons.

 

[Luissa]

Why is the difference in educational backgrounds not discussed? You can argue that Palin has more "executive" experience than Obama does. But I would like a little more specificity. What sort of actions and duties constitute that experience? What makes them beneficial to someone seeking the office of President or Vice President? What actions and duties did Palin have that specifically relate to Pres/VP actions and duties and don't apply to U.S. or state Senators.

And experience, while nice, is usually paired with education while considering a person's qualifications to hold a position.

Palin - 1 semester at Hawaii Pacific University; 2 Semesters at N. Idaho College; 2 semesters at the University of Idaho; 1- term Matanuska-Susitna College; Returned to University of Idaho for 3 semesters
Graduated B.S. in Communications and Journalism (Irony?)

McCain- U.S. Naval Academy

Barack Obama- 2 years Occidental College; 2 years Columbia University
Graduated B.A. Political Science w/ International Relations specialization;
3 years Harvard Law School (served as editor, then president of Harvard Law Review
Graduated Magna Cum Laude Juris Doctorate

Joe Biden- 4 years University of Delaware
B.A. Double Major- History/Political Science;
3-years Syracuse University Law School
Graduated with a Juris Doctorate

I think Obama has more educational qualifications than any other candidate. Columbia and Harvard are both Ivy league. Of course, the Naval Academy is also very prestigious, but finishing ranked 894 out of 899 tarnishes that accomplishment for McCain, especially when compared to graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law. I am sure that McCain did learn a lot of leadership there. It is also obvious that a background in political science specializing in foreign relations (Obama at Columbia) would also be helpful to a future president. The fact that Obama, after graduating, taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School also has clear relevance to someone seeking to be president. Biden has also studied political science and law. A degree in communications and journalism could be valuable to a president although seemingly more suited to white-house spokesman. In addition, Palin did not demonstrate much ability to apply the communication skills she studied.

I think the education gap between Palin and Obama is far greater than the experience gap.

North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.

 

[DiveCon]

North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.

yeah, kinda like Occidental College

 

[Luissa]

yeah, kinda like Occidental College

North Idaho is a junior college(In north Idaho) and Occidental is a four year college, alittle different from communtiy college. Anyone can get into North Idaho! And then she went on to the Unversity Of Idaho know for it's arguilture and natural resourse department giving the fact it is in the middle of no where Idaho among the wheat fields. Have you ever been to northern Idaho? It is probably where Sarah developed her love of guns. Have you heard of randy Weaver or Ruby Ridge?

 

[elvis]

North Idaho is like a community college!Alittle different then Harvard.

Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale. Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.

 

[Dr Grump]

Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale. Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.

True re Bush...absolutely..

 

[newpolitics]

I think the real issue here is judgement and intelligence. Experience is only as good as the wisdom that comes from it. Sarah Palin lacks wisdom, intelligence, "GOOD" experience, and many of the other qualities that would make a good VP and potentially a good president. .

EXACTLY! People qualify 'experience' as the end-all qualification for Washington. It's just something they use to put-down Obama, because they have nothing else. Too bad though, that that arguement doesn't hold up, for exactly the reason you just outlined.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale. Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.

Bush went to both, Yale and Harvard
he got his MBA from Harvard

 

[N4mddissent]

First of all, they weren't comparing apples to apples. Palin is vying (sp?) for the Vice Presidency. Obama is vying for the top job. They attempt to say they are comparing apples to apples by saying that McCain is old and Palin would be a heartbeat away, but I don't think that works. I think they should compare Obama to McCain, not Palin.

I understand what you are saying here and I think you can cross compare and directly compare. No reason not to consider things from all angles. But notice what you say a short while later...

When it comes to experience, I think she has the advantage over Obama for sure

Which is comparing Palin to Obama. You do go on to say the other two as well. But that's why I have not actually entered any arguments on the basis of arguing experience. I think experience is too loose a term. Experience that Palin has as a Mayor or Governor- as you say, being in charge- is something only she has. If that is how "experience is defined" then Obama and McCain are about equal in experience since neither have ever been elected to executive office at the city, state, or national level. But if somehow McCain's senate experience counts for more, then suddenly Palin can't claim an experience advantage over Obama since their time in political office is not that far apart. And while experience as Mayor or Governor is experience as an executive, no one can argue that there is an enormous difference between being mayor of a very small town and governor of a state with a population smaller than some large American cities is far different than being the POTUS. Another way the issue could be framed is that the candidates are seeking the highest Federal office in the country and Palin is the only candidate with 0 experience on the Federal level. How is she going to know what it takes to get a bill through congress? And she would become de-facto leader of the senate as VP. You see, it's just too easy for each person to have their own definition of the term "experience" means and adjust it to make their case. That's why I've focused more on the concerns about Palin's comments and how they reflect on her level of expertise, knowledge, and specific experience (like negotiating and developing foreign policy). But in my education post, I was intentionally leaving out the experience question, since there are many comments about it already and wanted to make the point that education is important as well.

It becomes difficult not to play the "cheap-shot" game when everyone seems to be playing it. It was a frustrating few days.

Sorry it has been frustrating. Believe me, I know. I live in a region with an 85% + Republican/Conservative evangelical base population. McCain signs all along the road. Have yet to see an Obama one. But what I've found is that if you argue clearly and logically and support you statements with facts- facts based on reputable sources- you can tap into that part of the brain found in those on both sides who simply parrot talking points and attacks while never doing any research or serious consideration. The part where there logical thinking is divided from their preconceived notions. They won't change their minds usually. And often they will get very angry with you. Take satisfaction as they storm off mad, because the source of their anger, is that by exposing the information to the thinking part of their mind that undermines their notions, you have forced them to consciously subvert their own logic to maintain their notions rather than blissfully maintaining them by not thinking. It is embarrassing to consciously admit that there is no good reason to disregard the information presented and realize you are just going to ignore it. That embarrassment is where the anger comes from. But they should be embarrassed.

Obama was defending himself most of the debate. When Obama would attack McCain, McCain would act as if Obama hadn't even said anything. How many times did Obama say "That's not true"? or "John is right".

Of course, another way it might have been perceived is that McCain rather than being constructive McCain was attacking Obama, perhaps misleadingly in some cases, and playing politics as usual. Obama saying John is right, could be seen as a sign of his open-mindedness and willing to stand up and accept a good idea or criticism from any source and not have a knee-jerk dismissal simply because it came from the other side of the isle. Obama and McCain have worked on legislation together before. Obviously they agree on some things. Did Obama not say a single thing McCain agreed with that night? If so, did McCain just not have the decency to admit that and give credit? And since McCain is running ads talking about Obama saying he was right (like admitting someone made a valid point is a bad thing) is he now going to consider himself as being less of a leader since he agreed with Obama's FDIC proposal in the last few days, even giving credit to Senator Obama- but carefully avoiding the words "Obama was right".

Obama is not perfect. But with things sinking on so many fronts, I really feel we have got to get someone in office who does things differently. If Obama is willing to say someone on the other side is right, rather than throw out a good idea or falsely condemn them- I see that as a positive. John McCain's service earns him a place in the heart of America. It alone does not earn him points on governing the nation in my opinion. Sarah Palin is likable in her own way. She earned her Miss Congeniality prize. But being a good old down to earth hockey-mom does not earn her any points toward running the country in my opinion. Too many people out there believe that is good-enough. I think it is a great accomplishment that Barak Obama has achieved the first Major party presidential nomination by an African American. But that gets him no points toward running the country in my opinion. Joe Biden is a wonderful dad who made a lot of sacrifices to take care of his children in the face of tragedy. But that earns him no points in my opinion. All 4 have great stories and I'm sure are great people at heart. They have all shown tremendous character at times. It all comes down to competence for me.

 

[N4mddissent]

Bush went to both, Yale and Harvard
he got his MBA from Harvard

One does not graduate magna cum laude without merit. One does not get selected editor and then elected by your peers as president of Harvard Law Review without merit. One does not get sought after by one of the most prestigious law schools in the nation, even offered incentives in the form of fellowship grants, to entice you to teach constitutional law without a hell of a lot of merit. One does not get into an ivy league school based on Daddy's legacy and influence if your daddy left the country to go back to Kenya when you were 2 years old.

We all know how Bush got accepted to Harvard and Yale. I don't think that Obama's family influence had a lot to do with his educational experience. And the results afterward are clearly different.

 

[elvis]

One does not graduate magna cum laude without merit. One does not get selected editor and then elected by your peers as president of Harvard Law Review without merit. One does not get sought after by one of the most prestigious law schools in the nation, even offered incentives in the form of fellowship grants, to entice you to teach constitutional law without a hell of a lot of merit. One does not get into an ivy league school based on Daddy's legacy and influence if your daddy left the country to go back to Kenya when you were 2 years old.

We all know how Bush got accepted to Harvard and Yale. I don't think that Obama's family influence had a lot to do with his educational experience. And the results afterward are clearly different.

I am not as impressed with his background at harvard. I can post again later.

 

[Luissa]

Yes, Obama went to Harvard, but Bush went to Yale. Pedigree doesn't guarantee good performance in the White House.

Like Divecon said he has is MBA, he also came from old money and his father is alumni to the college he went to. Obama worked his way up, it is alittle different. McCain went to the Naval Academy and came from a Navy family. Talk about predigree!

 

[pegwinn]

oh I know.. ANY mayor of a town with a monumental population of around 7k is probably well qualified to be a heart attack away from assuming the role of President.

Any Chicago Pol without credentials can be the President as well. But we really ought to wait until he is dry behind the ears and can show a consistant voting record. Besides, you really don't think Biden is an agent of change do you? Face it. Every Palin weakness so far is reflected in Obama. Don't matter to me any though my vote will be a write in.

Clinton lied about having sex with an intern. He also: balanced the budget, brought our country out of debt, didn't lie about the reasons for going to war (which lead to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of innocent people), didn't give excuses for torturing people, and preserved thousands of square miles of wilderness for generations to come. Was he really that bad? Clinton lied but Bush is a lying asshole.

I'm afraid the Clinton also alienated the military with his obvious character flaws. He balanced the budget on the backs of his service members via the draw down so we all got the opportunity to enjoy even more separation from our families. Clinton was a lying asshole as well.