Why McCain and Palin are unqualified

[billvon 3,008]

Brought to you by . . . McCain and Palin.

McCain, late last year:

"The fact is, I'm running on my record as a reliable conservative of 24 years. . . .I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."

Palin, recently:

"Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state."

[normiss 806]

So would you match those same skills and history against the opponents?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Brought to you by . . . McCain and Palin.

McCain, late last year:

"The fact is, I'm running on my record as a reliable conservative of 24 years. . . .I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."

Palin, recently:

"Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state."

Hey, billvon, why dont you post the whole question for which this answer was given? The one for Palin....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

So would you match those same skills and history against the opponents?

I doubt Bill would want to. That would mean he'd have to be neutral instead of partisan.

_________________________________________
Chris

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

So would you match those same skills and history against the opponents?

I doubt Bill would want to. That would mean he'd have to be neutral instead of partisan.

Squeak and squawk when the well established republican techniques are used against republicans, not Democrats. No complaints at all when the techniques are used against democrats.

The usual hypocritical bullshit from the right.

McClone and Caribou Barbie would be shrubco, continued. Get a clue.

[lawrocket 3]

I'm actually substantially fed up with this whole "qualified to be president" stuff that is being tossed about, without any appreciation for the objective qualifications necessary for the presidency.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides a three part test:
1) Natural born citizen of the united States (this includes US Controlled Territory, meaning that McCain qualifies
2) Age of 35 years or more; and
3) Been a resident within the US for at 14 years or more.

Another qualification for POTUS is found in the 22nd Amendment, Section 1, ratified in 1951:
1) Cannot have been elected POTUS twice before; or
2) Elected once and spent at least two years as President for someone else who was elected POTUS.

Obama, Biden, McCain and Palin meet all of these qualifications. They are therefore qualified to be POTUS. I am qualified to be POTUS - just barely.

Many things are not "qualifications" though historically they have been the rule. For example:
1) A POTUS need not be a Christian (though every single President has been a Christian, and all but Kennedy have been protestants);
2) A POTUS need not be a white male, though all have been;

There is no requirement for foreign policy experience, military experience, congressional experience, gubernatorial experience. None of it. No need for college education. There is no requirement that the POTUS have no criminal record.

Thus, the issue of whether a person is "qualified" is a non-issue for the candidates, is it not?

When people speak of "qualifications" they actually speak of those things they'd like to see. For example, many will not vote for Obama because he is a Democrat. Same for McCain because he is a Republican.

But that just doesn't sound good on a national scale. It sounds shallow. So instead they look to what they feel are "qualifications." Instead of saying, "I'd like a president to have military experience" or "I think a president should have an extensive legislative background"

So I'll give a nod to those who show the integrity to say, "I don't like him" or "I hate her" or "she's a liar." It's at least honest.

They are all "qualified."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 3,008]

>They are all "qualified."

I agree. I was discussing why Palin and McCain consider people like themselves to be unqualified.

[rehmwa 2]

Thanks - seems we always eventually get that post

Seems that to people here - "qualified" just means their candidate(s) or someone with a (D) or an (R) next to their name - followed by a bunch of wierdass rationalizations why the other guy isn't "Qualified"

or anyone that walks lockstep with their political positions would be "qualified"

I'm convinced that a 3 month old inanimate carbon rod would be "qualified" to a couple handful of people here as long as they had a (D) next to their names.

Maybe not as many, but a few on the (R) side too.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[lawrocket 3]

Indeed. And the whole "qualifications" business has so clouded both sides that Obama is unqualified, according to his veeps rhetoric and Palin is unqualified and McCain is "qualified" because of xxx and Biden is qualified because of yyy.

This is what happens when subjective is framed as objective...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[downwardspiral 0]

So what you are saying is none of them are qualified? Gotcha

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Andy9o8 2]

You're confusing "qualified" with "not prohibited".

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides a three part test:
1) Natural born citizen of the united States (this includes US Controlled Territory, meaning that McCain qualifies
2) Age of 35 years or more; and
3) Been a resident within the US for at 14 years or more.

Another qualification for POTUS is found in the 22nd Amendment, Section 1, ratified in 1951:
1) Cannot have been elected POTUS twice before; or
2) Elected once and spent at least two years as President for someone else who was elected POTUS.
Obama, Biden, McCain and Palin meet all of these qualifications. They are therefore qualified to be POTUS. I am qualified to be POTUS - just barely.

so then why don't you run? I'd vote for you!

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[normiss 806]

You're voting for Obama, aren't you???

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Brought to you by . . . McCain and Palin.

McCain, late last year:

"The fact is, I'm running on my record as a reliable conservative of 24 years. . . .I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."

Palin, recently:

"Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state."

Hey Bill

I am serious, I would really like to see the context under which she gave this answer

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,008]

>I would really like to see the context under which she gave this answer.
========================================
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I'm talking about somebody who's a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state ... these last couple of weeks ... it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.
===========================================

Summary from Leno:

Well, it's a very strange political campaign. I mean, out on the campaign trail, John McCain and Sarah Palin are talking about how they stood up to the Republican party, they fought the Republican establishment, and they battled Republicans. Their message: vote Republican.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>I would really like to see the context under which she gave this answer.
========================================
GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I'm talking about somebody who's a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we've got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody's big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they've had opportunities to meet heads of state ... these last couple of weeks ... it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.
===========================================


Thank you

Now, I will ask you. Does seeing this in its complete context maybe minimize the what you wanted your point to be?

I do!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

• Quote

[billvon 3,008]

>Does seeing this in its complete context maybe minimize the what
>you wanted your point to be?

No, it actually emphasizes it.

She wasn't asked a loaded question about whether McCain was qualified or not. She was asked a question about whether she had ever met a head of state. She first tried to sidestep the question, then finally answered it.

Then she volunteered a bit about how the people of the US don't want someone with decades and decades in the Washington establishment. She didn't have to, but she felt it important enough to get out there in the interview - so one can only imagine she thinks it's important to emphasize that the nation does not want the McCain/Bush closed door, good old boy network any longer.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Does seeing this in its complete context maybe minimize the what
>you wanted your point to be?

No, it actually emphasizes it.

She wasn't asked a loaded question about whether McCain was qualified or not. She was asked a question about whether she had ever met a head of state. She first tried to sidestep the question, then finally answered it.

Then she volunteered a bit about how the people of the US don't want someone with decades and decades in the Washington establishment. She didn't have to, but she felt it important enough to get out there in the interview - so one can only imagine she thinks it's important to emphasize that the nation does not want the McCain/Bush closed door, good old boy network any longer.

Sorry, dont buy it. The context of her answer is changed greatly by having the complete question AND answer.

Gibson (while he was trying not to) was talking down to her most of the interview.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,008]

> The context of her answer is changed greatly by having the complete
> question AND answer.

Indeed it does. It makes it clear that she was not asked that question, but wanted to get that information out there anyway.

>Gibson (while he was trying not to) was talking down to her most of the
>interview.

Yep, which I imagine was hard. She's been playing up how Alaska's physical proximity to Russia helps her with foreign relations, and he asked her what kind of insight that gives her into Russian actions. Her reply:

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Which would be like me asking someone what experience at the drop zone prepared them to do a 100-way I was organizing, and have them say "well, I can see them open when I pack!"

After that it would be very hard to not talk down to her. I can see him thinking "well, damn, where do I go from here?"

[rushmc 23]

Quote

> The context of her answer is changed greatly by having the complete
> question AND answer.

Indeed it does. It makes it clear that she was not asked that question, but wanted to get that information out there anyway.

>Gibson (while he was trying not to) was talking down to her most of the
>interview.

Yep, which I imagine was hard. She's been playing up how Alaska's physical proximity to Russia helps her with foreign relations, and he asked her what kind of insight that gives her into Russian actions. Her reply:

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

Which would be like me asking someone what experience at the drop zone prepared them to do a 100-way I was organizing, and have them say "well, I can see them open when I pack!"

After that it would be very hard to not talk down to her. I can see him thinking "well, damn, where do I go from here?"

You would

But I think you spin things regarding her answers...... ;...just a bit

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

from upi.com.

I am seeing many like this. Even some mainstream sites.

enjoy

Issue of the DayView archive | RSS Feed ABC's Gibson grilled Palin hard, but it may backfire
By MARTIN SIEFFPublished: Sept. 12, 2008 at 11:47 AMOrder reprints | Print Story | Email to a Friend | Post a Comment WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 (UPI) -- There were no surprises, no knockout zingers, but also no bloopers Thursday night in Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's first TV interview since becoming the Republican vice presidential nominee.

Charles Gibson of ABC News was out for blood and inherently applied a double-standard compared with the kid gloves George Stephanopoulos used on Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois on Sunday night.

Gibson was out to embarrass Palin and expose her presumed ignorance from the word go. By contrast, when Obama referred to his "Muslim faith" on Sunday and did not correct himself, Stephanopoulos rushed in at once to help him and emphasize that the senator had really meant to say his Christian faith.

By contrast, Gibson tried to embarrass Palin by referring to her Christian faith in asking people to pray for U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Palin countered by pointing out she was following the precedent set by Abraham Lincoln.

Palin also expressed her support for Georgia and Ukraine joining the U.S.-led NATO alliance. That statement was predictable and consistent with the current policy of the Bush administration. The policy has dangerously raised tensions with Russia, but Palin is hardly alone in the conservative/Republican consensus in expressing her support for it.

Palin's assessment of foreign policy was competent and not embarrassing. Although she initially exhibited ignorance of the Bush Doctrine on pre-emptive strikes that has been a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, she recovered quickly and then made the case clearly. Tactically, she made the mistake of trying to be friendly and informal with Gibson, who assumed a superior, professorial and critical stance toward her. She would have been far better going on the attack to rattle him.

The double-standard Gibson applied to Palin, compared with the uncritical media platforms repeatedly offered to Obama, who has had zero executive experience running anything, was especially striking. ABC and Gibson focused on Palin as if she were running right now for the presidency rather than the vice presidency. He and other media pundits, by contrast, have never asked the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, if he has ever had to make a decision on anything.

Gibson's aggressive approach appeared to take Palin by surprise: He was clearly attempting to put her on point by presenting her as having extreme religious views. This again, however, appears to be a double-standard, as Palin grew up in the Assemblies of God, one of the largest Christian denominations in America with 16 million members, and is now a member of the Wasilla Bible Church. Even now, Obama has yet to receive any comparable grilling on his 20-year attendance in the congregation of the notoriously racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

The focus on Palin's faith and family, as well as the controversy over Obama's "lipstick on a pig" comment in Virginia earlier this week, confirmed the swift demise of civility in the 2008 presidential campaign. This is especially ironic, as both Obama and his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, owed their victories over Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York in the Democratic primary race and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the GOP one to their perceived inclusive tolerance, uplift and vision compared with their main opponents.

In the long sweep of U.S. political history, the worst dirt that has been thrown at either of the presidential candidates pales compared with the claims that Thomas Jefferson had fathered a child by a black slave in the 1800 campaign -- the newspaper editor who published the accusations eventually was found dead floating in a canal -- or the false claims by Republicans in the 1944 campaign that President Franklin D. Roosevelt was senile. FDR by that point was indeed a dying man, though he did not know it, but he was mentally as sharp as ever.

The context of the increasingly desperate -- and ugly -- attacks on Palin and her alleged lack of experience is that the Obama bandwagon, which swept all before it from the Iowa caucuses through the end of June, is now stalling badly and, even more worrying for the Democrats, the malaise may be spreading to the congressional races.

The latest USA Today/Gallup poll has the Democrats only 3 points up on the Republicans on the question of which party people would vote for today in their congressional district.

Indeed, the Obama campaign is now saying it is ready to take the gloves off against McCain. They rolled out a new ad Friday mocking McCain as out of touch and old-fashioned, even though it was McCain who picked a young woman as a running mate while Obama opted for an old white guy who's been sitting in the Senate for 36 years. With more than 50 days still to go until the actual election, it appears dangerously early in the campaign for the Obama camp to go negative, especially as so much of his appeal has been based on rising above the old negatives to begin with. Isn't it early in the campaign to resort to that? Is it a sign of panic?

Whatever her inexperience and other shortcomings, Palin did not fall into that trap in her ABC interview. At no point did she appear fearful or threatening. Gibson's aggressive questioning on her religion and her son's coming military service in Iraq, by contrast, runs the risks for the Democrats of strengthening support for Palin among working-class, married women, especially those with husbands or sons serving in the military.

The pattern of previous presidential election interviews and debates has always been that individuals who come across as intellectually superior, arrogant and condescending forfeit support that goes to their perceived victims. This dynamic played a crucial role in propelling George W. Bush into the White House eight years ago. It remains to be seen if Gibson's perceived arrogance and condescension will give Palin another boost. It certainly didn't help the Democrats that ABC's chief political correspondent, Stephanopoulos, who had rushed to Obama's aid only four days before, was wheeled on to discuss her interview with Gibson as soon as it was concluded.

Liberal Democrats predictably will cite the interview as evidence that Palin is not prepared for the vice presidency. Republicans will equally predictably cite it as evidence that she is. How centrist voters will react to it remains to be seen. One thing is clear: This isn't a transformational election on either side. Whoever wins, the ugly old cultural and political divisions in America remain -- and they are deeper than ever.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

and even from the held in the highest CBS

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/11/politics/politicalplayers/main4442492.shtml

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

They just keep coming

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/12/abc-edits-out-palin-objection-to-holy-war-question/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

not done yet

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/12/palins-definition-of-bush-doctrine-hits-the-gibson-mark/

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

starting to look like an all out attack

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/548bfqty.asp

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln