Palin is Unfit to Be A Heart Beat Away

I agree with DPD. For those who would argue that Obama lacks sufficient experience, he at least showed reasonable understanding of foreign policy in last Friday’s debate.

We will see how Palin fares in this Friday’s debate.

Abraham Lincoln had less political experience than Obama when he became President. Lincoln was never Senator, and was Congressman for only one term. I find it interesting that a recent Enterprise letter commented that Obama did not have the experience to follow in the footsteps of other great Presidents like Lincoln and others.

I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

I agree with DPD. For those who would argue that Obama lacks sufficient experience, he at least showed reasonable understanding of foreign policy in last Friday’s debate.

We will see how Palin fares in this Friday’s debate.

Abraham Lincoln had less political experience than Obama when he became President. Lincoln was never Senator, and was Congressman for only one term. I find it interesting that a recent Enterprise letter commented that Obama did not have the experience to follow in the footsteps of other great Presidents like Lincoln and others.

I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

It’s a shame that McCain picked Palin when he could have picked a Republican woman with more experience and intelligence such as Senator Hutchison of Texas.

It’s a shame that McCain picked Palin when he could have picked a Republican woman with more experience and intelligence such as Senator Hutchison of Texas.

“We will see how Palin fares in this Friday’s debate.”

Just FYI, the VP debate is Thursday.

“We will see how Palin fares in this Friday’s debate.”

Just FYI, the VP debate is Thursday.

Sarah Palin is HOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sarah Palin is HOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I’m voting for McCain, and I had been excited about Palin, but the Couric interview, among other things, makes me think she was a terrible choice. Not sure if anyone saw the interview with McCain and Palin – McCain looked like he was defending and protecting his daughter…not a good image for Palin.

So, the real question is does the Palin candicacy represent a step backwards for women? Comments such as “Palin is hot” are degrading and immature, but they are also heard fairly regularly, especially amongst Republicans. Palin resorting to acting “cute,” in tough situations not only hurts her credibly, but hurts all women. I’m not a huge fan of Clinton, but Clinton was great for women – she was at least seen as a politician (good or bad) and not a female politician…and certainly neither hot nor cute.

I’m voting for McCain, and I had been excited about Palin, but the Couric interview, among other things, makes me think she was a terrible choice. Not sure if anyone saw the interview with McCain and Palin – McCain looked like he was defending and protecting his daughter…not a good image for Palin.

So, the real question is does the Palin candicacy represent a step backwards for women? Comments such as “Palin is hot” are degrading and immature, but they are also heard fairly regularly, especially amongst Republicans. Palin resorting to acting “cute,” in tough situations not only hurts her credibly, but hurts all women. I’m not a huge fan of Clinton, but Clinton was great for women – she was at least seen as a politician (good or bad) and not a female politician…and certainly neither hot nor cute.

From http://www.slate.com, today:

So What If They Didn’t Talk? The Differences Were Still Fundamental.
Posted Monday, September 29, 2008 8:29 AM By Bill Bishop

Just a few minutes into Friday’s debate and Jim Lehrer was already exasperated. The moderator wanted McCain and Obama to talk to each other. (Did he expect the candidates to banter away the next 90 minutes like two buddies in a fishing boat?) And Lehrer was convinced McCain and Obama hadn’t stated their “fundamental differences” in how the two approached the financial crisis.

The differences were pretty clear to me—and fundamental was the word. In the first few minutes of Friday’s debate, John McCain and Barack Obama placed themselves on either side of a divide that has defined the country for more than a century—two worldviews that are today expressed in church, party, and neighborhood.

When Obama talked about the financial crisis, he said there was a demand for new social controls. McCain spoke about the need for individual responsibility.

Obama’s described the financial situation as a failure of “we.” The Wall Street debacle was the result of a “theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down.” The collapse was caused by “an economic philosophy that says that regulation is always bad.”

McCain lamented a society that had abandoned personal accountability. He said he would have fired the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. “We’ve got to start also holding people accountable, and we’ve got to reward people who succeed,” said McCain. The Republican looked at the collapse of Wall Street and saw an “I” problem.

In the late 19th century, American Protestantism split. The division wasn’t denominational. It was about how people viewed the world. On one side was what University of Chicago religious scholar Martin Marty called “Private Protestantism.” Private Protestants promoted personal salvation and promised that individual morality would be rewarded in the next life.

On the other side was “Public Protestantism,” a conviction that the way to God required the transformation of society.

Private Protestants thought drunkenness was an individual failing that could be cured by faith. Public Protestants saw alcoholism as a social ill that should be addressed by “blue laws.” Public Protestants confronted the new industrial age with the eight-hour day, child labor laws, and the minimum wage. Private Protestant preacher Dwight Moody witnessed the Haymarket labor riot in 1886 and concluded that either “these people are to be evangelized or the leaven of communism and infidelity will assume such enormous proportions that it will break out in a reign of terror such as this country has never known.”

There were “two types of Christianity” in the country, Congregationalist minister Josiah Strong wrote in 1913. The competing views were “not to be distinguished by any of the old lines of doctrinal or denominational cleavage,” Strong continued. “Their difference is one of spirit, aim, point of view, comprehensiveness. The one is individualist; the other is social.”

The one staged revivals to save souls. The other pushed social reforms to save the world.

Private Protestantism guided the fundamentalist/evangelical church and, eventually, the Republican Party. It’s expressed in The Fundamentals, Goldwater, Ayn Rand, the nondenominational church, Reagan, Cato and Heritage, right-to-work, school vouchers, Social Security privatization, the Great Commission, conceal and carry, free trade and the market.

Public Protestantism drove the ecumenical movement of the mainline churches and, in time, the Democratic Party. It was The Jungle, the New Deal and Great Society, the Ford Foundation, Medicare, the National Council of Churches, OSHA and the labor union.

This election was supposed to be about post-partisanship, but it’s not even post-19th century. It’s a contest between two worldviews that have been struggling against each other in sanctuary and voting booth for more than a century.

From http://www.slate.com, today:

So What If They Didn’t Talk? The Differences Were Still Fundamental.
Posted Monday, September 29, 2008 8:29 AM By Bill Bishop

Just a few minutes into Friday’s debate and Jim Lehrer was already exasperated. The moderator wanted McCain and Obama to talk to each other. (Did he expect the candidates to banter away the next 90 minutes like two buddies in a fishing boat?) And Lehrer was convinced McCain and Obama hadn’t stated their “fundamental differences” in how the two approached the financial crisis.

The differences were pretty clear to me—and fundamental was the word. In the first few minutes of Friday’s debate, John McCain and Barack Obama placed themselves on either side of a divide that has defined the country for more than a century—two worldviews that are today expressed in church, party, and neighborhood.

When Obama talked about the financial crisis, he said there was a demand for new social controls. McCain spoke about the need for individual responsibility.

Obama’s described the financial situation as a failure of “we.” The Wall Street debacle was the result of a “theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down.” The collapse was caused by “an economic philosophy that says that regulation is always bad.”

McCain lamented a society that had abandoned personal accountability. He said he would have fired the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. “We’ve got to start also holding people accountable, and we’ve got to reward people who succeed,” said McCain. The Republican looked at the collapse of Wall Street and saw an “I” problem.

In the late 19th century, American Protestantism split. The division wasn’t denominational. It was about how people viewed the world. On one side was what University of Chicago religious scholar Martin Marty called “Private Protestantism.” Private Protestants promoted personal salvation and promised that individual morality would be rewarded in the next life.

On the other side was “Public Protestantism,” a conviction that the way to God required the transformation of society.

Private Protestants thought drunkenness was an individual failing that could be cured by faith. Public Protestants saw alcoholism as a social ill that should be addressed by “blue laws.” Public Protestants confronted the new industrial age with the eight-hour day, child labor laws, and the minimum wage. Private Protestant preacher Dwight Moody witnessed the Haymarket labor riot in 1886 and concluded that either “these people are to be evangelized or the leaven of communism and infidelity will assume such enormous proportions that it will break out in a reign of terror such as this country has never known.”

There were “two types of Christianity” in the country, Congregationalist minister Josiah Strong wrote in 1913. The competing views were “not to be distinguished by any of the old lines of doctrinal or denominational cleavage,” Strong continued. “Their difference is one of spirit, aim, point of view, comprehensiveness. The one is individualist; the other is social.”

The one staged revivals to save souls. The other pushed social reforms to save the world.

Private Protestantism guided the fundamentalist/evangelical church and, eventually, the Republican Party. It’s expressed in The Fundamentals, Goldwater, Ayn Rand, the nondenominational church, Reagan, Cato and Heritage, right-to-work, school vouchers, Social Security privatization, the Great Commission, conceal and carry, free trade and the market.

Public Protestantism drove the ecumenical movement of the mainline churches and, in time, the Democratic Party. It was The Jungle, the New Deal and Great Society, the Ford Foundation, Medicare, the National Council of Churches, OSHA and the labor union.

This election was supposed to be about post-partisanship, but it’s not even post-19th century. It’s a contest between two worldviews that have been struggling against each other in sanctuary and voting booth for more than a century.

“So, the real question is does the Palin candicacy represent a step backwards for women?”

Only if women are so shallow they vote for McCain/Palin simply because she is a woman.

“So, the real question is does the Palin candicacy represent a step backwards for women?”

Only if women are so shallow they vote for McCain/Palin simply because she is a woman.

I recently received this worthwhile spam… and quickly followed-up wiht a $25 donation to Planned parenthood. This kind of action is far better than donating $$ to fuel the campaign rhetoric.
*********
Dear Friends:

We may have thought we wanted a woman on a national political ticket, but the joke has really been on us, hasn’t it? Are you as sick in your stomach as I am at the thought of Sarah Palin as Vice President of the United States ?

Since Palin gave her speech accepting the Republican nomination for the Vice Presidency, Barack Obama’s campaign has raised over $10 million dollars. Some of you may already be supporting the Obama campaign financially; others of you may still be recovering from the primaries. None of you, however, can be happy with Palin’s selection, especially on her positions on women’s issues. So, if you feel you can’t support the Obama campaign financially, may I suggest the following fiendishly brilliant alternative?

Make a donation to Planned Parenthood. In Sarah Palin’s name. A Planned Parenthood donation is tax deductible, while a political donation isn’t. And here’s the good part: when you make a donation to PP in her name, they’ll send her a card telling her that the donation has been made in her honor.
Here’s the link to the Planned Parenthood website:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ go to donate, then honorary gifts
You’ll need to fill in the address to let PP know where to send the “in Sarah Palin’s honor” card. I suggest you use the address for the McCain campaign headquarters:
McCain for President
1235 S. Clark Street
1st Floor
Arlington,VA 22202

I recently received this worthwhile spam… and quickly followed-up wiht a $25 donation to Planned parenthood. This kind of action is far better than donating $$ to fuel the campaign rhetoric.
*********
Dear Friends:

We may have thought we wanted a woman on a national political ticket, but the joke has really been on us, hasn’t it? Are you as sick in your stomach as I am at the thought of Sarah Palin as Vice President of the United States ?

Since Palin gave her speech accepting the Republican nomination for the Vice Presidency, Barack Obama’s campaign has raised over $10 million dollars. Some of you may already be supporting the Obama campaign financially; others of you may still be recovering from the primaries. None of you, however, can be happy with Palin’s selection, especially on her positions on women’s issues. So, if you feel you can’t support the Obama campaign financially, may I suggest the following fiendishly brilliant alternative?

Make a donation to Planned Parenthood. In Sarah Palin’s name. A Planned Parenthood donation is tax deductible, while a political donation isn’t. And here’s the good part: when you make a donation to PP in her name, they’ll send her a card telling her that the donation has been made in her honor.
Here’s the link to the Planned Parenthood website:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ go to donate, then honorary gifts
You’ll need to fill in the address to let PP know where to send the “in Sarah Palin’s honor” card. I suggest you use the address for the McCain campaign headquarters:
McCain for President
1235 S. Clark Street
1st Floor
Arlington,VA 22202

Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion, and this political season is certainly generating many; however, I think DPD, like many Liberals, is out of his league on this topic. Liberals seemingly have never seriously studied or came close to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. They opine from a base of agitated feelings and not from fact.

Also, we are losing our ability to be objective here. The anointed one, Obama, can do no wrong. With every move he sets new standards for the spiritually-starved progressive. Obama and his media protectors attack McCain for saying “the fundamentals of the economy are strong”. Yet, yesterday Obama says the exact same thing and there is no complaint from the left. In the head of a Liberal, this is acceptable apparently only because Obama is on the left, and McCain is on the right. Obama has done absolutely nothing in his measly three years as a US Senator and he has zero executive experience; yet Sarah Palin’s experience as a wildly popular governor is somehow irrelevant? At least we should get acknowledgement from the left that their P candidate is at least as inexperienced as the VP on the right.

The financial market meltdown was caused by the same type of stupid altruism that Barak Obama will force on us. We hear the term “predatory lending practices” all the time. While there is no questioning the lack of honesty and integrity from mortgage brokers that lent to unqualified buyers; but the source of this trend was a government agenda allow more low-income Americans to purchase a home. These buyers could not afford a mortgage; would not have had the opportunity to purchase a home under normal credit circumstances. They were “gifted” lax credit standards by government programs and legislation specifically intended to do this. So, because of the meddling socialistic tendencies of government, these low-income borrowers temporarily owned a house that they should have never been able to afford in the first place, and they lost the house when the truth caught up with them. So, now we blame capitalism for their “pain” and demand more socialism to “help” them. Have we lost out mind?

The solution to providing low-income people a greater piece of the economic pie is not government handouts (what the last 12 years of subprime mortgage lending has been); what they require is a system of maximum opportunity to climb the social ladder. Enabling this climb requires three things:

First, it requires a free and robust free market that is not destructively impeded or manipulated by government control. Today, high corporate taxes combined with bloated and underperforming government has been a growing impediment to the kind of economic growth that produces real American prosperity.

Second: At the same time there has been an erosion of American cultural traditions of strong family values, civility, community, national pride, spirituality, persistence and hard work. Integrity is a byproduct of these traditional qualities of American greatness that have been decimated by poor parenting. We have become a nation of selfish narcissists that can blog about charity, but rarely spend the time to truly help our fellow humans.

Third: Drastically improve education. America has become the ‘drop out nation’. This year, more than 1/3 of American children will drop out before they finish high school. For African American and Latino children, this figure is near 50 percent. For male children these rates are even higher. These are the real numbers, not the deceptive ones quoted by self-serving bureaucrats and the wealthy teachers’ unions. Americans cannot win in the global economy with our future workforce dropping out of school. Charter schools, vouchers, pay-for-performance, trade schools, home schooling… all of these things must be utilized to create a competitive environment that rewards results and encourages ever-advancing quality. School employees that are proven consistent low performers should be given job retraining and shown the door.

To improve the financial situation of low-income and middle-class citizens: we need to fix government. We need to fix our culture. We need a strong free market. We need a drastically improved education system. Government handouts caused this financial mess, so why would we want more?

Liberals are so much into identity politics these days; they forget that elections are primarily about ideas. The founders of this nation expected us to govern ourselves. Real people should be elected. Sarah Palin and John McCain are more easily comprehended and are more “real”. Obama and Biden are strange enigmas that seem attractive specifically because they are different. However, we should stop pointing out this petty crap and talk about the differences in what these two parties stand for. In terms of ideas and record, McCain is no conservative… he is center. Palin too has gone after big business for the benefit of her constituents. Despite the media attention/lies, she is just right of center. Based on his stated ideas (not his record because there is very little record) Obama is a socialist… or at least very left of center. Biden is left of Mars.

So, with respect to the economy, which set of candidates offers the best hope for the future bases on their ideas? Who has the best chance to fix government, fix the culture and fix education? Not Obama and Biden in my book.

Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion, and this political season is certainly generating many; however, I think DPD, like many Liberals, is out of his league on this topic. Liberals seemingly have never seriously studied or came close to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. They opine from a base of agitated feelings and not from fact.

Also, we are losing our ability to be objective here. The anointed one, Obama, can do no wrong. With every move he sets new standards for the spiritually-starved progressive. Obama and his media protectors attack McCain for saying “the fundamentals of the economy are strong”. Yet, yesterday Obama says the exact same thing and there is no complaint from the left. In the head of a Liberal, this is acceptable apparently only because Obama is on the left, and McCain is on the right. Obama has done absolutely nothing in his measly three years as a US Senator and he has zero executive experience; yet Sarah Palin’s experience as a wildly popular governor is somehow irrelevant? At least we should get acknowledgement from the left that their P candidate is at least as inexperienced as the VP on the right.

The financial market meltdown was caused by the same type of stupid altruism that Barak Obama will force on us. We hear the term “predatory lending practices” all the time. While there is no questioning the lack of honesty and integrity from mortgage brokers that lent to unqualified buyers; but the source of this trend was a government agenda allow more low-income Americans to purchase a home. These buyers could not afford a mortgage; would not have had the opportunity to purchase a home under normal credit circumstances. They were “gifted” lax credit standards by government programs and legislation specifically intended to do this. So, because of the meddling socialistic tendencies of government, these low-income borrowers temporarily owned a house that they should have never been able to afford in the first place, and they lost the house when the truth caught up with them. So, now we blame capitalism for their “pain” and demand more socialism to “help” them. Have we lost out mind?

The solution to providing low-income people a greater piece of the economic pie is not government handouts (what the last 12 years of subprime mortgage lending has been); what they require is a system of maximum opportunity to climb the social ladder. Enabling this climb requires three things:

First, it requires a free and robust free market that is not destructively impeded or manipulated by government control. Today, high corporate taxes combined with bloated and underperforming government has been a growing impediment to the kind of economic growth that produces real American prosperity.

Second: At the same time there has been an erosion of American cultural traditions of strong family values, civility, community, national pride, spirituality, persistence and hard work. Integrity is a byproduct of these traditional qualities of American greatness that have been decimated by poor parenting. We have become a nation of selfish narcissists that can blog about charity, but rarely spend the time to truly help our fellow humans.

Third: Drastically improve education. America has become the ‘drop out nation’. This year, more than 1/3 of American children will drop out before they finish high school. For African American and Latino children, this figure is near 50 percent. For male children these rates are even higher. These are the real numbers, not the deceptive ones quoted by self-serving bureaucrats and the wealthy teachers’ unions. Americans cannot win in the global economy with our future workforce dropping out of school. Charter schools, vouchers, pay-for-performance, trade schools, home schooling… all of these things must be utilized to create a competitive environment that rewards results and encourages ever-advancing quality. School employees that are proven consistent low performers should be given job retraining and shown the door.

To improve the financial situation of low-income and middle-class citizens: we need to fix government. We need to fix our culture. We need a strong free market. We need a drastically improved education system. Government handouts caused this financial mess, so why would we want more?

Liberals are so much into identity politics these days; they forget that elections are primarily about ideas. The founders of this nation expected us to govern ourselves. Real people should be elected. Sarah Palin and John McCain are more easily comprehended and are more “real”. Obama and Biden are strange enigmas that seem attractive specifically because they are different. However, we should stop pointing out this petty crap and talk about the differences in what these two parties stand for. In terms of ideas and record, McCain is no conservative… he is center. Palin too has gone after big business for the benefit of her constituents. Despite the media attention/lies, she is just right of center. Based on his stated ideas (not his record because there is very little record) Obama is a socialist… or at least very left of center. Biden is left of Mars.

So, with respect to the economy, which set of candidates offers the best hope for the future bases on their ideas? Who has the best chance to fix government, fix the culture and fix education? Not Obama and Biden in my book.

Whoever is elected president and vice president of America usually are considered world leaders and the voters for the most part try to elect candidates who are world class. There is no doubt in my mind that Obama and Biden fits the bill. Both McClain and Palin are war hawks. Palin is pretty and colorful and should be given her own TV show. Otherwisee i think she is being exploited.

Whoever is elected president and vice president of America usually are considered world leaders and the voters for the most part try to elect candidates who are world class. There is no doubt in my mind that Obama and Biden fits the bill. Both McClain and Palin are war hawks. Palin is pretty and colorful and should be given her own TV show. Otherwisee i think she is being exploited.

my goodness, I am in such a hurry that I misspelled my own name!!

my goodness, I am in such a hurry that I misspelled my own name!!

My friend Chester, I think you miss the point of my essay today.

“I think DPD, like many Liberals, is out of his league on this topic. Liberals seemingly have never seriously studied or came close to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. They opine from a base of agitated feelings and not from fact.”

My analysis here has little to do with whatever my belief may or may not be with regards to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. It has everything to do with what I believe are serious and fatal shortcomings of Palin.

You spent a lot of time discussing your views on the economy, which are fine, but that doesn’t really address my concerns about Palin.

However, I will address this point:

“yet Sarah Palin’s experience as a wildly popular governor is somehow irrelevant?”

Yes, it is irrelevant for a few different reasons.

First, Alaska is a small state whose legislature meets for 90 days out of the year. That’s not a vast amount of experience.

Second, Alaska has singularly mindedgovernance built on the notion of oil exploration and export.

Third and most important, she has made irrelevant because she has proven to have utterly no clue about the implications of the bail-out, the fiscal system, or foreign policy.

In other words, we could perhaps forgive the first two flaws in the logic that being a wildly popular governor matters if she seemed knowledgeable on the issues that face the US government. But she does not.

From my standpoint, Palin is completely unqualified to serve as Vice President and to assume the Presidency should the 72 year old McCain become incapacitated or pass away. For McCain to name her to be his running mate calls into question any judgment or leadership he might have.

We can debate ideological concerns that you have laid out until we are blue in the face and come to no clear consensus, but for me, the bottom line is that Palin is an embarrassment to this country and needs to be removed from the ticket.

My friend Chester, I think you miss the point of my essay today.

“I think DPD, like many Liberals, is out of his league on this topic. Liberals seemingly have never seriously studied or came close to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. They opine from a base of agitated feelings and not from fact.”

My analysis here has little to do with whatever my belief may or may not be with regards to understanding the principles and dynamics of free-market capitalism. It has everything to do with what I believe are serious and fatal shortcomings of Palin.

You spent a lot of time discussing your views on the economy, which are fine, but that doesn’t really address my concerns about Palin.

However, I will address this point:

“yet Sarah Palin’s experience as a wildly popular governor is somehow irrelevant?”

Yes, it is irrelevant for a few different reasons.

First, Alaska is a small state whose legislature meets for 90 days out of the year. That’s not a vast amount of experience.

Second, Alaska has singularly mindedgovernance built on the notion of oil exploration and export.

Third and most important, she has made irrelevant because she has proven to have utterly no clue about the implications of the bail-out, the fiscal system, or foreign policy.

In other words, we could perhaps forgive the first two flaws in the logic that being a wildly popular governor matters if she seemed knowledgeable on the issues that face the US government. But she does not.

From my standpoint, Palin is completely unqualified to serve as Vice President and to assume the Presidency should the 72 year old McCain become incapacitated or pass away. For McCain to name her to be his running mate calls into question any judgment or leadership he might have.

We can debate ideological concerns that you have laid out until we are blue in the face and come to no clear consensus, but for me, the bottom line is that Palin is an embarrassment to this country and needs to be removed from the ticket.

I just love how Chip, Chuck, or others complain about “government handouts” but when it comes to “white collar welfare” to bail out the mismanagment of major corporations it’s OKAY to help….

Go Obama! You’ve got my vote.

I just love how Chip, Chuck, or others complain about “government handouts” but when it comes to “white collar welfare” to bail out the mismanagment of major corporations it’s OKAY to help….

Go Obama! You’ve got my vote.

Chip, Chuck, Chester…

Chip, Chuck, Chester…

“They were “gifted” lax credit standards by government programs and legislation specifically intended to do this. So, because of the meddling socialistic tendencies of government, these low-income borrowers temporarily owned a house that they should have never been able to afford in the first place, and they lost the house when the truth caught up with them.”

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Chester, the reason why the mortgage companies were going after such people without using their old fashioned standards about who could pay back the mortgage, was because of deregulation and decisions by conservatives like Phil Gramm et al. that the free market would take care of these problems.

Having NO regulations of the lending industry is what got us into this problem in the first place. The industry needs more oversight, not less.

“They were “gifted” lax credit standards by government programs and legislation specifically intended to do this. So, because of the meddling socialistic tendencies of government, these low-income borrowers temporarily owned a house that they should have never been able to afford in the first place, and they lost the house when the truth caught up with them.”

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Chester, the reason why the mortgage companies were going after such people without using their old fashioned standards about who could pay back the mortgage, was because of deregulation and decisions by conservatives like Phil Gramm et al. that the free market would take care of these problems.

Having NO regulations of the lending industry is what got us into this problem in the first place. The industry needs more oversight, not less.

Chester

“The financial market meltdown was caused by the same type of stupid altruism that Barak Obama will force on us. We hear the term “predatory lending practices” all the time.”

That was not an honest statement and I am sure you know it.

This meltdown happened because the financial markets lost control, feeding off of rising real estate values. Much of it was because too many speculators moved money into the real estate market, all sorts of high risk mortgage backed securies were invented and money poured in from offshore. Ultimately the market did not cooperate – it did not go up forever.

We have had three events like this during the past decade – the . com bust, the energy bust and now the real estate bust. The last two busts were directly related to Lack of Oversight. Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified. It is bad public policy to allow so much speculation in the housing markets – millions of people have been hurt and now the market itself might fail.

The last decade had demonstrated the free enterprise system desparately needs checks and balances – something McCain is against.

Chester

“The financial market meltdown was caused by the same type of stupid altruism that Barak Obama will force on us. We hear the term “predatory lending practices” all the time.”

That was not an honest statement and I am sure you know it.

This meltdown happened because the financial markets lost control, feeding off of rising real estate values. Much of it was because too many speculators moved money into the real estate market, all sorts of high risk mortgage backed securies were invented and money poured in from offshore. Ultimately the market did not cooperate – it did not go up forever.

We have had three events like this during the past decade – the . com bust, the energy bust and now the real estate bust. The last two busts were directly related to Lack of Oversight. Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified. It is bad public policy to allow so much speculation in the housing markets – millions of people have been hurt and now the market itself might fail.

The last decade had demonstrated the free enterprise system desparately needs checks and balances – something McCain is against.

“Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified.”

If the borrowers were qualified – speculator or not – they would not have defaulted on their mortgages unless they lost income to service their mortgage debt. Not enough borrowers lost their jobs in the poor economy to explain the mass default rate.

These adjustable-rate “liar loans” were always a time bomb because if the rates increased, the borrower would not be able to make the payments. That is what happened.

The securitized subprime mortgages that Freddie and Fanny cleared were known to be junk precisely because the borrowers did not meet normal credit standards. Beginning in the Clinton administration, the government wanted low-income people feeling left behind of the wealth being generated in the residential real estate market – to get a piece of that pie. This was stupid altruism. It was the genesis of the problem that is currently blamed on lack of oversight and greed.

I completely understand the relationship to this and other dysfunctional profit making runs like the tech stock boom and crash. However, the tech stock boom was self-caused and self correcting without requiring government bailouts. This financial mess was caused primarily by government meddling and so now the government has to fix the mess it caused.

The perplexing part of this mess is that somehow the Democrats have succeeded in blaming free-market capitalism on the problem rather than the truth: government meddling.

“Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified.”

If the borrowers were qualified – speculator or not – they would not have defaulted on their mortgages unless they lost income to service their mortgage debt. Not enough borrowers lost their jobs in the poor economy to explain the mass default rate.

These adjustable-rate “liar loans” were always a time bomb because if the rates increased, the borrower would not be able to make the payments. That is what happened.

The securitized subprime mortgages that Freddie and Fanny cleared were known to be junk precisely because the borrowers did not meet normal credit standards. Beginning in the Clinton administration, the government wanted low-income people feeling left behind of the wealth being generated in the residential real estate market – to get a piece of that pie. This was stupid altruism. It was the genesis of the problem that is currently blamed on lack of oversight and greed.

I completely understand the relationship to this and other dysfunctional profit making runs like the tech stock boom and crash. However, the tech stock boom was self-caused and self correcting without requiring government bailouts. This financial mess was caused primarily by government meddling and so now the government has to fix the mess it caused.

The perplexing part of this mess is that somehow the Democrats have succeeded in blaming free-market capitalism on the problem rather than the truth: government meddling.

The Treasury can control credit, yet nothing was done to reign in a market that was spinning out of control. At least, prior to the . com peak Greenspan was warning investors about market exuberance. Nothing happened during the past eight year – complete lack of leadership. The question is which of the two candidates will be more willing to step up and take control.

The Treasury can control credit, yet nothing was done to reign in a market that was spinning out of control. At least, prior to the . com peak Greenspan was warning investors about market exuberance. Nothing happened during the past eight year – complete lack of leadership. The question is which of the two candidates will be more willing to step up and take control.

This is no time to be going to Debate Camp and learning a few catchphrases.

oh, and would those “catch phrases” include “change we can believe in?”, “community organizer”, and “hope?”

This is no time to be going to Debate Camp and learning a few catchphrases.

oh, and would those “catch phrases” include “change we can believe in?”, “community organizer”, and “hope?”

I agree with DPD. For those who would argue that Obama lacks sufficient experience, he at least showed reasonable understanding of foreign policy in last Friday’s debate.

Obama wants to bring our troops home, move them into Afghanistan, attack Pakistan (our ally), show restraint on N. Korea and Iran. And Show restraint on an increasingly aggressive Russia.

This guy is a retard on foreign policy.

I agree with DPD. For those who would argue that Obama lacks sufficient experience, he at least showed reasonable understanding of foreign policy in last Friday’s debate.

Obama wants to bring our troops home, move them into Afghanistan, attack Pakistan (our ally), show restraint on N. Korea and Iran. And Show restraint on an increasingly aggressive Russia.

This guy is a retard on foreign policy.

I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.

I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.

Nowhere did Obama say he would attack Pakistan.

This is what Obama ACTUALLY said:

“Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan. If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out.”

Nowhere did Obama say he would attack Pakistan.

This is what Obama ACTUALLY said:

“Nobody talked about attacking Pakistan. If the United States has al Qaeda, bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out.”

“Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified.”

If the borrowers were qualified – speculator or not – they would not have defaulted on their mortgages unless they lost income to service their mortgage debt. Not enough borrowers lost their jobs in the poor economy to explain the mass default rate.

These adjustable-rate “liar loans” were always a time bomb because if the rates increased, the borrower would not be able to make the payments. That is what happened.

The securitized subprime mortgages that Freddie and Fanny cleared were known to be junk precisely because the borrowers did not meet normal credit standards. Beginning in the Clinton administration, the government wanted low-income people feeling left behind of the wealth being generated in the residential real estate market – to get a piece of that pie. This was stupid altruism. It was the genesis of the problem that is currently blamed on lack of oversight and greed.

I completely understand the relationship to this and other dysfunctional profit making runs like the tech stock boom and crash. However, the tech stock boom was self-caused and self correcting without requiring government bailouts. This financial mess was caused primarily by government meddling and so now the government has to fix the mess it caused.

The perplexing part of this mess is that somehow the Democrats have succeeded in blaming free-market capitalism on the problem rather than the truth: government meddling.

“Some of the borrowers probably were not qualified to buy houses but the vast majority were qualified.”

If the borrowers were qualified – speculator or not – they would not have defaulted on their mortgages unless they lost income to service their mortgage debt. Not enough borrowers lost their jobs in the poor economy to explain the mass default rate.

These adjustable-rate “liar loans” were always a time bomb because if the rates increased, the borrower would not be able to make the payments. That is what happened.

The securitized subprime mortgages that Freddie and Fanny cleared were known to be junk precisely because the borrowers did not meet normal credit standards. Beginning in the Clinton administration, the government wanted low-income people feeling left behind of the wealth being generated in the residential real estate market – to get a piece of that pie. This was stupid altruism. It was the genesis of the problem that is currently blamed on lack of oversight and greed.

I completely understand the relationship to this and other dysfunctional profit making runs like the tech stock boom and crash. However, the tech stock boom was self-caused and self correcting without requiring government bailouts. This financial mess was caused primarily by government meddling and so now the government has to fix the mess it caused.

The perplexing part of this mess is that somehow the Democrats have succeeded in blaming free-market capitalism on the problem rather than the truth: government meddling.

Folks, it would help if you are quoting others if you demarcate their quotes more clearly from your own thoughts. It makes it easier to follow. Many of you do this already by putting quotes in quotation marks, italics, or otherwise denoting it. Spaces don’t really help, for a few comments, it seemed like the poster was contradicting themselves and then I realized that they were actually quoting someone else and then responding.

Folks, it would help if you are quoting others if you demarcate their quotes more clearly from your own thoughts. It makes it easier to follow. Many of you do this already by putting quotes in quotation marks, italics, or otherwise denoting it. Spaces don’t really help, for a few comments, it seemed like the poster was contradicting themselves and then I realized that they were actually quoting someone else and then responding.

My gosh. Obama has spent his entire three entire years in the Senate learning how to act presiential. He has done absolutely nothing but sell himself as our next savior.

He is a gifted salesman and gifted speaker. He is bookish-intellegent. So was my political science professor, but I wouldn’t assume these things meant that he was qualified to lead the most powerful and prosperous country in the history of the human race.

We cannot trust the objectivity of anyone that attacks Palin’s experience and defends or deflects criticism of Obama’s lack of experience.

More important are the IDEAS that these two political camps represent. Obama represents socialism. If you are comfortable handing over the country to a socialist with only 3 years experience as a senator and zero years executive experience, then go for it. But don’t try and make a case that Palin is too inexperienced without conceeding Obama’s limited resume because you lose credibility as an objective thinker.

Also keep in mind that Palin has not had 2 years of campaigning experience like Obama. Much of what the left uses against her can be explained as her limited time to take the same acting lessons that Obama has had.

My gosh. Obama has spent his entire three entire years in the Senate learning how to act presiential. He has done absolutely nothing but sell himself as our next savior.

He is a gifted salesman and gifted speaker. He is bookish-intellegent. So was my political science professor, but I wouldn’t assume these things meant that he was qualified to lead the most powerful and prosperous country in the history of the human race.

We cannot trust the objectivity of anyone that attacks Palin’s experience and defends or deflects criticism of Obama’s lack of experience.

More important are the IDEAS that these two political camps represent. Obama represents socialism. If you are comfortable handing over the country to a socialist with only 3 years experience as a senator and zero years executive experience, then go for it. But don’t try and make a case that Palin is too inexperienced without conceeding Obama’s limited resume because you lose credibility as an objective thinker.

Also keep in mind that Palin has not had 2 years of campaigning experience like Obama. Much of what the left uses against her can be explained as her limited time to take the same acting lessons that Obama has had.

Chester:

Are you not alarmed by Palin’s answers to very basic but very important questions? You want to turn this debate onto Obama, for me it’s not about him, it’s about Palin and whether she is qualified to be Vice President. This is not a partisan argument for me. I think McCain is qualified to be President. I disagree with his policies, but he’s qualified.

Chester:

Are you not alarmed by Palin’s answers to very basic but very important questions? You want to turn this debate onto Obama, for me it’s not about him, it’s about Palin and whether she is qualified to be Vice President. This is not a partisan argument for me. I think McCain is qualified to be President. I disagree with his policies, but he’s qualified.

“not Lincoln by a long shot. said…
I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.”

And please explain how we will know when we’ve won war?

Will God come and blow a whistle and count the dead?

“not Lincoln by a long shot. said…
I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.”

And please explain how we will know when we’ve won war?

Will God come and blow a whistle and count the dead?

“not Lincoln by a long shot. said…
I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.”

And one more thing, we got ourselves into Iraq based on faulty intelligence, likely deception, and on the principal that once we got in we couldn’t possibly lose. I don’t find much noble for what Bush and Cheney are doing with us in Iraq.

Lincoln was at least leading a fight for more noble principles.

“not Lincoln by a long shot. said…
I wouldn’t dare to presume that Obama will be as great as Lincoln, but I have confidence that Obama will definitely not be the embarrassment that Palin would be.

Excuse me, but Lincoln WANTED TO WIN THE WAR WE WERE FIGHNING.”

And one more thing, we got ourselves into Iraq based on faulty intelligence, likely deception, and on the principal that once we got in we couldn’t possibly lose. I don’t find much noble for what Bush and Cheney are doing with us in Iraq.

Lincoln was at least leading a fight for more noble principles.

If Palin is unfit to “be a heartbeat away” I find that much more palatable than Obama and his being unfit from day one.

The guy has done NOTHING!!!! He’s an Elitist Anti-american ultra-liberal racist snob running for President – with no experience except duck for cover and wait for a teleprompter to tell him what to say. That is what those who vote Obama are voting for. It will be a change for sure – but not a good one!

If Palin is unfit to “be a heartbeat away” I find that much more palatable than Obama and his being unfit from day one.

The guy has done NOTHING!!!! He’s an Elitist Anti-american ultra-liberal racist snob running for President – with no experience except duck for cover and wait for a teleprompter to tell him what to say. That is what those who vote Obama are voting for. It will be a change for sure – but not a good one!

For a liberal blog, the Vanguard certainly attracts some conservative readers.

For a liberal blog, the Vanguard certainly attracts some conservative readers.

“for me it’s not about him, it’s about Palin and whether she is qualified to be Vice President.”

DPD, Is Palin qualified to be VP? This question is logical on the surface, but it is really tarnished by a strong hint of age discrimination. Obama might succumb to lung cancer having been a chain smoker until a year ago, so am I comfortable with Joe Biden as president?… absolutely not. Is he qualified? Personally I think he is less qualified than Palin in many ways. The nation didn’t think much of plain-spoken and inexperienced Harry Truman when he took office after FDR passed. Seems like that worked out okay. I think every candidate lacks something… so Palin lacks foreign policy experience. Obama and Biden both lack executive experience. These days I thought Democrats were more interested in domestic policy focus, so which matters more?

Just like Obama in the 2006 Democrat convention, Palin was electrifying at the 2008 GOP convention. She has governed Alaska very well (even if you want to discount this, it exceeds Obama and Biden’s resume).

She has stumbled in some TV interviews… and maybe this is indicative of her lack of qualifications. However, the main media is hostile to her; she is inexperienced as a celebrity; and she has had very little national campaign experience.

Let’s see how the debates go. I suspect that she might surprise the electorate again.

“for me it’s not about him, it’s about Palin and whether she is qualified to be Vice President.”

DPD, Is Palin qualified to be VP? This question is logical on the surface, but it is really tarnished by a strong hint of age discrimination. Obama might succumb to lung cancer having been a chain smoker until a year ago, so am I comfortable with Joe Biden as president?… absolutely not. Is he qualified? Personally I think he is less qualified than Palin in many ways. The nation didn’t think much of plain-spoken and inexperienced Harry Truman when he took office after FDR passed. Seems like that worked out okay. I think every candidate lacks something… so Palin lacks foreign policy experience. Obama and Biden both lack executive experience. These days I thought Democrats were more interested in domestic policy focus, so which matters more?

Just like Obama in the 2006 Democrat convention, Palin was electrifying at the 2008 GOP convention. She has governed Alaska very well (even if you want to discount this, it exceeds Obama and Biden’s resume).

She has stumbled in some TV interviews… and maybe this is indicative of her lack of qualifications. However, the main media is hostile to her; she is inexperienced as a celebrity; and she has had very little national campaign experience.

Let’s see how the debates go. I suspect that she might surprise the electorate again.

“Palin lacks foreign policy experience.”

Palin lacks the ability to answer softball questions from Katie Couric who gave her plenty of chances to make any coherent sense whatsoever.

Palin’s great at reading other people’s prepared speeches. But her smugness at the Republican National Convention is coming back to haunt her big time.

“Palin lacks foreign policy experience.”

Palin lacks the ability to answer softball questions from Katie Couric who gave her plenty of chances to make any coherent sense whatsoever.

Palin’s great at reading other people’s prepared speeches. But her smugness at the Republican National Convention is coming back to haunt her big time.

“Palin lacks the ability to answer softball questions from Katie Couric who gave her plenty of chances to make any coherent sense whatsoever.

Palin’s great at reading other people’s prepared speeches. But her smugness at the Republican National Convention is coming back to haunt her big time”

I’ll also add that both campaigns should adopt the position of “any question, any time, anywhere” and let the chips fall where they may.

You can’t blame the media for her embarrassing responses. She has only herself to blame. She’s not ready, period. You want to compare inexperience with Obama? Obama proves himself everyday and isn’t hidden by his campaign from the media.

That we’re even discussing this is embarrassing. It’s so clear she has no idea what she’s doing that it’s laughable.

“Palin lacks the ability to answer softball questions from Katie Couric who gave her plenty of chances to make any coherent sense whatsoever.

Palin’s great at reading other people’s prepared speeches. But her smugness at the Republican National Convention is coming back to haunt her big time”

I’ll also add that both campaigns should adopt the position of “any question, any time, anywhere” and let the chips fall where they may.

You can’t blame the media for her embarrassing responses. She has only herself to blame. She’s not ready, period. You want to compare inexperience with Obama? Obama proves himself everyday and isn’t hidden by his campaign from the media.

That we’re even discussing this is embarrassing. It’s so clear she has no idea what she’s doing that it’s laughable.

“the main media is hostile to her; she is inexperienced as a celebrity;”

How did Steve Schmidt find his way to this blog??

“the main media is hostile to her; she is inexperienced as a celebrity;”

How did Steve Schmidt find his way to this blog??

BTW, it is infinitely uncool for McCain to call himself a “Maverick”. Others can call you a Maverick, but don’t call yourself a Maverick, McCain. It sounds dumb. Did Tom Cruise ever go around calling himself Maverick in Top Gun? I rest my case.

BTW, it is infinitely uncool for McCain to call himself a “Maverick”. Others can call you a Maverick, but don’t call yourself a Maverick, McCain. It sounds dumb. Did Tom Cruise ever go around calling himself Maverick in Top Gun? I rest my case.

Maybe Palin’s mistake is she doesn’t put “community organizer” on her resume instead of the meager Governor of Alaska.

I’m sure “community organizing” is a 9-5 job also. Must be tough standing in marches and shouting at people.

People sitting behind desks don’t know how good they have got it.

Maybe Palin’s mistake is she doesn’t put “community organizer” on her resume instead of the meager Governor of Alaska.

I’m sure “community organizing” is a 9-5 job also. Must be tough standing in marches and shouting at people.

People sitting behind desks don’t know how good they have got it.

Chester:

“She has governed Alaska very well (even if you want to discount this, it exceeds Obama and Biden’s resume).”

I think you are missing my point here–and the question really is–what about her governing Alaska very well discounts the fact that she was unable to answer basic and straightforward questions in an intelligible manner?

Apparently, she was asked by Couric what Supreme Court cases she thought was important besides Roe v. Wade and she went silent. This will apparently air tomorrow. She was also asked what newspapers she read and she stammered for a minute and never named one.

These are basic questions, I think most of us can answer here.

You are looking at qualifications in terms of job experience, we can probably quibble about the degree to which her job experience is more impressive than Obama’s or even Biden’s, but I think you are drawing too narrow a focus here.

If she doesn’t know about the issues facing the national government and the world, it is irrelevant to me whether or not she was a successful governor of Alaska.

Chester:

“She has governed Alaska very well (even if you want to discount this, it exceeds Obama and Biden’s resume).”

I think you are missing my point here–and the question really is–what about her governing Alaska very well discounts the fact that she was unable to answer basic and straightforward questions in an intelligible manner?

Apparently, she was asked by Couric what Supreme Court cases she thought was important besides Roe v. Wade and she went silent. This will apparently air tomorrow. She was also asked what newspapers she read and she stammered for a minute and never named one.

These are basic questions, I think most of us can answer here.

You are looking at qualifications in terms of job experience, we can probably quibble about the degree to which her job experience is more impressive than Obama’s or even Biden’s, but I think you are drawing too narrow a focus here.

If she doesn’t know about the issues facing the national government and the world, it is irrelevant to me whether or not she was a successful governor of Alaska.

I find it laughable that such a bastion of self-proclaimed “progressives” (from the supposedly 2nd most educated city in the United States) is defending a VP candidate who would make a woman carry to term the offspring of her rapist, and who believes in “young earth” creationism, and that dinosaurs co-existed with humans as recently as 6,000 years.

I find it laughable that such a bastion of self-proclaimed “progressives” (from the supposedly 2nd most educated city in the United States) is defending a VP candidate who would make a woman carry to term the offspring of her rapist, and who believes in “young earth” creationism, and that dinosaurs co-existed with humans as recently as 6,000 years.

Anon 6:09:

I don’t think that’s an accurate statement, at most less than a handful of people in this comment thread have defended her.

Anon 6:09:

I don’t think that’s an accurate statement, at most less than a handful of people in this comment thread have defended her.

Obama wins by over 2 million votes and Electoral Votes: Obama 301 McCain 237. Just 35 days until this reality comes home.

Obama wins by over 2 million votes and Electoral Votes: Obama 301 McCain 237. Just 35 days until this reality comes home.

Palin is sexy , she gets my vote, good looks and great mind with glasses , YEA BABY !!!!Who else agrees with me ?

Palin is sexy , she gets my vote, good looks and great mind with glasses , YEA BABY !!!!Who else agrees with me ?

I saw this embarrassing exchange on the CBS Evening News, tonight:

Couric: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?

Palin: I’ve read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.

Most of them? What kind of retard answer is that? I suspect she at least peruses the Anchorage Daily News. Yet she couldn’t even come up with that paper, let alone The NY Times, The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Seattle P-I, the Petersburg Pilot*, etc.

Couric: What, specifically?

Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn’t a foreign country, where it’s kind of suggested, “Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?” Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

Palin strikes me as a Quayle-esque moron. Miss South Carolina is ashamed of Miss Alaska’s lack of understanding about the Iraq..

I realize this will never fly, but prior to running for office I would love all candidates to have to take 1) an IQ test and 2) an Econ 1 final. We would learn up front if we are electing idiots; and economic ignoramuses would have an incentive to master basic microeconomics before they ruin our economy.

* The Petersburg Pilot is the weekly community paper in Petersburg, Alaska, where I used to work as a deck hand on a salmon Seiner and a chink operator in a cannery. The Pilot does an adequate job of covering the news in town. It does a great job of reporting local crime, most of which involves world class bar fights — great fun to read when you know the local drunks.

I saw this embarrassing exchange on the CBS Evening News, tonight:

Couric: And when it comes to establishing your worldview, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?

Palin: I’ve read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.

Most of them? What kind of retard answer is that? I suspect she at least peruses the Anchorage Daily News. Yet she couldn’t even come up with that paper, let alone The NY Times, The Economist, The Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the Seattle P-I, the Petersburg Pilot*, etc.

Couric: What, specifically?

Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn’t a foreign country, where it’s kind of suggested, “Wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?” Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.

Palin strikes me as a Quayle-esque moron. Miss South Carolina is ashamed of Miss Alaska’s lack of understanding about the Iraq..

I realize this will never fly, but prior to running for office I would love all candidates to have to take 1) an IQ test and 2) an Econ 1 final. We would learn up front if we are electing idiots; and economic ignoramuses would have an incentive to master basic microeconomics before they ruin our economy.

* The Petersburg Pilot is the weekly community paper in Petersburg, Alaska, where I used to work as a deck hand on a salmon Seiner and a chink operator in a cannery. The Pilot does an adequate job of covering the news in town. It does a great job of reporting local crime, most of which involves world class bar fights — great fun to read when you know the local drunks.

Hey Rifkin thanks for linking that South Carolina video. I laugh every time I see it. I wonder about the girls she beat out to win Miss SC.

Hey Rifkin thanks for linking that South Carolina video. I laugh every time I see it. I wonder about the girls she beat out to win Miss SC.

“Obama might succumb to lung cancer having been a chain smoker until a year ago, so am I comfortable with Joe Biden as president?… absolutely not. Is he qualified? Personally I think he is less qualified than Palin in many ways.”

At least Joe Biden can handle himself okay in a regular interview and give some semblance of intelligence.

Have you actually watched these interviews? Did you cringe even a little bit? Do you feel proud of Palin when you watch those interviews? Do you regret that someone like Kay Bailey Hutchison isn’t the Republican VP candidate? Do you feel proud of McCain’s ability to judge people and make appointments?

“Obama might succumb to lung cancer having been a chain smoker until a year ago, so am I comfortable with Joe Biden as president?… absolutely not. Is he qualified? Personally I think he is less qualified than Palin in many ways.”

At least Joe Biden can handle himself okay in a regular interview and give some semblance of intelligence.

Have you actually watched these interviews? Did you cringe even a little bit? Do you feel proud of Palin when you watch those interviews? Do you regret that someone like Kay Bailey Hutchison isn’t the Republican VP candidate? Do you feel proud of McCain’s ability to judge people and make appointments?

“At least Joe Biden can handle himself okay in a regular interview and give some semblance of intelligence.”

Biden is not stupid. However, you are wrong about him handling an interview. Biden is infamous for saying nutty things all the time in interviews. He regularly gets mixed up and creates his own version of history. If you follow his career, you should know that.

It didn’t get much attention, but Biden told a whopper in his recent interview with Katie Couric, which sadly Miss Couric failed to correct —

Biden said Bush ought to speak to the country the way FDR did in 1929: “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed.”

Katie perhaps didn’t know that FDR did not become president until 1933; and that he did not appear on TV until 1939, when I would guess less than 1/10th of 1 percent of Americans owned TVs. It was not until 1947, when Harry Truman was president, that our Commander in Chief spoke to the nation from the White House on TV.

“At least Joe Biden can handle himself okay in a regular interview and give some semblance of intelligence.”

Biden is not stupid. However, you are wrong about him handling an interview. Biden is infamous for saying nutty things all the time in interviews. He regularly gets mixed up and creates his own version of history. If you follow his career, you should know that.

It didn’t get much attention, but Biden told a whopper in his recent interview with Katie Couric, which sadly Miss Couric failed to correct —

Biden said Bush ought to speak to the country the way FDR did in 1929: “When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed.”

Katie perhaps didn’t know that FDR did not become president until 1933; and that he did not appear on TV until 1939, when I would guess less than 1/10th of 1 percent of Americans owned TVs. It was not until 1947, when Harry Truman was president, that our Commander in Chief spoke to the nation from the White House on TV.

“Biden is not stupid. However, you are wrong about him handling an interview. Biden is infamous for saying nutty things all the time in interviews. He regularly gets mixed up and creates his own version of history. If you follow his career, you should know that.”

Let’s say that he doesn’t give the impression of a “deer in the headlights” reaction. I heard the Biden excerpt on NPR, and it brought me a little more amusement rather than a cringe reaction.

It’s possible that 30-40% of the general public probably wouldn’t pick up on Biden’s gaffe. It would probably be hard to caricature Biden’s performance to the same effect as Sarah Palin’s.

Maybe I will be proven wrong soon on SNL.

“Biden is not stupid. However, you are wrong about him handling an interview. Biden is infamous for saying nutty things all the time in interviews. He regularly gets mixed up and creates his own version of history. If you follow his career, you should know that.”

Let’s say that he doesn’t give the impression of a “deer in the headlights” reaction. I heard the Biden excerpt on NPR, and it brought me a little more amusement rather than a cringe reaction.

It’s possible that 30-40% of the general public probably wouldn’t pick up on Biden’s gaffe. It would probably be hard to caricature Biden’s performance to the same effect as Sarah Palin’s.

Maybe I will be proven wrong soon on SNL.

Judging from the amount of flack (verbal hyperbole) Senator John McCain has been catching for selecting Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, his VP choice must have hit a nerve in certain quarters within Davis, and thus be “on target”. As an intelligence officer for an F4B Phantom Fighter Squadron (VF-84) from 1966-68, and I learned that defensive resistance was the best indicator that an air strike was near or on target.

The flack being generated here to Governor Palin’s selection as VP makes it appear that Senator McCain may have actually hit the target with this shot. He is certainly getting a nice secondary explosion (boom-BOOM) with all of these postings! Lead on Sarah and John, lead on! Steve Hayes, Proud Navy Veteran!

Judging from the amount of flack (verbal hyperbole) Senator John McCain has been catching for selecting Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, his VP choice must have hit a nerve in certain quarters within Davis, and thus be “on target”. As an intelligence officer for an F4B Phantom Fighter Squadron (VF-84) from 1966-68, and I learned that defensive resistance was the best indicator that an air strike was near or on target.

The flack being generated here to Governor Palin’s selection as VP makes it appear that Senator McCain may have actually hit the target with this shot. He is certainly getting a nice secondary explosion (boom-BOOM) with all of these postings! Lead on Sarah and John, lead on! Steve Hayes, Proud Navy Veteran!

There you go again Rifkin. This time its IQ tests last time sterilization. There are lots of reasons to vote against Palin but her IQ is not one of them.
Why do you think you are so much better than everyone else?

There you go again Rifkin. This time its IQ tests last time sterilization. There are lots of reasons to vote against Palin but her IQ is not one of them.
Why do you think you are so much better than everyone else?

Jesus was a community organizer. Pontius Pilot was a governor.

Jesus was a community organizer. Pontius Pilot was a governor.

Wow… so many comments about VP choices. Maybe we do have too much free time on our hands here.

I personally believe that Palin is a nobody and Biden is a perennial, wanna-be loser.

I plan to vote for Obama,but don’t think either major political party has a chance to rescue our citizens from the steady decline of our economy, well-being and jobs.

Read “The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire” and the “Fall of the Third Reich” to see were we are headed. Corporations have taken over our country and our politicians (of both parties) have turned all of us into slaves to the almighty dollar.

And maybe that’s what we deserve for hauling Negro Africans as slaves to this country, killing Native Americans en masse. stealing their land and hunting the once-proud symbols of what we really want to think is our heritage, to near extinction: the wolves, buffaloes and even passenger pigeons.

Debate all you want about Palin and Biden, and wring your hands about the finacial collapse. The truth is our country is going to hell in a hand-basket because we, and our “representatives,” are driven by greed and the lure of the (once) almighty dollar.

Nothing will improve for us or future generations until we can understand and admit that our current political parties are rotten to the core.

Wow… so many comments about VP choices. Maybe we do have too much free time on our hands here.

I personally believe that Palin is a nobody and Biden is a perennial, wanna-be loser.

I plan to vote for Obama,but don’t think either major political party has a chance to rescue our citizens from the steady decline of our economy, well-being and jobs.

Read “The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire” and the “Fall of the Third Reich” to see were we are headed. Corporations have taken over our country and our politicians (of both parties) have turned all of us into slaves to the almighty dollar.

And maybe that’s what we deserve for hauling Negro Africans as slaves to this country, killing Native Americans en masse. stealing their land and hunting the once-proud symbols of what we really want to think is our heritage, to near extinction: the wolves, buffaloes and even passenger pigeons.

Debate all you want about Palin and Biden, and wring your hands about the finacial collapse. The truth is our country is going to hell in a hand-basket because we, and our “representatives,” are driven by greed and the lure of the (once) almighty dollar.

Nothing will improve for us or future generations until we can understand and admit that our current political parties are rotten to the core.

For all of the comments about Palin being good looking, I think you prove a lot of points with them.

First of all, who would say that about a male candidate?

Second, of what relevance is, if you want a good looking woman to look at there are lots of places to do so, this about the future of the country. This is not a joke. I wonder how many people realize how serious the current situation is that we face. I wonder if any of the people who have commented on the Governor’s looks have any clue. I’m guessing not.

For all of the comments about Palin being good looking, I think you prove a lot of points with them.

First of all, who would say that about a male candidate?

Second, of what relevance is, if you want a good looking woman to look at there are lots of places to do so, this about the future of the country. This is not a joke. I wonder how many people realize how serious the current situation is that we face. I wonder if any of the people who have commented on the Governor’s looks have any clue. I’m guessing not.

“Judging from the amount of flack (verbal hyperbole) Senator John McCain has been catching for selecting Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, his VP choice must have hit a nerve in certain quarters within Davis, and thus be “on target”.”

On target about what? I’m frightened by her lack of knowledge. This has nothing to do with her politics. Can you please defend her answers to some of those questions?

“Judging from the amount of flack (verbal hyperbole) Senator John McCain has been catching for selecting Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, his VP choice must have hit a nerve in certain quarters within Davis, and thus be “on target”.”

On target about what? I’m frightened by her lack of knowledge. This has nothing to do with her politics. Can you please defend her answers to some of those questions?

“On target about what? I’m frightened by her lack of knowledge. This has nothing to do with her politics. Can you please defend her answers to some of those questions?”

It’s another Republican celebration of ignorance — Dan Quayle, GW Bush, now Sarah Palin. Being a C student and showing a lack of grasp about important complicated subjects connects with a certain sector of the electorate.

I guess this will offer new life goals to beauty queens and C students. Personally, I don’t know why anyone would want such a person leading our country, but that’s what they want, and this is a democracy.

As Dick Tuck once said after an election, “The people have spoken. Damn them!”

“On target about what? I’m frightened by her lack of knowledge. This has nothing to do with her politics. Can you please defend her answers to some of those questions?”

It’s another Republican celebration of ignorance — Dan Quayle, GW Bush, now Sarah Palin. Being a C student and showing a lack of grasp about important complicated subjects connects with a certain sector of the electorate.

I guess this will offer new life goals to beauty queens and C students. Personally, I don’t know why anyone would want such a person leading our country, but that’s what they want, and this is a democracy.

As Dick Tuck once said after an election, “The people have spoken. Damn them!”

Who would talk about a male candidates looks?

My mama about John Kennedy.

Who would talk about a male candidates looks?

My mama about John Kennedy.

“First of all, who would say that about a male candidate?”

ME!!!

I think Obama is much more handsome than McCain, so maybe Palin is just providing balance to the ticket.

“First of all, who would say that about a male candidate?”

ME!!!

I think Obama is much more handsome than McCain, so maybe Palin is just providing balance to the ticket.

10:39 “Why do you think you are so much better than everyone else?”

Because I read the Petersburg Pilot, my friend.

10:39 “Why do you think you are so much better than everyone else?”

Because I read the Petersburg Pilot, my friend.

“There are lots of reasons to vote against Palin but her IQ is not one of them.”

I disagree. Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president. That is not the only thing, but it is a minimum standard. If Palin is as stupid as she appears to be, she should not be VP or president.

Harry Truman had little experience when he became president in 1945. However, Truman was intelligent and that got him through. IQ trumps experience, if that’s the choice we face. It’s one of the reasons I prefer Obama over McCain.

“There are lots of reasons to vote against Palin but her IQ is not one of them.”

I disagree. Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president. That is not the only thing, but it is a minimum standard. If Palin is as stupid as she appears to be, she should not be VP or president.

Harry Truman had little experience when he became president in 1945. However, Truman was intelligent and that got him through. IQ trumps experience, if that’s the choice we face. It’s one of the reasons I prefer Obama over McCain.

“Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president.”

Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation? There are different types of intelligence. Ever play word games with an intelligent architect or Pictionary with an intelligent attorney? I am really tired of the “Bush is stupid” crap from people that do not have a clue about the type of intelligence required to be a good leader.

Intellectuals are often paralyzed decision-makers. They are analysts. Their high IQ portends a propensity to gather copious data/details. They can feel accomplished by writing a paper to explain a problem; but rarely can translate that into an actual implementation of a solution. Intellectuals can be risk-averse. Good leaders have people/relationship (emotional intelligence?). They surround themselves with the right type of intellectuals and then use them to vet decisions… but THEY MAKE DECISIONS. This is why John Kerry scared the crap out of me… he reminded me of a risk-averse intellectual that got his satisfaction from just talking about a problem rather than actually solving it.

I think Bush, like many people, lacks sufficient emotional intelligence. He cannot self-identify. He cannot sense feelings. He cannot “feel your pain”. He cannot read nor speak to the hurt and wounds that so many American narcissists seem to carry around with them all the time. This deficit has hampered his ability to be an effective executive because good leaders generally require very strong emotional intelligence (i.e., can sense the devil in Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin).

Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.

“Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president.”

Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation? There are different types of intelligence. Ever play word games with an intelligent architect or Pictionary with an intelligent attorney? I am really tired of the “Bush is stupid” crap from people that do not have a clue about the type of intelligence required to be a good leader.

Intellectuals are often paralyzed decision-makers. They are analysts. Their high IQ portends a propensity to gather copious data/details. They can feel accomplished by writing a paper to explain a problem; but rarely can translate that into an actual implementation of a solution. Intellectuals can be risk-averse. Good leaders have people/relationship (emotional intelligence?). They surround themselves with the right type of intellectuals and then use them to vet decisions… but THEY MAKE DECISIONS. This is why John Kerry scared the crap out of me… he reminded me of a risk-averse intellectual that got his satisfaction from just talking about a problem rather than actually solving it.

I think Bush, like many people, lacks sufficient emotional intelligence. He cannot self-identify. He cannot sense feelings. He cannot “feel your pain”. He cannot read nor speak to the hurt and wounds that so many American narcissists seem to carry around with them all the time. This deficit has hampered his ability to be an effective executive because good leaders generally require very strong emotional intelligence (i.e., can sense the devil in Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin).

Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.

“Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president.”

Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation? There are different types of intelligence. Ever play word games with an intelligent architect or Pictionary with an intelligent attorney? I am really tired of the “Bush is stupid” crap from people that do not have a clue about the type of intelligence required to be a good leader.

Intellectuals are often paralyzed decision-makers. They are analysts. Their high IQ portends a propensity to gather copious data/details. They can feel accomplished by writing a paper to explain a problem; but rarely can translate that into an actual implementation of a solution. Intellectuals can be risk-averse. Good leaders have people/relationship (emotional intelligence?). They surround themselves with the right type of intellectuals and then use them to vet decisions… but THEY MAKE DECISIONS. This is why John Kerry scared the crap out of me… he reminded me of a risk-averse intellectual that got his satisfaction from just talking about a problem rather than actually solving it.

I think Bush, like many people, lacks sufficient emotional intelligence. He cannot self-identify. He cannot sense feelings. He cannot “feel your pain”. He cannot read nor speak to the hurt and wounds that so many American narcissists seem to carry around with them all the time. This deficit has hampered his ability to be an effective executive because good leaders generally require very strong emotional intelligence (i.e., can sense the devil in Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin).

Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.

“Bush is proof of it. We need someone smart to be president.”

Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation? There are different types of intelligence. Ever play word games with an intelligent architect or Pictionary with an intelligent attorney? I am really tired of the “Bush is stupid” crap from people that do not have a clue about the type of intelligence required to be a good leader.

Intellectuals are often paralyzed decision-makers. They are analysts. Their high IQ portends a propensity to gather copious data/details. They can feel accomplished by writing a paper to explain a problem; but rarely can translate that into an actual implementation of a solution. Intellectuals can be risk-averse. Good leaders have people/relationship (emotional intelligence?). They surround themselves with the right type of intellectuals and then use them to vet decisions… but THEY MAKE DECISIONS. This is why John Kerry scared the crap out of me… he reminded me of a risk-averse intellectual that got his satisfaction from just talking about a problem rather than actually solving it.

I think Bush, like many people, lacks sufficient emotional intelligence. He cannot self-identify. He cannot sense feelings. He cannot “feel your pain”. He cannot read nor speak to the hurt and wounds that so many American narcissists seem to carry around with them all the time. This deficit has hampered his ability to be an effective executive because good leaders generally require very strong emotional intelligence (i.e., can sense the devil in Dick Cheney and Vladimir Putin).

Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.

“Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.”

Bush seems pathologically unable to reconsider past decisions. Remember how he couldn’t answer the question about whether he had made any mistakes 3-4 years into his administration? More than one biographer has mentioned Bush’s lack of intellectual curiosity.

We’re not talking about having stratospheric IQ scores, here, but being able to consider and weigh competing alternatives, how to leave options open, and perhaps gracefully reverse course at times.

On the other hand, he has been noted to be a very personable guy. But being personable is often not enough.

From what I’ve seen of Palin, I think she may fit more of a George Bush mold. Personally, I want a change from that.

“Sarah Palin is not an intellectual and this makes her a more attractive candidate to me. The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.”

Bush seems pathologically unable to reconsider past decisions. Remember how he couldn’t answer the question about whether he had made any mistakes 3-4 years into his administration? More than one biographer has mentioned Bush’s lack of intellectual curiosity.

We’re not talking about having stratospheric IQ scores, here, but being able to consider and weigh competing alternatives, how to leave options open, and perhaps gracefully reverse course at times.

On the other hand, he has been noted to be a very personable guy. But being personable is often not enough.

From what I’ve seen of Palin, I think she may fit more of a George Bush mold. Personally, I want a change from that.

“Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation?”

In my small company, every exec is well educated and has a high IQ. How many of us are good leaders? Maybe half or less.

To repeat, having a strong IQ is a big plus, but it’s not the only thing. It’s the floor. If the person running is an imbicile, like Bush, he’s disqualified in my mind.

Bush was not smart enough to know that his advisors, like Rumsfeld, were feeding him bad advice.

“Ever worked with someone with a very high IQ? How many of them would make a good leader in your estimation?”

In my small company, every exec is well educated and has a high IQ. How many of us are good leaders? Maybe half or less.

To repeat, having a strong IQ is a big plus, but it’s not the only thing. It’s the floor. If the person running is an imbicile, like Bush, he’s disqualified in my mind.

Bush was not smart enough to know that his advisors, like Rumsfeld, were feeding him bad advice.

“The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.”

Very important to pay attention that.
Palin has been built up as a governor- top executive of a big state. There is no question Alaska is big and there are a million people. Yet is the job itself a very difficult position? – you have to consider that.

Alaska has enormous oil tax revenue – there is no income tax and there is no state sales tax. Furthermore Alaska operates with surpluses – they have so much money from oil royalties they really do not know what to do with it. Most governors have to face two major challenges – how to collect necessary revenue and how to allocate out the limited resources availble. In Alaska they really do not have to worry about the collection side and they have enough money to do whatever they want to do.

The job is really a three month job and even during the three months she spends most of the time at home.

The people of Alaska are happy – why wouldn’t they be? The state does not tax them and in fact the state gives each individual about $3000 in oil dividends. To her credit, Palin was able to increase the oil dividend, but even that was mostly because crude prices rose. At a crude price of $120 per barrel (every barrel pumped out of the North Slope) the state of Alaska gets $49.

It seems to me that Alaska is a very easy state to run because there are no money issues.

“The question I still ask myself is if she has top-level leadership skills. At this point I am inclined to thing she does, but I do not know enough about her yet.”

Very important to pay attention that.
Palin has been built up as a governor- top executive of a big state. There is no question Alaska is big and there are a million people. Yet is the job itself a very difficult position? – you have to consider that.

Alaska has enormous oil tax revenue – there is no income tax and there is no state sales tax. Furthermore Alaska operates with surpluses – they have so much money from oil royalties they really do not know what to do with it. Most governors have to face two major challenges – how to collect necessary revenue and how to allocate out the limited resources availble. In Alaska they really do not have to worry about the collection side and they have enough money to do whatever they want to do.

The job is really a three month job and even during the three months she spends most of the time at home.

The people of Alaska are happy – why wouldn’t they be? The state does not tax them and in fact the state gives each individual about $3000 in oil dividends. To her credit, Palin was able to increase the oil dividend, but even that was mostly because crude prices rose. At a crude price of $120 per barrel (every barrel pumped out of the North Slope) the state of Alaska gets $49.

It seems to me that Alaska is a very easy state to run because there are no money issues.

Very partisan junk, IMHO. Not much very substantive here. It seems as if the discussion is more about personality than issues. Bias is rampant. Too much “gotcha” politics.

Even the NY Times conceded the last debate was a draw, but you would never know it reading today’s blog and the ensuing comments.

All the candidates are lousy. Why? Because they all seem more interested in getting elected than solving our nation’s problems. Obama has a silly set of talking points, that if he strays from, he suffers from foot in the mouth disease. McCain paints himself as a maverick, but hasn’t a clue on what to do about the mess the economy is in, other than to whine about gov’t pork. Neither is a stellar candidate. Neither are either of their VP choices.

The real question is what do we do to get more qualified candidates to run for office? In this entire bail-out mess, the electorate who demanded better from Congress were the only sensible ones!

Very partisan junk, IMHO. Not much very substantive here. It seems as if the discussion is more about personality than issues. Bias is rampant. Too much “gotcha” politics.

Even the NY Times conceded the last debate was a draw, but you would never know it reading today’s blog and the ensuing comments.

All the candidates are lousy. Why? Because they all seem more interested in getting elected than solving our nation’s problems. Obama has a silly set of talking points, that if he strays from, he suffers from foot in the mouth disease. McCain paints himself as a maverick, but hasn’t a clue on what to do about the mess the economy is in, other than to whine about gov’t pork. Neither is a stellar candidate. Neither are either of their VP choices.

The real question is what do we do to get more qualified candidates to run for office? In this entire bail-out mess, the electorate who demanded better from Congress were the only sensible ones!

“Very partisan junk, IMHO. Not much very substantive here. It seems as if the discussion is more about personality than issues. Bias is rampant. Too much “gotcha” politics.”

Really, you don’t find it alarming that Palin couldn’t answer very basic questions in a coherent manner?

“Even the NY Times conceded the last debate was a draw, but you would never know it reading today’s blog and the ensuing comments.”

What does the debate have to do with Palin? She wasn’t in that debate.

Moreover, I think you casting aspirsions at all of the candidates ignores and glosses over huge problems with Palin that is not endemic to all candidates.

I wish people would stop trying to paint so broad a brush here because you are missing key parts of the picture. There is something wrong with Palin, she is not qualified. I don’t care if you agree with someone or not. I’m a Democrat, I think many people on the Republican side are qualified, I may disagree with them, but that is not an issue of qualifications. Palin is in a different class. Quit trying to protect her with a pox on all of their houses.

“Very partisan junk, IMHO. Not much very substantive here. It seems as if the discussion is more about personality than issues. Bias is rampant. Too much “gotcha” politics.”

Really, you don’t find it alarming that Palin couldn’t answer very basic questions in a coherent manner?

“Even the NY Times conceded the last debate was a draw, but you would never know it reading today’s blog and the ensuing comments.”

What does the debate have to do with Palin? She wasn’t in that debate.

Moreover, I think you casting aspirsions at all of the candidates ignores and glosses over huge problems with Palin that is not endemic to all candidates.

I wish people would stop trying to paint so broad a brush here because you are missing key parts of the picture. There is something wrong with Palin, she is not qualified. I don’t care if you agree with someone or not. I’m a Democrat, I think many people on the Republican side are qualified, I may disagree with them, but that is not an issue of qualifications. Palin is in a different class. Quit trying to protect her with a pox on all of their houses.

“Alaska is big and there are a million people.”

Nope. Less than 700,000. Less than San Jose. About the same as Austin TX.

“Alaska is big and there are a million people.”

Nope. Less than 700,000. Less than San Jose. About the same as Austin TX.

Interesting article in the NY Times today:

As Governor, Palin Was Quiet on Many Key Issues

“ANCHORAGE — When Gov. Sarah Palin meets Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. on Thursday in the vice-presidential debate, even her fellow Alaskans might hear for the first time some of her views on health care reform, education policy and other issues of state government.

In her 22 months in office, Ms. Palin has not addressed many of those matters in a significant way, pursuing a narrower agenda rooted in Alaska’s resource-based economy. “

Full Article

Interesting article in the NY Times today:

As Governor, Palin Was Quiet on Many Key Issues

“ANCHORAGE — When Gov. Sarah Palin meets Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. on Thursday in the vice-presidential debate, even her fellow Alaskans might hear for the first time some of her views on health care reform, education policy and other issues of state government.

In her 22 months in office, Ms. Palin has not addressed many of those matters in a significant way, pursuing a narrower agenda rooted in Alaska’s resource-based economy. “

Full Article

“Nope. Less than 700,000. Less than San Jose. About the same as Austin TX.”

I guess I was giving her too much credit -the swag for those people who might be hibernation.

“Nope. Less than 700,000. Less than San Jose. About the same as Austin TX.”

I guess I was giving her too much credit -the swag for those people who might be hibernation.

I think the VP debate that just concluded established Sarah Palin as a very compelling candidate for reasons that our founding fathers would understand, but Davis elites will not.

I think the VP debate that just concluded established Sarah Palin as a very compelling candidate for reasons that our founding fathers would understand, but Davis elites will not.

She’s compelling with absolutely zero substance. I guess I’m an elitist. First time I’ve remotely been confused as one. I just like my poiticians to actually like answer the questions and know something about what they are talking about it.

She was glib, witty, kind of folksie, but she demonstrated in my mind zero little knowledge outside of perhaps energy. And even there it was drill baby, drill. Wish Biden had asked her how drilling oil in Alaska helped with global warming.

She’s compelling with absolutely zero substance. I guess I’m an elitist. First time I’ve remotely been confused as one. I just like my poiticians to actually like answer the questions and know something about what they are talking about it.

She was glib, witty, kind of folksie, but she demonstrated in my mind zero little knowledge outside of perhaps energy. And even there it was drill baby, drill. Wish Biden had asked her how drilling oil in Alaska helped with global warming.

Well, she did handle herself okay. I wish she could have been more specific several times.

I guess that’s because I must be a Davis elitist.

Well, she did handle herself okay. I wish she could have been more specific several times.

I guess that’s because I must be a Davis elitist.

As usual david greenwald is off base, or completely wrong in his evaluations of the current pres. candidates. This is not to mention the fact that ole david is completely unqualified to make any statements regarding either party.
David Greenwald does’nt even come straight out with his real name when making comments regarding any local or national political debates or any other local topic.
david greenwald supports union politics because his wife works for the SEIU, which steals directly from the taxpayer. This is not to mention the 3 SEIU reps who recently stole hundreds of thousands from their own members and the other SEIU pervert in Sacto who was arrested for child porn.
david greenwald does not mention these issues but will point out everyone else’s problem in the current political arena. “I see the splinter in my brother’s eye but do not see the log in my own”. What a hypocrite. I encourage everyone to see david greenwald for who he is and the phony blog he runs. david greenwald is a self serving hypocritical person.
He will probably delete this entry, or have one of his monitors do it, as I am sure the truth is painful and not admissable in his extremely small realm.

As usual david greenwald is off base, or completely wrong in his evaluations of the current pres. candidates. This is not to mention the fact that ole david is completely unqualified to make any statements regarding either party.
David Greenwald does’nt even come straight out with his real name when making comments regarding any local or national political debates or any other local topic.
david greenwald supports union politics because his wife works for the SEIU, which steals directly from the taxpayer. This is not to mention the 3 SEIU reps who recently stole hundreds of thousands from their own members and the other SEIU pervert in Sacto who was arrested for child porn.
david greenwald does not mention these issues but will point out everyone else’s problem in the current political arena. “I see the splinter in my brother’s eye but do not see the log in my own”. What a hypocrite. I encourage everyone to see david greenwald for who he is and the phony blog he runs. david greenwald is a self serving hypocritical person.
He will probably delete this entry, or have one of his monitors do it, as I am sure the truth is painful and not admissable in his extremely small realm.

But DPD (or Greenwald, if you wish) deserves a lot of credit for even maintaining such a well-trafficked blog. He is on a schedule of producing an article every day, here. Rifkin and others have more time to think through their ideas. Even Bob Dunning is not under the same kind of pressure to produce this level intelligent writing.

Some topics are duds, but most importantly he provides a resource for Davis and area residents to learn about local issues and interact with others to develop their ideas. I always like seeing responses of Rifkin, Don Shor, and Elaine Musser. Where else would you get such a forum?

I’ve been more aware and involved because of the Vanguard. Possibly you have, too. Clearly there is something you find engaging about this blog, or you would not have put the care and energy into such a generally disparaging comment.

But DPD (or Greenwald, if you wish) deserves a lot of credit for even maintaining such a well-trafficked blog. He is on a schedule of producing an article every day, here. Rifkin and others have more time to think through their ideas. Even Bob Dunning is not under the same kind of pressure to produce this level intelligent writing.

Some topics are duds, but most importantly he provides a resource for Davis and area residents to learn about local issues and interact with others to develop their ideas. I always like seeing responses of Rifkin, Don Shor, and Elaine Musser. Where else would you get such a forum?

I’ve been more aware and involved because of the Vanguard. Possibly you have, too. Clearly there is something you find engaging about this blog, or you would not have put the care and energy into such a generally disparaging comment.

“As usual david greenwald is off base, or completely wrong in his evaluations of the current pres. candidates. This is not to mention the fact that ole david is completely unqualified to make any statements regarding either party.”

It is fine to disagree with someone, but at least make some effort to explain you point of view. Substance is important!

“As usual david greenwald is off base, or completely wrong in his evaluations of the current pres. candidates. This is not to mention the fact that ole david is completely unqualified to make any statements regarding either party.”

It is fine to disagree with someone, but at least make some effort to explain you point of view. Substance is important!

One question that irked me in Palin’s response. Given the current economic crisis and proposed $700 billion bailout, what would you scale back in your proposed spending? Biden responded with cutting back on foreign aid, or slowing it down, I think. Probably a safe answer. Palin didn’t answer; I think that was a completely fair question that she should have been ready to answer. That response, or lack of it, reminded me of her performance in recent interviews.

I only caught about 15 minutes of the debate. Maybe she redeemed herself elsewhere.

Otherwise, the 15 minutes I saw gave me the impression of her being more of a cheerleader for John McCain and less of someone offering thoughtful comments.

One question that irked me in Palin’s response. Given the current economic crisis and proposed $700 billion bailout, what would you scale back in your proposed spending? Biden responded with cutting back on foreign aid, or slowing it down, I think. Probably a safe answer. Palin didn’t answer; I think that was a completely fair question that she should have been ready to answer. That response, or lack of it, reminded me of her performance in recent interviews.

I only caught about 15 minutes of the debate. Maybe she redeemed herself elsewhere.

Otherwise, the 15 minutes I saw gave me the impression of her being more of a cheerleader for John McCain and less of someone offering thoughtful comments.

“Otherwise, the 15 minutes I saw gave me the impression of her being more of a cheerleader for John McCain and less of someone offering thoughtful comments.”

Sarah Palin must be a relief to a certain kind of conservative voter who prefers minimal involvement from their politicians. In other words, let the VP be a more ceremonial figure, a cheerleader, a ribbon-cutter.

By contrast, Cheney is alarming.

“Otherwise, the 15 minutes I saw gave me the impression of her being more of a cheerleader for John McCain and less of someone offering thoughtful comments.”

Sarah Palin must be a relief to a certain kind of conservative voter who prefers minimal involvement from their politicians. In other words, let the VP be a more ceremonial figure, a cheerleader, a ribbon-cutter.

By contrast, Cheney is alarming.

Alright, having watched Palin last night, she did not change my impression of her, in fact she solidified it.

In my opinion, she had very little substance, she did well in the sense that she was able to make some interesting attacks against Obama, but she did not articulate much.

I’m probably going to post something this weekend that will lay out where I have concerns about Palin. I’m interested if any defenders want to make logical arguments in her defense. One-liners or attacks on Obama are not what I’m looking for.

I don’t think she’s qualified to be President or Vice President. That has nothing to do with my agreement or disagreement with her ideologically. I was very impressed with the Republican Governor of Hawaii and her ability to articulate things that Palin could not, after the debate. It also has nothing to do with her experience or her resume. It is rather her ability to discuss policies in a thoughtful and intelligent matter. All I heard last night was a strewn together string of sound bites, some clever, others less so.

Alright, having watched Palin last night, she did not change my impression of her, in fact she solidified it.

In my opinion, she had very little substance, she did well in the sense that she was able to make some interesting attacks against Obama, but she did not articulate much.

I’m probably going to post something this weekend that will lay out where I have concerns about Palin. I’m interested if any defenders want to make logical arguments in her defense. One-liners or attacks on Obama are not what I’m looking for.

I don’t think she’s qualified to be President or Vice President. That has nothing to do with my agreement or disagreement with her ideologically. I was very impressed with the Republican Governor of Hawaii and her ability to articulate things that Palin could not, after the debate. It also has nothing to do with her experience or her resume. It is rather her ability to discuss policies in a thoughtful and intelligent matter. All I heard last night was a strewn together string of sound bites, some clever, others less so.

More to the original point of this article:

If you haven’t seen any recent Palin interviews, there are plenty to see on youtube.

For instance, here’s one clip about some of the specific sources she consults to stay informed.

More to the original point of this article:

If you haven’t seen any recent Palin interviews, there are plenty to see on youtube.

For instance, here’s one clip about some of the specific sources she consults to stay informed.

As a cute parody, someone should take this clip and overdub that she reads the Davis Vanguard every day!

As a cute parody, someone should take this clip and overdub that she reads the Davis Vanguard every day!

Incredible diversity of opinions, which is good for all of us. It is vitally important to consider all points of view and, hopefully, we'll all be able to make better decisions by considering "both sides" of issues.

I take GREAT exception though to the person who attacked David (and his wife, albeit indirectly)and labeled him a "hypocrite."

Anyone who expresses an opinion on The Vanguard should appreciate the fact that David (or dpd)is providing a great service to the Davis community by allowing us to express our opinions in such an open, uncensored forum.

So, if you want to disagree with or challenege David's opinions (as I have done on many occasions), great.

But, please, don't rip his incredible dedication and the unique experience he provides for all of us through The Vanguard.

Disagree? O.K. Debate? O.K. Criticize? O.K.

But, disrespect, humiliate or attack him or his wife? NO,NO&NO!

If you can't stand free-wheeling, open discussions in The Vanguard, just go away and try The Davis Enterprise. You would be lucky to get one published letter per year with the drivel you spew!

David, I disagree with you a LOT. But, thanks for the opportunity to discuss, debate and disagree.

Keep up the great work!

Incredible diversity of opinions, which is good for all of us. It is vitally important to consider all points of view and, hopefully, we'll all be able to make better decisions by considering "both sides" of issues.

I take GREAT exception though to the person who attacked David (and his wife, albeit indirectly)and labeled him a "hypocrite."

Anyone who expresses an opinion on The Vanguard should appreciate the fact that David (or dpd)is providing a great service to the Davis community by allowing us to express our opinions in such an open, uncensored forum.

So, if you want to disagree with or challenege David's opinions (as I have done on many occasions), great.

But, please, don't rip his incredible dedication and the unique experience he provides for all of us through The Vanguard.

Disagree? O.K. Debate? O.K. Criticize? O.K.

But, disrespect, humiliate or attack him or his wife? NO,NO&NO!

If you can't stand free-wheeling, open discussions in The Vanguard, just go away and try The Davis Enterprise. You would be lucky to get one published letter per year with the drivel you spew!

David, I disagree with you a LOT. But, thanks for the opportunity to discuss, debate and disagree.

Keep up the great work!

“Sarah Palin must be a relief to a certain kind of conservative voter who prefers minimal involvement from their politicians.”

This is an interesting comment and I think it does speak to the opinions about Sarah Palin being based on ideological differences.

The left sees government as the solution to all social problems and does not trust free enterprise. The right sees free enterprise as a better problem solver and does not trust government. The left likes candidates that appear smart enough to give them confidence that they can run government like a big successful business. The right likes candidates that provide social and cultural leadership, but otherwise stay out of business… except as it relates to national security.

Bush said in the aftermath of Katrina “government is not a loving organization”. The language he used was directed at liberals because otherwise he would have said “government is not a capable solution for big social problems”.

Most government agencies are bloated and inefficient with sucky customer service. It is the nature of the beast. To put hope on Obama and Biden to solve complex social problems with big government is, I think, a big mistake. Ask the French who are going the opposite way. Americans are over-reacting to the financial market problems and adopting socialism while the rest of the world goes the other way. We are throwing in the towel because we hate George Bush, hate the war and hate corporate greed.

Sarah Palin is not as polished as Joe Biden because she is not a 35-year career politician. She is “regular people” and very appealing for that reason. We are supposed to be “by the people and for the people”, right?

“Sarah Palin must be a relief to a certain kind of conservative voter who prefers minimal involvement from their politicians.”

This is an interesting comment and I think it does speak to the opinions about Sarah Palin being based on ideological differences.

The left sees government as the solution to all social problems and does not trust free enterprise. The right sees free enterprise as a better problem solver and does not trust government. The left likes candidates that appear smart enough to give them confidence that they can run government like a big successful business. The right likes candidates that provide social and cultural leadership, but otherwise stay out of business… except as it relates to national security.

Bush said in the aftermath of Katrina “government is not a loving organization”. The language he used was directed at liberals because otherwise he would have said “government is not a capable solution for big social problems”.

Most government agencies are bloated and inefficient with sucky customer service. It is the nature of the beast. To put hope on Obama and Biden to solve complex social problems with big government is, I think, a big mistake. Ask the French who are going the opposite way. Americans are over-reacting to the financial market problems and adopting socialism while the rest of the world goes the other way. We are throwing in the towel because we hate George Bush, hate the war and hate corporate greed.

Sarah Palin is not as polished as Joe Biden because she is not a 35-year career politician. She is “regular people” and very appealing for that reason. We are supposed to be “by the people and for the people”, right?

“Sarah Palin is not as polished as Joe Biden because she is not a 35-year career politician. She is “regular people” and very appealing for that reason. We are supposed to be “by the people and for the people”, right?”

This is an interesting comment. Obama is not a 35-year career politician, and is certainly a bit more polished than Sarah Palin.

This comment about being “regular people” was a selling point for GW Bush, but right now he does not convey the sense that he has optimal control (for what he can do) of the situation. Look at his current record breaking (almost) disapproval numbers.

I would be nervous to see Sarah Palin presiding over the current economic situation when she can’t be a little more specific in her ideas.

“Sarah Palin is not as polished as Joe Biden because she is not a 35-year career politician. She is “regular people” and very appealing for that reason. We are supposed to be “by the people and for the people”, right?”

This is an interesting comment. Obama is not a 35-year career politician, and is certainly a bit more polished than Sarah Palin.

This comment about being “regular people” was a selling point for GW Bush, but right now he does not convey the sense that he has optimal control (for what he can do) of the situation. Look at his current record breaking (almost) disapproval numbers.

I would be nervous to see Sarah Palin presiding over the current economic situation when she can’t be a little more specific in her ideas.

Chester

And which is the most socialistic state in the union – that would be Alaska.

Chester

And which is the most socialistic state in the union – that would be Alaska.

Why is Alaska socialist?

Why is Alaska socialist?

Why is Alaska socialist?

Everyone in Alaska gets a government handout.

Why is Alaska socialist?

Everyone in Alaska gets a government handout.

David Greenwald, (who hides behind dpd), has little substance and would’nt make a pimple on a Good public representative’s rear end. In addition to that, if the seiu made a quick right turn it would probably cause a dislocation of his nasal turbinates.
David Greenwald is nothing more than an a small irritant who is unable to see both sides and the big picture. Hopefully he and his wife will never influence politics there in the city of Davis.

David Greenwald, (who hides behind dpd), has little substance and would’nt make a pimple on a Good public representative’s rear end. In addition to that, if the seiu made a quick right turn it would probably cause a dislocation of his nasal turbinates.
David Greenwald is nothing more than an a small irritant who is unable to see both sides and the big picture. Hopefully he and his wife will never influence politics there in the city of Davis.

anon 12:08

If you think so little of DPD/Greenwald, I’m surprised you even take the time to post here.

Don’t you think you could spend your time better doing something else?

anon 12:08

If you think so little of DPD/Greenwald, I’m surprised you even take the time to post here.

Don’t you think you could spend your time better doing something else?