Sarah Palin stepping down as Governor of Alaska

[thereom4]

I always had to laugh how people's counter to Obama's lack of experience was "But...but, PALIN is FAR more inexperienced!!!". For crying out loud your comparing the Preidential candidate to a Vice Presidential Candidate! That's just sad. It's an insult to Obama, really, to say "YOUR VP candidate is more dumb than our Presidential candidate!".

Palin was not running for President. Let's compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, shall we? Comparing Palin to Obama is just silly. Now, if we're talking about a (very) theoretical future race, that's another matter... but I don't really see Palin earning the GOP's trust after her recent stunt.

That said, I give you that Palin is still more dumb than Beiden. But I did like McCain as a candidate more than Obama. And personally, I don't vote based on a VP candidate as much as the head hancho.

You're absolutely right. But somewhere along the road the comparison was made and the argument still continues today. Though I agree with you, I figure if we're going to still have this discussion, let me jump in and reiniterate that Palin's intelligence paled in comparison to Obama's.

[thereom4]

Ah...what does experience have to do with public speaking ability, or vice versa?

The same claim was aimed at Bush, even after years of "experience" in the "hardest job in the world". The two are unrelated subjects.

They are two different subjects. You're right. Palin just wasn't very knowledgeable. How do I know that? She spoke. Publicly.

Intelligence is not everything but when it comes down to it........I'll take the Columbia and Harvard Law grad for $800 Alex.

Bush was dim and you know it.
He was already in office, we got into a war, re-elected him, so what were we going to do other than wait till his term was over.

This wasn't even the basis of the standard opposition to Palin. It was "Omigod, McCain wil absolutely positively die in office and she'll become President! It will happen! And she's not experienced enough to be President!"

Personally speaking her lack of knowledge on those subjects that she should be versed on coupled with her inexperience were deal breakers. McCain's mother was in her 90s, so who was to say that McCain wouldn't make it there too. I really hated the McCain might die talk. But the reality was that he was an old man and seriously what if he did die? Palin as President?! *Clutching pearls tightly.

Seriously, though---what does this prove? Carter was quite possibly one of the most "intelligent" Presidents we have ever had. It didn't make him a very good leader, though. And that is what the President is supposed to be: Not the smartest guy, but the best leader. As such he gets the smartest guys to work FOR him.

If I could choose, and lucky for me I live in a democracy, so I did.....
I would choose the smartest guy who would hire more smart guys to work for him.

Not but that I would necessarily assume automatically that "law review=intelligent", either....

Oh yes it does. I don't know if you've ever taken the LSAT but that is a hard test. Harvard Law students tend to score in the 90% percentile and have something like 3.8 GPA averages. So IMO they are all smart to begin with. Then you have this law review that you compete to get on through a writing competition and your grades. So basically you have already smart people competing for a few "smartest of the bunch" jobs.

Now, I'm not saying either that Obama is not a smart guy or that Palin is not...dim. I'm just pointing out that some of your arguments are less than convincing about either.

It wasn't Palin's lack of public speaking ability, that in IMO made her unqualified for V.P., it was her apparent lack of understanding about basic issues. During one of the V.P. debates she told the moderator that she would not be "answering the questions the way the moderator would like." Wait......What?! Okay so basically you're not going to answer the questions. Okay pack it in, the debate is over. Thanks for wasting everyone's time Palin.

[Inquartata]

But you don't understand, ILS! McCain was old! He could never have survived a month in the high-stress job of President! He would have died and left Palin to succeed him! It was a foregone conclusion! So she actually was running for President! See?

These are the logical gymnastics that are necessary to avoid the pain of cognitive dissonance...

[Inquartata]

McCain's mother was in her 90s, so who was to say that McCain wouldn't make it there too.

Far too many people...

I really hated the McCain might die talk. But the reality was that he was an old man and seriously what if he did die? Palin as President?!

Biden as President?! *clutching earplugs*

And sure, Obama seems healthy, but what are the actuarials on a black male smoker over 40?

I don't know if you've ever taken the LSAT but that is a hard test.

Tests do not measure intelligence.

Harvard Law students tend to score in the 90% percentile and have something like 3.8 GPA averages. So IMO they are all smart to begin with. Then you have this law review that you compete to get on through a writing competition and your grades. So basically you have already smart people competing for a few "smartest of the bunch" jobs.

Now you are conflating education and test-taking skills with intelligence.

IMO anyone who cannot understand the basic concept that a business with lower costs than its competitors will eventually put all of the latter out of business has a lot of specialized education but maybe not that much native intellect...or maybe is being deliberately disingenuous. I'm not sure which reflects more poorly on him.

[jeff]

It wasn't Palin's lack of public speaking ability, that in IMO made her unqualified for V.P., it was her apparent lack of understanding about basic issues. During one of the V.P. debates she told the moderator that she would not be "answering the questions the way the moderator would like." Wait......What?! Okay so basically you're not going to answer the questions. Okay pack it in, the debate is over. Thanks for wasting everyone's time Palin.

I would put it a different way. She has excellent speaking ability - she's engaging, upbeat, energizing. Very good public speaker. Unfortunately, what she says is gibberish that makes no sense - up to and including her "I'm quitting because I'm not a quitter speech". That's hardly a partisan observation, since it's been ragged on by both parties.

What the real problem was the "apparent lack of understanding", coupled with the obvious contempt for the idea that she should know and understand issues, as demonstrated by her inability to answer the questions put to her, and indignation that anybody she should think she was required to. McCain staffers from the campaign (who despised her and called her "diva") said it was impossible to get her to study issues or prepare for debates.

Definitely not the person I would want to have "a heartbeat from the Presidency" - regardless of how old McCain is.

OTOH, Biden is an extremely knowledgeable and experienced legislator who knows policy and how the government operates. He's the one with public speaking ability problems - especially "foot in mouth disease", not Palin.


To intelligence and Harvard Law Review - it takes more than "just a test" to get to that", and it's absurd to claim that it isn't very strong evidence of intelligence. Sure, dullards get into Ivy League colleges - it's rather famous for that for sons of famous families, like GWB. But for those who are not-connected, that is the most competitive academic environment you can think of, and getting in indicates a lot more than being able to fill out multiple choice SATs.

[Hauptman]

Y
This wasn't even the basis of the standard opposition to Palin. It was "Omigod, McCain wil absolutely positively die in office and she'll become President! It will happen! And she's not smart enough to be President!"

Fixed that for you.

Come on.... how many times do we have to say it? The argument was not about Palin's quantity of experience, but the quality of that experience, and her lack of real education and knowledge.

[Hauptman]

Tests do not measure intelligence.




Now you are conflating education and test-taking skills with intelligence.

Actually, there is quite a bit of research out there showing that education and test-taking skills correlate quite well with intelligence..... aside from the tests designed specifically to measure intelligence.

[Philistine]

{snip}
To intelligence and Harvard Law Review - it takes more than "just a test" to get to that", and it's absurd to claim that it isn't very strong evidence of intelligence. {snip}

Also, Obama graduated magna cum laude--which means he was in the top 10% of his class as at HLS.

Personally, I never really thought of Palin as particularly dumb. Rather (IMHO), it was more that she, like Bush, seemed intellectually incurious.

I think the main problem with Palin's interviews/debates is that she was such a latecomer, and all her previous experience had been purely local, with very little concerns about national or international issues (other than energy--and even that mostly focusing on how those issues impacted Alaska).

I have little doubt that had she gone through the 18 month debate/campaining process that Obama, Biden and McCain all did (not to mention the other candidates) she would have given much more coherent answers.

Given her late entry and lack of national experience, it's not surprising she wasn't well informed on the issues at the beginning (compounded by the fact that she couldn't necessarily freely express her own positions, but had to be in line with McCain's). OTOH, if she really did resist practice and study on the issues, then the problems were, in large part, of her own making.

My $.02

--Philistine

[I_luv_saber]

Definitely not the person I would want to have "a heartbeat from the Presidency" - regardless of how old McCain is.

I agree, but is that really a good main reason to stand by to not vote for a presidential candidate? I mean, I understand it as a factor, but many people seemed to clutch to it as a main point, which seems silly...

I mean, don't get me wrong, Palin is a ditz... but I don't give Biden a whole lot more credit either (but some).

To intelligence and Harvard Law Review - it takes more than "just a test" to get to that", and it's absurd to claim that it isn't very strong evidence of intelligence.

There's also a very big difference between "book smarts" and "street smarts" though. Or rather, academic knowledge and practical sense and logic. Intelligence and wisdom are two very different things. I favor the latter over the former when choosing a leader (however intelligence certainly is important as well).

Basically, I think it's a very good indicator of intelligence, but not of sense necessarily. There's really no proof of that other than track record.

Bush was dim and you know it.
He was already in office, we got into a war, re-elected him, so what were we going to do other than wait till his term was over.

For those who haven't read it, I think this is a good/funny description of Bush:

A 70-year-old Texas Rancher got his hand caught in a gate while working cattle. He wrapped the hand in his bandana and drove his pickup to the doctor. While suturing the laceration, the doctor asked the old man about George W. Bush being in the White House.

The old Texan said, "Well, ya know, Bush is a 'Post Turtle.'"

Not knowing what the old man meant, the doctor asked what a Post Turtle was.

The old man looked at him and drawled, "When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a Post Turtle."

The old man saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain:

"You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he can't get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor dumb bastard get down."

[thereom4]

^
"You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he can't get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor dumb bastard get down."

Now that is just funny.

To sum up......my overall opinion on Palin: energy efficient light bulb on "off" setting. I'm just saying.

[jeff]

If a VP candidate is completely unsuitable (or if you think that), then it is a good reason to not vote for a ticket. In most cases it's not a key issue, but when a candidate is prominent (or notorious) for negative reasons, then it rises to that level. VP's matter nowadays - look at our prior administration and the outsize influence and control Cheney had.

During the campaign and after the election there were a lot of Republicans who said that Palin was a deal-breaker that prevented them for voting for their ticket.. I didn't base my vote for Obama on this.

Frankly, I felt this reflected poorly on McCain. He took the running mate that was forced on him instead of who he wanted, despite a lack of agreement on policy issues or personal chemistry. If he couldn't demonstrate leadership at that point within his own party, how would he fare if he was in office?

As far as intelligence - sure, real world ability and "street smarts" are essential, but I don't think we can say that Palin's lack of academic accomplishment was proof she had them.

Oh, I always enjoy the "post turtle" metaphor. I see that in office politics when somebody in a job they're not qualified for.

[I_luv_saber]

If a VP candidate is completely unsuitable (or if you think that), then it is a good reason to not vote for a ticket. In most cases it's not a key issue, but when a candidate is prominent (or notorious) for negative reasons, then it rises to that level. VP's matter nowadays - look at our prior administration and the outsize influence and control Cheney had.

Fair enough, but I think it was more blown out of proportion than it really was. I still didn't see it as that key of an issue.

During the campaign and after the election there were a lot of Republicans who said that Palin was a deal-breaker that prevented them for voting for their ticket.. I didn't base my vote for Obama on this.

Nor did I mean to imply you did. Indeed, I think relatively few people did... but it was often used as a point in debate...

Frankly, I felt this reflected poorly on McCain. He took the running mate that was forced on him instead of who he wanted, despite a lack of agreement on policy issues or personal chemistry. If he couldn't demonstrate leadership at that point within his own party, how would he fare if he was in office?

I think it reflected poorly on McCain, but not that he took someone who was "forced" on him. Ultimately, he made the choice... do I run with the person I should run with, or do I run with the person I think will secure me the most votes (which I think was silly... what else was the far right going to do, vote for Obama?). It was a bad choice, to be sure.

As far as intelligence - sure, real world ability and "street smarts" are essential, but I don't think we can say that Palin's lack of academic accomplishment was proof she had them

Oh, by no means. I definitely think she does not. I'm just not sure yet if Obama does, either...

Oh, I always enjoy the "post turtle" metaphor. I see that in office politics when somebody in a job they're not qualified for.

It's such a good description!

[thereom4]

I didn't base my vote for Obama on this.

I agree. McCain and Obama were interviewing for the top job in this country. As a potential "employer" I found Obama to be the better person for the job.

During the campaign and after the election there were a lot of Republicans who said that Palin was a deal-breaker that prevented them for voting for their ticket..

I thought both potential veeps were a little damaging to their respective tickets. Biden talked long past when he should have stopped and Palin just spoke gibberish.

If I were a Republican who voted along party lines, Palin would have been a deal breaker. Lucky for me I don't belong to any of the political gangs.

[thereom4]

Tests do not measure intelligence.

Now you are conflating education and test-taking skills with intelligence.

Aaaaaahhhh.....it's the weekend. Please refer to Jeff and Hauptman's posts. (#65 and #67)

[Inquartata]

Come on.... how many times do we have to say it? The argument was not about Palin's quantity of experience, but the quality of that experience, and her lack of real education and knowledge.

Say it as many times as you like, it's still definitional retreat and not very convincing at that. Obama's "quality of experience" was certainly no better that Palin's. "Community organizer" is superior to "mayor"? Senator is superior executive experience to Governor? Please!

Quit while you're behind, already.

Actually, there is quite a bit of research out there showing that education and test-taking skills correlate quite well with intelligence..... aside from the tests designed specifically to measure intelligence.

Yeah. Unless, of course, you cheat or something.

But no one from Chicago would ever do that, I am sure.

As to the "post turtle" metaphor, Jeff, it's my turn to reject one that YOU like!
Because no one hates the turtle, no one jeers at it because it can't speak, and no one wants to pick it up and hurl it across the field, or indeed to smash it with a rock...

[I_luv_saber]

Because no one hates the turtle, no one jeers at it because it can't speak, and no one wants to pick it up and hurl it across the field, or indeed to smash it with a rock...

Never been to Texas, have you?

[Inquartata]

I am in it right now, you silly fellow!

[telkanuru]

Say it as many times as you like, it's still definitional retreat and not very convincing at that. Obama's "quality of experience" was certainly no better that Palin's. "Community organizer" is superior to "mayor"? Senator is superior executive experience to Governor? Please!

Quit while you're behind, already.

It's not what they did, it's how they did it, which was the point that you missed.

[Hauptman]

Say it as many times as you like, it's still definitional retreat and not very convincing at that. Obama's "quality of experience" was certainly no better that Palin's. "Community organizer" is superior to "mayor"? Senator is superior executive experience to Governor? Please!

Quit while you're behind, already.

Don't forget "mayor" followed by endless scandal, and ethics violations. And hello? Will you ever acknowledge that getting into Harvard Law is an achievement let alone becoming president of the law review?

Take your own advice and quit while behind.

[Inquartata]

It's not what they did, it's how they did it, which was the point that you missed.

I didn't "miss" anything, because there was no substantive "point" to miss. You do have a "point" of view, and nothing will budge you from it. That you all keep shifting your standards---from "experience" to "quality of experience" to "how the quality of experience is used" is demonstration enough of that...

Don't forget "mayor" followed by endless scandal, and ethics violations.

Alleged violations. Most of them are arguable, and sound like the usual sorts of attacks aimed at leaders of one party by members of the other.

If you wanted to do so, you could read a few articles that looked into, for instance, Obama's time as community-organizer, and found less than a complimentary picture. But of course, you believe he's a saint and cannot possibly have feet of clay, but that all conservatives are clay up to the waist at least. I cannot change that, but I can certainly point it out when a particular pillar of your belief system is shaky...

And hello? Will you ever acknowledge that getting into Harvard Law is an achievement let alone becoming president of the law review?

It can be, depending on how you got in. On merit? Or, for example, as a legacy? Or---well, there are many roads to Rome. Some are stonier than others.

As for "achievements"...is this another shifting goal? Before it was supposed to prove intelligence, wasn't it? Now we're down to "achievement"?



[/QUOTE]