First, that liberal bloggers claim this reveals that they know this is a major weakness of their candidate. The fact that Obama picked Senator Joe Biden as his running mate reveals that he knows this as well.
Second, Palin's pick in no way means that McCain can't use Obama's inexperience in the campaign. Obama's responses to the Palin nomination reveal exactly why.
This is his response immediately following the announcement:
"Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency."Mr. Community Organizer will be sure to highlight Governor Palin's experience as a small town mayor while conveniently forgetting her other experience (you know, like being a governor), but all it does is serve to keep the inexperience topic in the headlines.
And it ensures that Obama will continue to have to field reporters' questions regarding his own inexperience. For instance, CNN asked him about his experience vs Gov. Palin's and this is what he said,
"My understanding is that Gov. Palin’s town, Wassilla, has I think 50 employees. We've got 2500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe 12 million dollars a year – we have a budget of about three times that just for the month,"So Obama thinks that running a campaign for president qualifies one to be president. Ok then.
Again, all Obama's attacks on Palin do is serve to highlight the fact that the man running for president barely has the experience of the vice president he is attacking.
But does this create problems with McCain's ability to showcase Obama's inexperience to be president? The beauty of this pick is that McCain doesn't have to be the one to do it.
Let his running mate Joe Biden do it for him:
Or have Hillary Clinton do it:
Or Bill Clinton:
Or Hillary, Bill, Biden, Dodd, and even Obama himself:
17 comments:
The "Reclusive Leftist" agrees with me. She makes some other fine points as well, though her language is that of a borderline PG-13 movie where they get to use the F word and you're not sure why it's not rated R. Just an FYI. :-)
Here's one of her comments:
"And yet another reason it’s brilliant: the experience issue.
Palin is young, but she actually has more experience than Obama. If he tries to criticize her as inexperienced, what the hell does that say about him? Same if the media goes after her on that point — it just raises the issue of Obama’s lack of experience.
But someone just emailed me this snippet from the Obama camp’s reaction to the pick, and they’re fumbling it:
Obama spokesman Bill Burton:
“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.”
As opposed to Barack Obama, a community organizer with less than two years in the Senate who wants to be not one heartbeat away from the presidency but the President himself? WTF?"
I tried to go to the Reclusive Leftist blog and it just brings me back to yours.
Ah crap.
Here's the link.
She's got a few more up that are quite...earnest in their criticism of how Gov. Palin has been treated in the few short days she's been on the ticket.
I certainly agree that attacking Palin on her experience or her family situation is bad politics for the Obama campaign. Fortunately they don't need to do that.
First of all, when a 72 year old candidate with a history of cancer selects a running mate, one would think that he would insist the candidate had been thoroughly vetted, and that there would be no question in the minds of the electorate that he or she was qualified to step into the Presidency at a moment's notice. John McCain did neither. He barely knew Palin, his staff did practically no investigation of her, and he passed over several other potential candidates who had a great deal more relevant experience than Palin. That was impulsive, risky, and politically motivated - a typical McCain move. Hanging "Country First" banners around the arena don't disguise that fact that McCain put politics first.
Second, Palin's own statements on policy and her own record as a politician make it abundantly clear that she is on the lunatic fringe of American politics and that she sees public office as a route to achieve personal goals. She was unable to put Wasilla first, and unable to put Alaska first, so it's unlikely she will put America first either.
Yes, she's pretty and can read a speech with the best of them, but a brilliant choice? Give us a break!
Did you see her last night? She was awesome!
Democracy Lover are you for real?!?
Palin was a brillant choice.
I kept waiting for her to say anything important last night. Does she have an opinion on anything or is she just supposed to dazzle us with her annoying accent, tight pants suits or her Down'sey baby? Still not convinced.
"Yes, she's pretty and can read a speech..."
"is she just supposed to dazzle us with her annoying accent, tight pants suits..."
DL & Steve, you two might do well to follow the "Reclusive Leftist" link I posted above.
DL,
You claim that you finally agree with me that it's folly to attack Governor Palin on experience, yet you then go on to do exactly that.
"...that there would be no question in the minds of the electorate that he or she was qualified to step into the Presidency at a moment's notice."
Again, this only serves to highlight the fact that Obama himself knows he doesn't have the experience to be president.
And he's actually running for president.
Doug,
I thought her speech last night was really great. She really came out firing.
The issue of experience here is one of McCain proving to the American voters that all the claptrap he's been putting out about his experience and the great importance of experience means something - it obviously doesn't. Not only did he pick the least experienced candidate he could find, he picked someone that has no knowledge of the grave issues facing the American people. Choosing Palin is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
Palin says "I'm not a member of the permanent political establishment", not mentioning that her running mate is the ultimate Washington insider. She calls herself a reformer when she represents business as usual in ethically-challenged Alaska Republican politics.
Sure this plays well with folks who ignore the economy, ignore the war, ignore the encroachment on our personal liberty, and ignore the corruption that has festered in Washington during the last 8 years. Those folks will buy anything as long as a Republican is selling it. They buy the party propaganda hook, line and sinker because they don't care about America, they only care about their pet "social" issues.
His decision to pick Gov Palin just may have delivered him the presidency. Maybe when Obama's 72 he'll figure out how to pick a running mate too.
Cameron, the point - in case you've forgotten - is not to "win" the Presidency, it is to govern well. We have just experienced 8 years of bad governance from someone who "won" the Presidency, and I think the American people have had quite enough of that.
Any one can have experience, that doesn't make you a better President, CEO, or father. Just saying.
The point of picking a President is to have someone that will make the best decisions. The Palin choice might be a great political move, but it's not a great choice for the country, unless you want to relive the last two years of the Clinton admin when the far-right and the centrist and progressives almost literally come to battle in the streets. If Palin's social values were to ever come into practice, we WILL have rioting in the streets, mark my words! It'll make Chicago in '68 look like a nice warmup.
"Cameron, the point - in case you've forgotten - is not to "win" the Presidency, it is to govern well."
From the beginning of time the VP pick ahas been about gaining support for the ticket. That's why Obama picked Biden. All we've been hearing is about Biden's years in the Senate and how experienced he is, and how that helps Obama try to erase his own shortcomings.
So let's not be idealistic only when it serves our own purposes.
Besides, Gov Palin is every bit as qualified to be VP as Obama is to be President.
Sure this plays well with folks who ignore the economy, ignore the war, ignore the encroachment on our personal liberty, and ignore the corruption that has festered in Washington during the last 8 years. Those folks will buy anything as long as a Republican is selling it. They buy the party propaganda hook, line and sinker because they don't care about America, they only care about their pet "social" issues.
I need to respond to this DL.
Do you realize how prone to stereotypes your comments often are?
"These people",
"this plays well with folks",
"Those folks will buy anything...because they don't care about America"
Come on, DL.
How many people are feverishly writing a letter to the editor quoting verbatim what MoveOn.org emailed them to write yesterday? They've just bought the party line hook line and sinker then, right?
Why is it that your comments parrot almost word for word those same talking points? Are you a Democratic Party stooge who doesn't care about America?
We've gone over this before; I realize you don't like or understand religion, the religious, or social conservatism, but we can have good political discussions (I never properly thanked you for that comment- thank you. I enjoy arguing with you too) without all the hater nonsense.
Cameron, unfortunately only a handful of people are busy writing what MoveOn told them to write, and almost all of them disagree with MoveOn from time to time. The left is far from monolithic. If we were, you conservatives would not have won an election in the last 80 years.
I would suggest that you read about authoritarian followers. That is the group to which I am referring and they have the characteristics I described. I simply reject the idea that a rational person can place "social" issues at the top of their list at this point in our nation's history. There is far too much at stake.
Post a Comment