A thought regarding Palin

13567…10

Comments

  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    polaris wrote:
    you replied to my post that says she is not qualified to be vp or prez with your "fact" ... so, do you think she is qualified to be vp or prez!?? ... yes or no?

    Yes. And Obama (who has no executive experience) is also qualified. I, personally, believe that her executive experience provides her with her qualifications. While Obama's experience in Congress provides him with his.

    Do I think either one of them is ridiculously qualified? No. They both are relatively young.... that's why experience is such an issue. Younger people don't tend to have much because they are "young".

    Personally, I don't see too much of an issue with being relatively young though.
  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    inmytree wrote:
    you've answered nothing...you can't define "executive experience"...you know it and I know it...

    and you claim to have no bias...that's some funny stuff, indeed...


    I already did define it. Read.
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    mammasan wrote:
    Who cares about her executive experience when half the shit she brags about are out right lies. I will admit when I first heard about her I was somewhat excited about a Washington outsider being on the ticket, but as I read more about her I realized that this woman is a disaster waiting to happen.

    dude ... we're not even talking about her accomplishments here or her record ... it is simply because of the "fact" she has more experience that matters ... apparently, everything else is irrelevant to her qualifications for the job ...
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    cincybearcat wrote:
    I just did.

    What about "the buck stops with them" don't you get?

    I kinda get it...what I mean is, this sounds nice, but I've yet to see evidence of her being a buck stops here type of leader...unless you talking about the bucks from earmarks....
    cincybearcat wrote:
    You want me to spell out each and every detail of what a governor does, etc?

    sure, go for it...:D
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Just look at the criticism presidents, governors, etc get...you ever hear anyone blame the state debt on the legislature?

    yes....
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    saveuplife wrote:
    I already did define it. Read.

    help me out, which post # did you define anything...I just reviewed this thread, and can't seem to find it...
  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    polaris wrote:
    dude ... we're not even talking about her accomplishments here or her record ... it is simply because of the "fact" she has more experience that matters ... apparently, everything else is irrelevant to her qualifications for the job ...

    You were the one who stated that she didn't have the necessary experience. I simply responded that she has the most exec experience of all the candidates.

    Whether you think she's done a good job or whether one thinks Obama did a good job is idiosyncratic and most likely tainted by your (my) political beliefs. I'm not getting into that because I know that. I was simply correcting you about experience.... that's how this started.
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,838
    What's funny is that people will always shuffle reality in their heads in order to maek the situation fit their beliefs...

    The facts are

    1) Sarah Palin has more executive experience then anyone on the 2 major party tickets. The debate can be around whether or not this is important. I believe it is important, that it is 1 piece of the puzzle for being able to be president (and she's only the VP).

    2) Having executive experience is not the only factor. You have to have been a good executive.

    3) Leadership is another important factor. Having executive experience should give you a leg up here, but more so, as I said before, it's the ability to articulate a clear vision (what's the finish line look like), inspire people to believe that we can reach that finish line, and empower the right people to accomplish the necessary tasks to get to that finish line. This is subjective I understand, but I think this is where Obama takes a lead in this race. Though, we'll have to wait and see who he empowers. ;) Not saying that McCain, Palin, or Biden have none of this, but the all trail Obama.

    4) And then there are many more factors that we all weigh depending on how we see the world, what we see as the biggest issues, etc. All very subjective.

    The only thing on this list that isn't subjective is the fact that Palin has more executive experience than McCain, Obama, & Biden...combined. Now was it good experience? That's subjective. ;)
    hippiemom = goodness
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    i am just going to go ahead and say it... i typically dont like to be too negaitve, BUT

    anyone that supports Sarah Palin as VP and votes for ANY ticket with her on it, is a flat out fucking moron

    and anyone that thinks the earth is only 5,000 years old is a fucking moron


    ok, i just had to get that off my chest real quick :cool:
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    saveuplife wrote:
    You were the one who stated that she didn't have the necessary experience. I simply responded that she has the most exec experience of all the candidates.

    Whether you think she's done a good job or whether one thinks Obama did a good job is idiosyncratic and most likely tainted by your (my) political beliefs. I'm not getting into that because I know that. I was simply correcting you about experience.... that's how this started.

    dude ... i said she wasn't qualified to run a post-office let alone the white house ... i didn't mention the word experience ...
  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    saveuplife wrote:
    I'm referring to mayor/governor/president of a geographical area. You should care because it's direct experience to the job being applied for.


    Here.
  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    polaris wrote:
    dude ... i said she wasn't qualified to run a post-office let alone the white house ... i didn't mention the word experience ...

    So experience does not matter for qualifications? This is ridiculous.
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    saveuplife wrote:
    So experience does not matter for qualifications? This is ridiculous.

    i didn't say that did i!?? ... but to you that is all that matters ...
  • YieldInHiding
    YieldInHiding Posts: 1,841
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Being there means shit.

    Solid retort!!!
    No longer overwhelmed it seems so simple now.
  • saveuplife
    saveuplife Posts: 1,173
    polaris wrote:
    i didn't say that did i!?? ... but to you that is all that matters ...


    No, it is not. I never said that.

    I simply think it does matter. I just don't understand why everyone is saying she's not "qualified" and Obama is. I don't get that and I won't get that. People are seeing what they want to see. The truth is the are BOTH relatively inexperienced because "they are both relatively young". That said, they both do have political experience. I consider them both to be "qualified".
  • Brain of J.Lo
    Brain of J.Lo Posts: 3,259
    my2hands wrote:
    i am just going to go ahead and say it... i typically dont like to be too negaitve, BUT

    anyone that supports Sarah Palin as VP and votes for ANY ticket with her on it, is a flat out fucking moron

    and anyone that thinks the earth is only 5,000 years old is a fucking moron


    ok, i just had to get that off my chest real quick :cool:

    Tell us how you really feel. :D
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    If we are being technical here than yes Palin has the most "executive" experience of all the other people on the tickets. The point that bothers me is that is pretty much all they are tauting these days is this sense that she is the best pick because she has executive experience. Never mind all the lies, never mind that she wanted to ban books, never mind that she believes Iraq was a task from God. All those are not important because she has executive experience.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    You know why I don't like Sarah Palin?

    She wasn't McCains choice for VP.
    Many republicans are saying she wasn't even close to the best choice for VP,....even Karl Rove....

    She's the pure quintessential definition of a tool.
    She's a waste of all this debate...

    Her selection as VP should be an insult to all republicans outside of Alaska.
    the Minions
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Brain of J.Lo wrote:
    Tell us how you really feel. :D

    dont get me started :p
  • digster
    digster Posts: 1,293
    OK, about executive experience...

    Palin does have executive experience (of course, her party's ticket must not think it is quite that important, since their presidential candidate has never run anything either, but I digress). You can take executive experience as far as you want, but at what point do you draw the line and state realistically and logically, that maybe being the executive of the smallest population in the Union, with problems entirely removed from the international and national concerns that will plague a President, might not be all it's cracked up to be.

    I used this example in another thread, and it's not a great example, but it's the best I can think of. You have the largest school in a country, that also oversees every other school in the country, and you have the smallest school in the country. Maybe, just maybe, it's not automatically the principal of that smallest school who is more qualified than anyone else in the system. Maybe you should deal with people who have worked in the larger schools, and not just assume that if you've run one school you can run them all. Being President is not going to be at all like being the governor of Alaska.

    I don't think she's unqualified (or I should say, I don't think she's unqualified necessarily due to a lack of experience. I feel she's unqualified because she has not given me any reason to believe she understands the issues and will make informed, resolute, and intelligent decsions). I don't really think there's a very good way to judge competency for the Presidency based on past resume, candidates have to be judged on their own strengths, but that said people who are trying to bend it to mean that since she's run Alaska she's more qualified to run the country than her opposing Presidential candidate, who has had experience on the national stage, is hogwash.
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    saveuplife wrote:
    No, it is not. I never said that.

    I simply think it does matter. I just don't understand why everyone is saying she's not "qualified" and Obama is. I don't get that and I won't get that. People are seeing what they want to see. The truth is the are BOTH relatively inexperienced because "they are both relatively young". That said, they both do have political experience. I consider them both to be "qualified".

    uhhh ... you've written a dozen posts saying the same thing ... and ignored all references to her scandals as governor; her record as a mayor; her lack of knowledge about foreign issues; the fact she lets religion take over common sense; etc ...

    while peeps were highlighting the reasons for her lack of qualification - you kept beatiing the experience horse ...

    but in any case - sure experience matters but you have to take that experience into context (was she good at her job; was she holding standards you would want in your vp, prez; was she involved with issues that translate to the white house) - in all these issues, she fails ...

Categories