The title of this post seems to be the new favorite phrase of the McCain campaign and some right-wing pundits lately. I would personally just like to point out that the population of Alaska according to the 2000 US census is 626,932, conversely, the population of the suburban Philadelphia county in which I live is 551,974. Oh, wait, I forgot, she has also been a mayor of a 9,000 member city in Alaska, which is the whopping grand total equivalent of three large high schools, or a Texas sized mega church. So, by my calculations a regional principal or mega church pastor is only a little less than two years shy of the amount of executive experience the McCain campaign insists blows Obama’s wee little time as community organizer in Chicago, and a US Senator out of the water.
The issue with this is that while I am excited to see a woman on the Republican ticket, that does not mean I will vote for her. Within 24 hours of Palin’s addition to the ticket I think I was asked at least 10 times if that meant that I would now switch team’s in this election. The reason I am not voting for Sarah Palin is not because she is a woman, a mother of five, a “pitbull with lipstick” (her words, not mine), or a Republican, it is because I disagree with her policy positions in nearly every category that I can think of, with a handful of exceptions.
That being said, Palin is a brilliant move for the McCain campaign, and if you are a more conservative Republican, there are wonderful things about her as a candidate, but her “executive experience” is not one of them. Obama has a similar problem…. Does McCain have more traditional govt. leadership experience than Obama? Obviously, yes. Does McCain have more life experience than Obama? Obviously, yes.
However, I do feel that Obama has other significant leadership experience that have prepared him adequately for the job. Palin, while I disagree with most of her policy, has some clear and raw leadership ability, so to tout her “executive experience,” is a disservice to her good attributes and is a disservice to Obama as well. The fixation on one or two attributes of a candidate is, in my opinion, an insult to the American people.
It ignores the complexity of politics, leadership, and the ability of the people to know what they do or do not want. If the McCain campaign wants to attack Obama’s policies, beliefs, or record, have at it, but it is simply factually wrong to paint a picture that a small town, small and homogenous state candidate is somehow more politically experienced than a Senator from one of the largest, most diverse cities in the country.
For some reason, when it comes to women in politics, they are treated to a different standard ( I spoke about this at length when Hillary was still in the running in the Hillary make me a sandwich post). When Hillary was still in the campaign, she was attacked by the right for all sorts of things that had nothing to do with her beliefs or policies. Now, with Palin on the ticket, she is being “dumbed” down as a candidate by being referred to as having “more experience than Obama and Biden combined,” which is a silly and foolish statement (just for background info. Joe Biden, is the longest running member of the US Senate ever in our nation’s history). Or, the absurd frequent allusion to the fact that she has five kids, so? who cares? someone please tell me how many kids Biden has? I honestly do not know, and I am a news junkie.
Some on the right are doing a disservice to women both outside of their party (Hillary) and to those within their party (Palin) by pigeon holing them into categories and ignoring the whole scope of the candidate.
On the flip side, this past week the DNC launched Hillary onto the campaign trail once again for Obama, with a mission to counterract Palin and attack her on a female to female basis. Hillary, to her credit refused, and said she would do all in her power to see Obama elected, but would not unjustly attack Palin. Think of the irony here, the DNC asked the woman, whom they did not choose b/c they did not think she was a good enough pick, to be the one to try and prove that another woman was also not good enough for the VP ticket. That rings in my mind with police departments that take complacency stances against gang violence saying, “let’s just let them kill each other off, they are fighting anyways.”
My point is, that while it is quite exciting that we have “millions of cracks in the glass ceiling,” we have a long, long way to go for women to have parity in politics.
Actually you could say she has more executive experience than Biden, Obama, and McCain combined. However, recent history shows that people are generally more comfortable with a governor making the transition to President than a Senator. McCain or Obama will be the first Senator since Kennedy to do it. It is amazing to be that this is almost Obama vs Palin now instead of Obama vs McCain. I don’t think Palin or Obama are ready, but we have to choose one or the other. I rather have an inexperienced VP over an inexperienced President. http://preservetherepublic.wordpress.com/
By: preservetherepublic on September 14, 2008
at 12:42 am
Preserve: That’s hilarious, I had actually not thought of it that way (combining all three), and it just accentuates the absurdity of the argument.
It is crazy that it has become Obama v. Palin, but I wonder if that will not soon disappear in the coming weeks. When Ferraro (Dem. female VP candidate ‘84) was on the ticket with Montdale, he had a huge bump and surge of interest for awhile, but then slid back down. My suspicion is that the same will happen b/c as the campaign rolls on, Palin will either have to step to the media plate (meet the press etc.) or the campaign will have to pull her back a bit. I think her misunderstanding of the Bush doctrine question this week in her open interview was evidence of that.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 12:52 am
While I applaud the Republican Party for nominating their first woman VP – remember that the Democrats did long ago – I would ask you: Does this particular woman represent the values you hold and does she have the knowledge to take over the presidency should McCain suddenly die in office?
One of the things that haunts me is: What if McCain suddenly dies on day two of his administration? Does she have enough foreign affairs knowledge to take over as President on day two or day one?
Palin admitted that she’s not been interested in or paid any attention to foreign affairs. She’s admitted she does she not know about international affairs in order to deal with the extremely complex issues facing our foreign affairs. Can we…or should we…trust her admitted lack of knowledge to lead our country forward safely? That is the extremely important question.
Sen. Clinton could have handled the issues. She has the knowledge. Palin, by her own admission, does not.
And that is what concerns me. I don’t care about her personal life. I don’t care about her religion. I don’t even care that she’s female as opposed to male.
I believe in HIRING THE BEST person for the job.
Yes, I long for the day when a woman becomes President of the U.S. Hell, I personally have experienced all the discrimination and prejudice dumped on women. But that does not mean I want an unqualified woman to become the leader of the free world just because she’s a woman.
I mean would you want your company to promote a female co-worker, regardless of her experience and knowledge, to CEO just because she’s a woman? Wouldn’t you want that female to be a knowledge leader in the field …or at least highly knowledgeable in the field…in order to make the company grow in order to preserve your job and your benefits and increase your salary?
Tell the truth, if you had a choice in your company’s management, who would you choose: A male who had lots lots of experience and knowledge or a female who admitted that she had almost no interest and no knowledge? Who would you bet your salary and job on?
That IS what counts. If you vote for McCain solely because he chose Gov. Palin, you’re saying that knowledge doesn’t count. Just as you would be saying to your company that experience and knowledge don’t count when hiring a CEO.
And for those of you who say she’ll have time to learn, I point to the fact that many presidents have died early in office and that McCain is 72. Sure he may live long like his mother. But I too had grandmothers that lived well over 100; yet my father, their son and grandson, died at 73. There is no way of knowing how long a President…any President…will live. Several Presidents have died almost upon taking the oath of office. That is why it is so important to choose a VP who can immediately step into the shoes of the President.
We no longer live in an isolated world where the VP can be a novice in world affairs. We’re too interconnected politically, socially, and financially. We need a VP, regardless of gender, who understands this interconnectedness upon assumption of the office. If not, we as a country are doomed to repeat or make worse the mistakes of the past seven years.
As a female who really has experienced and dealt with all the prejudice issues regarding female abilities, capabilities, knowledge base and so much more, I still want to hire the best “person” for the job, regardless of gender,..because gender means a whole lot less to me than knowledge and ability.
I want our country to regain its competitive edge in a world economy. I want the U.S. to export the highest and best technology the world has to offer. I want us to grow jobs. I want the rest of the world to look at the US and say, “hey, that’s the kind of place where I want to live. ” I want to keep our country safe and growing, But to get to that point again, we need to have leaders, regardless of gender or race or religion, who understand the world and world politics.
Can you HONESTLY say Sarah Palin has the knowledge of world affairs and economics to negotiate with often hostile foreign leaders — or at the very least, leaders who seek their own country’s self interest — and keep our country safe, grow our economy in a world economy, and provide the kind of economic and social leadership our country needs. I ask you to remember too that according to all economic indicators we are at the tipping point of a major, catastrophic depression.
Does she have the knowledge to take over from McCain? We’re not asking her to be the Gov of Rhode Island, we’re asking her to possibly be the leader of the free world…potentially to take over the most important position in the world. And potentially take over that position on day one or two after assuming office.
What is at stake is not whether she breaks the deplorable “glass ceiling” but whether she has the knowledge and ability on day one to lead our country forward and protect it from all the many threats, both military and financial, that could harm us.
As a woman who has quite literally dealt with all many and disgusting prejudices that have been thrown against women, I simply do no believe that Sarah Palin has either the experience or knowledge to keep our country safe.
Therefore, I cannot support her.
By: Valerie Curl on September 14, 2008
at 12:53 am
Valerie, you have brought up a point I have left out…. that should anything, ANYTHING, happen to McCain, she would be our President. I agree, this is a phenomenally scary situation; b/c while she has some good qualifying attributes, there are none, in my opinion, that remotely qualify her for President. This, I admit, is a completely obnoxious comment, but I have truly been wondering if she has ever even been to Washington as a tourist, let alone in an official capacity.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 1:05 am
Wait, I am wrong for that past statement, apparently according to the AP (associated press) she has been to washington numerous times, to lobby for the “bridge to nowhere.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 1:09 am
There is a real difference in being an engaged spectator and in being a participant in foreign affairs. What we’re calling “executive experience” only speaks to the type of experience, not the breadth, depth, and length of that experience. Very true, it’s silly for the McCain campaign to talk about her executive experience when McCain has zero as well. But we have to keep in mind that no governor has ever had any or much policy experience to speak of, even Ronald Reagan or Franklin Roosevelt. I think we’d all say they did quite well in dealing in foreign policy affairs in their eras.
To be honest, both sides are missing the point here. It’s as if we’re only voting based on experience. Last time I checked Amy is voting for Obama for very different reasons that I am not voting for him. It’s not that we disagree over experience. Obama has very little. It’s not that we differ on abortion issues; both of us disagree with Obama’s stance. What we differ on is what priorities we give to why we want Obama or somebody else to be the next executive branch head of our nation (I’m sorry, I don’t buy the “leader” argument for president; sounds like a nicer and PC way of saying dictator to me).
Check out http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell0904408.php3 for a review on the topic of experience. I think Sowell nails it here.
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 10:06 am
“Can you HONESTLY say Sarah Palin has the knowledge of world affairs and economics to negotiate with often hostile foreign leaders — or at the very least, leaders who seek their own country’s self interest — and keep our country safe, grow our economy in a world economy, and provide the kind of economic and social leadership our country needs. I ask you to remember too that according to all economic indicators we are at the tipping point of a major, catastrophic depression.”
No. But I can’t say that about Bush, Cheney, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, or John McCain. Presidents don’t just sit in their office and dictate to their staff what the United States’ position is. They have a Cabinet. They have Advisors. Everyone thought “The Terminator” (I can’t spell his real name) had no experience to be governor. But he was elected because they trusted his judgment in bringing the best people around him. And THAT is exactly why I don’t trust Obama’s judgment.
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 10:09 am
By the way, I read Brian McLaren’s take on McCain’s foreign policy approach (or what it would likely be). It’s the most poignant and thoughtful reason I’ve ever read as to why a Christian shouldn’t vote for McCain. To me it’s not convincing enough to vote for Obama (for various reasons), but it was well-written:
http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/why-im-voting-for-obama-and-why.html
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 10:10 am
(Amy, I didn’t mean to speak for you, so I was taking an educated guess on the abortion stance. I think I’ve heard you say you’re pro-life as opposed to pro-choice. If I’m wrong, sorry about that.)
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 10:12 am
I find some of these arguments to be impactful. I must say that I also find Joe Biden’s foreign policy (at least on Iraq) to be woefully inadequate and illadvised. I think I’d rather take a chance with Sarah Palin instead of Joe Biden, if that was ever a possibility of occuring.
I remember reading Joe Biden’s foreign policy about a year ago and being struck by how ridiculous his suggestions for Iraq were based on what had occurred over there so far. I won’t go into detail, but neither VP hopefully will ever be president in my opinion.
By: v02468 on September 14, 2008
at 1:26 pm
I find it incredibly ironic that Obama picked a VP that wants to segregate a country into ethnic and sectarian territories in Iraq. Biden scares me more than McCain does.
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 2:58 pm
What is even more frightening is the Arab leadership in Iraq already discussed proposals similar to what Joe Biden wants to do and crossed them off because of severe inadequacies in those options (such as oil being located geographically and would make certain ethnic groups rich and certain groups very poor). Even mentioning such an idea to them today would be worse than slapping them in the face.
Now they did end up adopting a bit of a modified version of what Biden suggested, but what I don’t understand is that Biden started pushing his foreign policy AFTER they already went through his idea and moved on. The entire situation reeks of arrogance, or ignorance. Either one I’m not too happy about.
By: v02468 on September 14, 2008
at 3:31 pm
When George Washington became Preisdent, the US population was 3,929,214. Doubtful that he ran anything incredibly huge before becoming President. When Lincoln became President, the population was 31,443,321. Neither were in charge of very large populations of people. To insult Palin as “just a small town leader” is an insult to her and to small towns.
Palin’s critics don’t want a small-town person “running the country” because they don’t want “the little people” to be leading the country. They’d rather have the elite and anointed “smart people” do the work of centralizing everything because “the smart people” know how to run the country better than those who are actually not professional politicians and don’t know a thing about small town Americans.
Makes me sick the disdain people have for middle Americans and small towns.
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 4:26 pm
Doug,
to argue the size of the country or just about any socio-demographic data from that long ago as supporting or not supporting the validity of a candidacy is a poor argument. The issues and complexity from then until now are completely different. What makes a good President now is not necessarily what made a good one then.
I am also not hating on Palin b/c she is from a small town, and I am certainly not saying she is not a brilliant person, but the fact still remains that her experience is from a relatively homogenistic environment that is minimally complicated compared to nearly any other state in the country. It has nothing to do with disdain for middle America, or accusing people from small town as being less smart than others.
It has everything to do with the fact that we are world’s largest super power, and that cities, not small towns are where culture and power are located, created, and exported to the rest of the country, regardless of what nation you come from. That will never change, and is absolutely key in today’s very complicated economy and global society. This has nothing to do with spite or disliking ‘little people’ is has to do with qualifications and beliefs. In my opinion, she has neither, and that is very frightening given McCain’s age and health history. Even though I am not a fan of Biden’s history on Iraq, I am at least confident that he knows what the Bush Doctrine is and has an opinion on it.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 8:45 pm
McClaren said it well in the article you linked… we are in a pluralistic and post-modern society, and neither McCain or Palin have given any indication that they understand that in terms of their beliefs, experience, or background.
An us v. them mindset is what gets the church in trouble, and it’s what got the Bush administration ( in my opinion, of course, you a free to differ) in a ton of trouble. The combination of an old guard mentality with someone who not only lacks experience, but whose meager experience is far off in Alaska, is a risky proposition for a multi-cultural, global, and pluralistic society.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 8:49 pm
normally i would comment, but we just have a long list of talking point here that don’t mean anything. the fact of the matter is that we don’t know the truth about any of these people. we know what the media, their surregates, and their web sites say. we know what their speach writters say. the truth is that people with more money and more influnce are running both these guys. pick your poison.
By: Tom D on September 14, 2008
at 10:00 pm
Amy, I understand that you wish to be charitable in what you’re saying. But after reading your response several times, I can’t shake what feels to me to be a disdain for those whom you consider the “unsophisticated” people who don’t live in cities or come from small towns. The world is complicated, therefore unless you’ve got “city experience” you shouldn’t be President? How is that not insulting? I’ve never really been insulted by anything you’ve written until this. I know you mean no harm, and it’s text on a blog instead of a conversation, so I’m certain there is misunderstanding.
What I don’t understand is that those critical of the “experience” of any candidate misses something very important: mentors, advisors, and Cabinet members. Not sure that I care really that Palin has a lot of “experience” with foreign affairs, but she better be able to know who does and pick them to be part of those around her. Wise people don’t know everything, they have good judgment on how they utilize those who know the things and have the experience they do not.
By: Doug on September 14, 2008
at 10:50 pm
P.S. McCain’s mom is 96. So even though he’s had cancer (which generally you don’t just drop dead overnight from), I think it is a weak argument to suppose his death. That should be off the table. P.S.S. I think the best reason Palin was a good pick is that people are talking about her and Obama and not McCain and Obama.
By: bek on September 14, 2008
at 10:56 pm
bek was Tom D by the way.
By: Tom D on September 14, 2008
at 10:57 pm
PSSS. I don’t remember the right attacking Hillary too much. Most of the attacks that people blame the right for during the Dem. primary were actually from Clinton and Obama supporters. Why would the right attack a Dem. during their primary?
By: Tom D on September 14, 2008
at 11:00 pm
Tom D:
She was attacked fairly regularly, but by the more out there radio pundits. I think the mainstream republicans quite wisely, steered clear and let them shoot at each other. As much as I enjoyed it, and find it funny, it is still annoying. I am thinking particulary of Smerconish and Limbaugh with his operation chaos nonsense.
As for speech writers, those in charge, etc. you are 100% correct, and that is the substance of what I was getting at with my original post, Palin has things about her that make her a strong candidate, and her PR people are doing a disservice to her by only talking about things that are irrelevant such as her family life, or absurd as a qualification (the title of my post).
It does sound a bit morbid to talk about death, but I fear the same thing with Obama…. it’s a reality that if they die, the VP is up. I can think of no one more likely to be assassinated than Obama, b/c he is so polarizing.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 11:31 pm
also…. no question, Palin as a choice is pure political genius, I love it. It makes things so much more interesting
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 11:33 pm
Doug, I cannot help but wonder if you thoroughly read what I wrote above, so here are some quotes:
“That being said, Palin is a brilliant move for the McCain campaign, and if you are a more conservative Republican, there are wonderful things about her as a candidate, but her “executive experience” is not one of them.”
“Palin, while I disagree with most of her policy, has some clear and raw leadership ability, so to tout her “executive experience,” is a disservice to her good attributes and is a disservice to Obama as well. ”
“Now, with Palin on the ticket, she is being “dumbed” down as a candidate by being referred to as having “more experience than Obama and Biden combined…”
“Some on the right are doing a disservice to women both outside of their party (Hillary) and to those within their party (Palin) by pigeon holing them into categories and ignoring the whole scope of the candidate”
Doug I don’t think you are doing this on purpose, but you are arguing against things I didn’t say, because there are no arguments against the things I actually did say.
It’s fine if you want to support Sarah Palin, but you cannot say you support her b/c of her experience, because it is simply not there. Even though I support Obama, I do not say i support him on his experience in a traditional political sense. It is based on his policies and record of general leadership.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 11:46 pm
Amy, I was referring to your reply to my comments, not your post. Sorry for not making that clear.
By: xfree9 on September 14, 2008
at 11:53 pm
Either way:
“I am also not hating on Palin b/c she is from a small town, and I am certainly not saying she is not a brilliant person, but the fact still remains that her experience is from a relatively homogenistic environment that is minimally complicated compared to nearly any other state in the country.”
You can argue that despite this fact she can still be a good VP, but you cannot argue that this is evidence that she will be a good VP.
By: amybaker on September 14, 2008
at 11:56 pm
The assassination thing may be true, but with one catch. With the number of people who want to kill the president just because he is the president, degree to which Obama would be more likely to be assassinated can’t be that much more. Let’s say 1 million people want to kill the president just because he’s the president. It would be like saying 10 thousand more people want to kill the president because he is divisive. By the way, in modern politics, every president is divisive. If McCain gets elected, I think these nuts that think McCain is GW all over again are just as likely to want to kill McCain as the people you are thinking about would want to kill Obama. (I think the number of times I used the words assassinate, kill, McCain, and Obama now have flagged your blog with the Homeland Security)
By: Tom D on September 15, 2008
at 12:02 am
In the future I will use code words like hug = kill to prevent big brother type monitoring.
By: Tom D on September 15, 2008
at 12:05 am
Ha!!!! I am literally laughing hysterically, and I almost deleted my original comment b/c I subconsciously was picturing a dark room with a panel of screens buzzing, and my license picture and personal info flashing as a bell rang and lights flashed.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 12:05 am
“PR people are doing a disservice to her by only talking about things that are irrelevant such as her family life…”
Family life isn’t relevant?
By: xfree9 on September 15, 2008
at 6:43 am
It wouldn’t be as relevant as her positions and political history. Especially her record of being separate from corruption (at least some people think so).
By: v02468 on September 15, 2008
at 7:10 am
I agree that it’s not the only important thing, but it is a strong suit for her, something most politicians don’t quite have.
By: xfree9 on September 15, 2008
at 7:14 am
When I say it isn’t relevant, here is what I mean by that….
1. It’s illegal for potential employers to ask you how many kids you have, what your childcare situation is, whether or not you have aging parents, and when you plan on getting pregnant. So, why do we set a different standard for the #2 position in the land?
2. Repeatedly within the hours following McCain’s announcement, up until now, she is most commonly referred to by the following monikers in her campaign and the media…
1 mother of five
2. baby with downs
3. son in Iraq
4. more exec. experience than obama and biden combined
5. took on her own party in alaska
Of those five characteristics, only #5 is truly relevant to her candidacy, b/c as I pointed out earlier, #4 is a poor argument and 1-3 while, they might be cute media photo-ops, have little to do with policy beliefs.
This is the issue with the media and women in politics, and it is being fed to the media, by the campaign itself. Women are always treated differently, (in an unjust way, not in a “different strengths” sort of way). No one lists family issues as the top five most frequent comments about McCain, Obama, or Biden as their qualifications for candidacy.
Yes, Biden’s tragedy with his first wife is mentioned. Yes, Obama’s kids smile from the stage, and Yes, McCain’s kids and family history, are sometimes mentioned, but never, never in the same way as Palin is treated. She is being presented as a “safe” first Republican woman for a major ticket. It’s the same vein where middle aged upper class white women listen to eminem, but no other rap (that demographic bracket were the #1 biggest purchaser’s of his album following his movie) He’s “cute” to them, and is a “safe” introduction to that entertainment genre. Regardless of whether or not that is true.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 8:59 am
so we need a sophisticated woman, not a standard, “of the people” type of person? Great! More of the same in Washington!
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 11:48 am
I never once called her unsophisticated, seriously, where do you get that? I have said it over, over, over, and over again, it’s not about what she is at her core, it’s about how she is being portrayed. That is the problem.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 1:58 pm
Come on Doug.
By: Meade on September 15, 2008
at 2:02 pm
It’s not fair to argue against something someone hasn’t said. In fact is taking great pains to NOT say.
By: Meade on September 15, 2008
at 2:17 pm
I don’t think you’ve said that specifically about her, but you are greatly implying that it takes somebody sophisticated to be VP. I kinda get what you’re saying, to a point. My biggest concern is thepopular elitist attitude (not by you in this post) that there are only certain people who know how to “run a country,” and bring “one of the people” is not only not a qualification, it is looked down upon. The words you are using echo those sentimentwhether you realize it or not.
I’m sure in a conversation I’d be less offended, so please forgive me for pushing it. But I’m not sure you realize what is inherent in the words you are writing. But again, I’m sure it’s not meant to be harmful toward anybody in particular.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 3:04 pm
Okay. But you realize inherent in your comments is the idea that someone “of the people” is not sophisticated. Don’t you think there are only certain people who are able to run a country? The trouble is the word sophisticated. If by that you mean educated and clever then yes you absolutely need that to be VP.
If you mean someone who is an “A-list” type then obviously no it’s not a requirement.
By: Meade on September 15, 2008
at 3:14 pm
yes, we agree. It does take somebody with certain qualifications. One of Palin’s strong points is that she’s “one of us,” not a Washingtonian politician. To me, that’s worth way more than experience. She’ll either get the experience first hand, and/or she’ll have experienced leaders around her.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 3:28 pm
What does that even mean? “one of us.”
I implied nothing of the sort, you really need to read what I am actually writing. You are reading between the lines to connect dots that are not even there. In all honesty Doug, when debating, it seems as though unless someone agrees with you 100% you insist that they are saying something they are not, so that you can debate points that are not even given.
I would reiterate it again, but it’s useless to redress the same comment 100 different ways when you will still insist that something was stated/implied/ indicated that was not there.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 3:57 pm
“It’s not fair to argue against something someone hasn’t said. In fact is taking great pains to NOT say.”
“In all honesty Doug, when debating, it seems as though unless someone agrees with you 100% you insist that they are saying something they are not, so that you can debate points that are not even given.”
That would be called a Straw Man argument.
At some point, depending on whether politics make me insane, maybe as early as this week, I will deliver on the promised “Logical Fallacies” post that I thought we needed some months ago.
By: Joel on September 15, 2008
at 4:06 pm
sweetness.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 4:09 pm
amy, I’ve never said that if somebody doesn’t agree with me 100% that they are saying something they aren’t. The words “it seems” is critical here, and perhaps I shouldve used those words for you. A conversation is more than just the literal words. Reading between the lines is a part of the conversation. Sometimes we are right, sometimes we are wrong about it.
A few months ago you and others pointed out to me that I was “coming off” in such a way that I wasn’t aware of. Never did I state in words the sentiment you claimed, yet you were still appropriate in mentioning how the words I was using were being taken. I’m simply doing the same here, and over and over again I’ve also given you the benefit of the doubt that mere text is often not enough and I’d probably the source of the debate here.
Do I believe you wish to demonize Palin? No. Do I think you value her family life and upbringing? Yes. But the argument you have made “seems like” it smacks of leftist elitism because that’s all I hear from the left (and I do read their stuff, too), and I’m very familiar with their arguments. Hours was little different. It lacks the arrogance factor, but the argument is pretty much the same.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 4:14 pm
Oops, “yours” and “is” instead of I’d.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 4:23 pm
you’re all a bunch of women
well, at least.. nevermind.
By: v02468 on September 15, 2008
at 4:32 pm
“so we need a sophisticated woman, not a standard, “of the people” type of person? Great! More of the same in Washington!”
Doug I’m just going to pick on you a minute here–this is an example of what everyone is up in arms against when you make these arguments. First off, no one even came close to making this kind of argument. This was like a campaign advert level of leap. As you now know, Ame was in no sense talking about whether or not SP’s domesticity would make her more or less apt to be what “we” “need” in Washington. Her point, for the record, was that these were things that are and should be considered to be at best irrelevant as factors for her job performance, and any potential employer would be in huge trouble for inquiring, hence the interviewee’s insistence on making them factors was/is offensive at best. So that’s a little bit of a “straw man” there–attacking a point (“more of the same”) that no one was actually making.
Secondly you could get in deep DEEP trouble with your second logical fallacy–the false dichotomy of the sophisticated woman vs. “woman of the people.” I’m not going to dwell on this because I know you aren’t like this but the implications of this ill-considered statement run pretty deeply.
Third, bonus question–what the double-hockey-sticks is a “standard” person?
I know, sort of, where you’re coming from, and I know you’re not a bad dude, it’s just that your arguing technique as it comes across in print is a little rough around the edges.
I’m not writing this for a response as I’m going home, just throwing in a little unwanted 3rd party advice.
By: Joel on September 15, 2008
at 4:42 pm
Never unwanted. Thanks for the thoughts, Joel. I think I can describe my thoughts on the dichotomy, but I’m typing on my iPhone at the moment. Suffice of to say that I was pointing out that dichotomy as one of the left, not my own. I was using terms they use, not categories in which I think of women.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 5:02 pm
“double hockey sticks” totally going on the christian swear words list.
By: Meade on September 15, 2008
at 5:52 pm
Amy, you wrote the following:
#14: “…the fact still remains that her experience is from a relatively homogenistic environment that is minimally complicated compared to nearly any other state in the country…”
“It has everything to do with the fact that we are world’s largest super power, and that cities, not small towns are where culture and power are located, created, and exported to the rest of the country, regardless of what nation you come from.”
#21: “PR people are doing a disservice to her by only talking about things that are irrelevant such as her family life…”
Let me indict myself a bit (and I think you’d agree): I’ve argued very much in this post in the style of a “fightin’ fundie.” It’s probably the least effective way to debate/argue something, and it doesn’t look favorably on me. But until I had some time to re-read my comments and hear thoughts from others, I didn’t quite realize it.
The above comments stood out to me, and I took these and commented on them. Like I mentioned before, I don’t think you hate her, but these comments seem to me to be condescending (especially with the first quote). So in the same way I don’t/can’t always see how I’m coming off or how the words I’m saying can seem to be, I’d like to point out the way you’re coming off with the way you have worded some of those statements.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 6:01 pm
“double hockey sticks” totally going on the christian swear words list.”
DEFINITELY!!!
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 6:05 pm
It’s not condescending to say Alaska is much more homogeneous if it actually is. Our nation is pluralistic and diverse. Alaska not so much. That’s not opinion and therefore can’t be condescending.
By: Meade on September 15, 2008
at 6:19 pm
I dunno, my Alaska experience on our trip was VERY diverse! I don’t think anybody but us was even from the U.S.
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 8:21 pm
so that’s what was wrong with my food. I was wondering why I got boiled noodles and fish at 4 a.m. I don’t think I can fly china air ever again! I am sticking with the Brits next time.
By: amybaker on September 15, 2008
at 8:33 pm
I just read an interesting comparison of the “executive experience” of Palin and Bill Clinton when he was governor:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122100776282517559.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks
By: Doug on September 15, 2008
at 9:12 pm
I think we all need a hug. (not my code word for kill). There is a pretty heated debate here about a woman, that despite how much press she is getting (good and bad), we don’t know a lot about. My gut says she’s pretty savvy, and will do just fine. Good leaders surround themselves with experts, and that doesn’t always work (i.e. Kennedy/LBJ in Vietnam, Bay of Pigs…). We will get a better picture in the debates. I don’t think a fair minded person can judge her based on the interview with Charlie Gibson. If you are being intellectually honest, that interview was a brow beating where Charlie Gibson played the haughty professor putting words in the mouth of his student. Also, if you are a fair minded person, her interview with Sean Hannity won’t be a good judge either because Sean will likely put words in her mouth as well. The debates are going to be a true test. Plus, if we could ever get these side-by-side town hall type things going and cut out all these stupid campaign commercials, I think people would get a great picture of what these two tickets are trying to accomplish. For once I believe we have two candidates for president that have some credibility in what they say. I honestly believe that Obama and McCain want to do what they say and are both actually trying to change things. That being said, give them both a fair shake.
By: danielst3 on September 15, 2008
at 11:29 pm
Within the first 72 hrs of the SP 4 VP pick i was convinced the GOP had made an absolutely awful mistake. and time may still show that they did. [I'm speaking purely of the PR aspect of the question, not the qualification side (on which i'm pretty resolute).] But now it looks like, by picking someone who is an incredible lightning rod, they’ve injected something into the campaign that the Dems had and they totally did not.
Qualification-wise, everything I’ve ever heard about Alaska would lead me to believe that there’s basically no correlation between what happens there and and what happens literally anywhere else.
By: Joel on September 16, 2008
at 8:53 am
Either it was a brilliant move or a deadly mistake. So far, seems brilliant, and I think the only deadly missile for Palin is Palin herself.
By the way, I thought we were going to see a lot of town hall debates?
By: Doug on September 16, 2008
at 8:56 am
Good point Doug. It was a huge gamble either way. I’m convinced that she’s politically worthless but that doesn’t really matter.
If I could trade a finger for never EVER seeing/hearing another political ad I would do it immediately. And I’d be an American hero.
By: Joel on September 16, 2008
at 8:58 am
Well, it’s already turned out to be POLITICALLY worthwhile, at least in the short term for the McCain campaign. What we’re waiting on is whether it’s worthwhile for the United States if they win.
By: Doug on September 16, 2008
at 9:11 am
1. I’m still upset Hilary didn’t win the nomination… she got robbed.
Some things are more important than running for President Obama… LIKE MY EMAIL!!!! 
2. I only like Palin cause she looks like Tina Fey… I know NOTHING else about her, other than the skit Tina fey did which killed me
3. I wrote Obama a letter the other day cause he’s my senator and I had some problems with things so I had to e-mail him… which was weird. I bet he’ll ignore it since hes running for President and stuff.
4. Everyone keeps saying “if anything happens to McCain… ” dude what if something happens to Obama? …Biden? REALLY?
5. I don’t like anyone cause I still like Hilary, but I wont vote for Obama unless he e-mails me back… which was like a week ago and he hasn’t. And I’m upset
By: jessboulet on September 21, 2008
at 1:15 pm
If I were Hillary, I think I would’ve sunk into a despairing depression the minute Palin was announced. Poor chick.
By: amybaker on September 21, 2008
at 2:10 pm
who said she didn’t? I haven’t seen her in a while.
By: Doug on September 21, 2008
at 4:12 pm
I know… poor Hilary
Oh and Obama just e-mailed me back, hahaha so I guess I’ll vote for him. YOU WIN! I never go back on my word
By: jessboulet on September 21, 2008
at 8:25 pm
Oh and his e-mail was very nice and it SEEMED like he wrote it just for me, even though I know thats unlikely, and he supports my issue, so I like him now
By: jessboulet on September 21, 2008
at 8:30 pm