phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
John McCain - The Candidate of Senility
- Thread starter phrodeau
- Start date
killallhippies
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Posts
- 60,313
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802030007
From the January 27 edition of NBC's Meet the Press:
[begin video clip]
RUSSERT: Senator McCain, you have said repeatedly, "I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Is it a problem for your campaign that the economy is now the most important issue, one that, by your own acknowledgement, you're not well-versed on?
McCAIN: Actually, I don't know where you got that quote from. I'm very well-versed in economics.
[end video clip]
RUSSERT: Well, I'll tell you --
McCAIN: Now I know where you got that quote from. Now I know where you got the quote from.
RUSSERT: I will show you where I got the quote from. I got it from John McCain, and here it is: "McCain is refreshingly blunt when he tells me, quote, 'I'm going to be honest. I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.' " Wall Street Journal, November 26th, 2005. You repeated it to The Boston Globe in December of '07. You said it.
McCAIN: OK. Let me tell you what I was trying to say and what I meant -- and that's obvious. I spent 22 years in the military. I spent 20 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee. I've been involved in national security issues all my life. I attended the National War College. Of course I know more about national security than any other issue. That's been my entire life.
Am I smart on economics? Yes. I was chairman of the Commerce Committee. Why -- that's why people like [former Sen.] Phil Gramm [R-TX], [Sen.] Tom Coburn [R-OK] and [former Sen.] Warren Rudman [R-NH] and [former Hewlett-Packard CEO] Carly Fiorina and the real strong economic minds, [1996 Republican vice presidential nominee] Jack Kemp, the real strong minds on the economy and conservatives on the economy are supporting me. They don't think that I'm -- of course, I always have things to learn, and I continue to learn every day, but I'm very strong on the economy. And, frankly, my economic record is a lot stronger than that of the governor of Massachusetts when you look at his record as governor.
Following the debate, MSNBC's David Shuster noted McCain's response in a fact check, asserting, "John McCain was asked a question that included a quote about McCain talking about economics. And McCain denied the quote." After airing a video clip of the exchange, Shuster asserted: "Well, actually, NBC News got that quote from last month. John McCain was heard saying on December 17th in The Boston Globe and Time magazine, quote, 'The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should. I've got [former Federal Reserve chairman Alan] Greenspan's book.' " Following Shuster's fact check, MSNBC host Chris Matthews asked Newsweek's Howard Fineman, "Howard, the 'Straight Talk Express': Did it stall tonight? Was it derailed by his denial of a quote that's on the record?" In his response, Fineman asserted, "You can't pretend that you didn't say something you said. You just can't wish it away."
From the January 27 edition of NBC's Meet the Press:
[begin video clip]
RUSSERT: Senator McCain, you have said repeatedly, "I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." Is it a problem for your campaign that the economy is now the most important issue, one that, by your own acknowledgement, you're not well-versed on?
McCAIN: Actually, I don't know where you got that quote from. I'm very well-versed in economics.
[end video clip]
RUSSERT: Well, I'll tell you --
McCAIN: Now I know where you got that quote from. Now I know where you got the quote from.
RUSSERT: I will show you where I got the quote from. I got it from John McCain, and here it is: "McCain is refreshingly blunt when he tells me, quote, 'I'm going to be honest. I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.' " Wall Street Journal, November 26th, 2005. You repeated it to The Boston Globe in December of '07. You said it.
McCAIN: OK. Let me tell you what I was trying to say and what I meant -- and that's obvious. I spent 22 years in the military. I spent 20 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee. I've been involved in national security issues all my life. I attended the National War College. Of course I know more about national security than any other issue. That's been my entire life.
Am I smart on economics? Yes. I was chairman of the Commerce Committee. Why -- that's why people like [former Sen.] Phil Gramm [R-TX], [Sen.] Tom Coburn [R-OK] and [former Sen.] Warren Rudman [R-NH] and [former Hewlett-Packard CEO] Carly Fiorina and the real strong economic minds, [1996 Republican vice presidential nominee] Jack Kemp, the real strong minds on the economy and conservatives on the economy are supporting me. They don't think that I'm -- of course, I always have things to learn, and I continue to learn every day, but I'm very strong on the economy. And, frankly, my economic record is a lot stronger than that of the governor of Massachusetts when you look at his record as governor.
Following the debate, MSNBC's David Shuster noted McCain's response in a fact check, asserting, "John McCain was asked a question that included a quote about McCain talking about economics. And McCain denied the quote." After airing a video clip of the exchange, Shuster asserted: "Well, actually, NBC News got that quote from last month. John McCain was heard saying on December 17th in The Boston Globe and Time magazine, quote, 'The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should. I've got [former Federal Reserve chairman Alan] Greenspan's book.' " Following Shuster's fact check, MSNBC host Chris Matthews asked Newsweek's Howard Fineman, "Howard, the 'Straight Talk Express': Did it stall tonight? Was it derailed by his denial of a quote that's on the record?" In his response, Fineman asserted, "You can't pretend that you didn't say something you said. You just can't wish it away."
Ham Murabi
Plumbing the Depths
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Posts
- 23,159
Of course he's senile. Shit, he considered being Kerry's running mate.
If that's not a sign ...
If that's not a sign ...
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
Playing for the other team again here...
This is Manufactured Outrage. I understood what he meant. I don't think McCain's senile.
Let's move on.
This is Manufactured Outrage. I understood what he meant. I don't think McCain's senile.
Let's move on.
Cade Is Here
Troll Magnet
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Posts
- 25,253
Did you of the black power freaks here make that?
Karen Kraft
29
- Joined
- May 18, 2002
- Posts
- 36,253
YAY !!!!
I told you so:
Tired Yet Perennial Donkey Allegations [the other guy is]:
CORRUPT
STUPID
SENILE
Just as I said: That's all the Democrats ever come up with when facing a strong Republican candidate. It fails them everytime. But it makes them feel intellectual. Go for it.
I told you so:
Tired Yet Perennial Donkey Allegations [the other guy is]:
CORRUPT
STUPID
SENILE
Just as I said: That's all the Democrats ever come up with when facing a strong Republican candidate. It fails them everytime. But it makes them feel intellectual. Go for it.
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
What fucking Anime America are you living in?
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121745962594698731.html?mod=todays_columnists
WONDER LAND
By DANIEL HENNINGER
Is John McCain Stupid?
July 31, 2008; Page A13
Is John McCain losing it?
On Sunday, he said on national television that to solve Social Security "everything's on the table," which of course means raising payroll taxes. On July 7 in Denver he said: "Senator Obama will raise your taxes. I won't."
This isn't a flip-flop. It's a sex-change operation.
He got back to the subject Tuesday in Reno, Nev. Reporters asked about the Sunday tax comments. Mr. McCain replied, "The worst thing you could do is raise people's payroll taxes, my God!" Then he was asked about working with Democrats to fix Social Security, and he repeated, "everything has to be on the table." But how can . . .? Oh never mind.
Yesterday he was in Aurora, Colo., to wit: "On Social Security, he [Sen. Obama] wants to raise Social Security taxes. I am opposed to raising taxes on Social Security. I want to fix the system without raising taxes."
What I'm asking is, does John McCain have the mental focus, the intellectual discipline, to avoid being out-slicked by Barack Obama, if he isn't abandoned by his own voters?
It's not just taxes. Recently the subject came up of Al Gore's assertion that the U.S. could get its energy solely from renewables in 10 years. Sen. McCain said: "If the vice president says it's doable, I believe it's doable." What!!?? In a later interview, Mr. McCain said he hadn't read "all the specifics" of the Gore plan and now, "I don't think it's doable without nuclear power." It just sounds loopy.
Then this week in San Francisco, in an interview with the Chronicle, Sen. McCain called Nancy Pelosi an "inspiration to millions of Americans." Notwithstanding his promises to "work with the other side," this is a politically obtuse thing to say in the middle of a campaign. Would Bill Clinton, running for president in 1996 after losing control of the House, have called Newt Gingrich an "inspiration"? House Minority Leader John Boehner, facing a 10-to-20 seat loss in November, must be gagging.
The one thing -- arguably the only thing -- the McCain candidacy has going for it is a sense among voters that they don't know what Barack Obama stands for or believes. Why then would Mr. McCain give voters reason to wonder the same thing about himself? You're supposed to sow doubt about the other guy, not do it to yourself.
Yes, Sen. McCain must somehow appeal to independents and blue-collar Hillary Democrats. A degree of pandering to the center is inevitable. But this stuff isn't pandering; it's simply stupid. Al Gore's own climate allies separated themselves from his preposterous free-of-oil-in-10-years whopper. Sen. McCain saying off-handedly that it's "doable" is, in a word, thoughtless.
Speaker Pelosi heads a House with a 9% approval. To let her off the hook before the election reflects similar loss of thought.
The forces arrayed against Sen. McCain's candidacy are formidable: an unpopular president, the near impossibility of extending Republican White House rule for three terms, the GOP trailing in races at every level, a listless fundraising base, doubtful sentiments about the war, a flailing economy.
The generic Democratic presidential candidate should win handily. Barack Obama, though vulnerable at the margin, is a very strong candidate. This will be a turnout election. To win, Mr. McCain needs every Republican vote he can hold.
Why make it harder than it has to be? Given such statements on Social Security taxes, Al Gore and the "inspirational" Speaker Pelosi, is there a reason why Rush Limbaugh should not spend August teeing off on Mr. McCain?
Why as well shouldn't the Obama camp exploit all of this? If Sen. Obama's "inexperience" is Mr. McCain's ace in the hole, why not trump that by asking, "Does Sen. McCain know his own mind?"
In this sports-crazed country, everyone has learned a lot about what it takes to win. They've heard and seen it proven repeatedly that to achieve greatness, to win the big one, an athlete has to be ready to "put in the work."
John McCain isn't doing that, yet. He's competing as if he expects the other side to lose it for him. Sen. McCain is a famously undisciplined politician. Someone in the McCain circle had better do some straight talking to the candidate. He's not some 19-year-old tennis player who's going to win the U.S. presidential Open on raw talent and the other guy's errors. He's not that good.
There is a reason the American people the past 100 years elevated only two sitting senators into the White House -- JFK and Warren Harding. It's because they believe most senators, adept at compulsive compromise, have no political compass and will sell them out. Now voters have to do what they prefer not to. Yes, Sen. McCain has honor and country. Another month of illogical, impolitic remarks and Sen. McCain will erase even that. Absent a coherent message for voters, he will be one-on-one with Barack Obama in the fall. He will lose.
Write to henninger@wsj.com
WONDER LAND
By DANIEL HENNINGER
Is John McCain Stupid?
July 31, 2008; Page A13
Is John McCain losing it?
On Sunday, he said on national television that to solve Social Security "everything's on the table," which of course means raising payroll taxes. On July 7 in Denver he said: "Senator Obama will raise your taxes. I won't."
This isn't a flip-flop. It's a sex-change operation.
He got back to the subject Tuesday in Reno, Nev. Reporters asked about the Sunday tax comments. Mr. McCain replied, "The worst thing you could do is raise people's payroll taxes, my God!" Then he was asked about working with Democrats to fix Social Security, and he repeated, "everything has to be on the table." But how can . . .? Oh never mind.
Yesterday he was in Aurora, Colo., to wit: "On Social Security, he [Sen. Obama] wants to raise Social Security taxes. I am opposed to raising taxes on Social Security. I want to fix the system without raising taxes."
What I'm asking is, does John McCain have the mental focus, the intellectual discipline, to avoid being out-slicked by Barack Obama, if he isn't abandoned by his own voters?
It's not just taxes. Recently the subject came up of Al Gore's assertion that the U.S. could get its energy solely from renewables in 10 years. Sen. McCain said: "If the vice president says it's doable, I believe it's doable." What!!?? In a later interview, Mr. McCain said he hadn't read "all the specifics" of the Gore plan and now, "I don't think it's doable without nuclear power." It just sounds loopy.
Then this week in San Francisco, in an interview with the Chronicle, Sen. McCain called Nancy Pelosi an "inspiration to millions of Americans." Notwithstanding his promises to "work with the other side," this is a politically obtuse thing to say in the middle of a campaign. Would Bill Clinton, running for president in 1996 after losing control of the House, have called Newt Gingrich an "inspiration"? House Minority Leader John Boehner, facing a 10-to-20 seat loss in November, must be gagging.
The one thing -- arguably the only thing -- the McCain candidacy has going for it is a sense among voters that they don't know what Barack Obama stands for or believes. Why then would Mr. McCain give voters reason to wonder the same thing about himself? You're supposed to sow doubt about the other guy, not do it to yourself.
Yes, Sen. McCain must somehow appeal to independents and blue-collar Hillary Democrats. A degree of pandering to the center is inevitable. But this stuff isn't pandering; it's simply stupid. Al Gore's own climate allies separated themselves from his preposterous free-of-oil-in-10-years whopper. Sen. McCain saying off-handedly that it's "doable" is, in a word, thoughtless.
Speaker Pelosi heads a House with a 9% approval. To let her off the hook before the election reflects similar loss of thought.
The forces arrayed against Sen. McCain's candidacy are formidable: an unpopular president, the near impossibility of extending Republican White House rule for three terms, the GOP trailing in races at every level, a listless fundraising base, doubtful sentiments about the war, a flailing economy.
The generic Democratic presidential candidate should win handily. Barack Obama, though vulnerable at the margin, is a very strong candidate. This will be a turnout election. To win, Mr. McCain needs every Republican vote he can hold.
Why make it harder than it has to be? Given such statements on Social Security taxes, Al Gore and the "inspirational" Speaker Pelosi, is there a reason why Rush Limbaugh should not spend August teeing off on Mr. McCain?
Why as well shouldn't the Obama camp exploit all of this? If Sen. Obama's "inexperience" is Mr. McCain's ace in the hole, why not trump that by asking, "Does Sen. McCain know his own mind?"
In this sports-crazed country, everyone has learned a lot about what it takes to win. They've heard and seen it proven repeatedly that to achieve greatness, to win the big one, an athlete has to be ready to "put in the work."
John McCain isn't doing that, yet. He's competing as if he expects the other side to lose it for him. Sen. McCain is a famously undisciplined politician. Someone in the McCain circle had better do some straight talking to the candidate. He's not some 19-year-old tennis player who's going to win the U.S. presidential Open on raw talent and the other guy's errors. He's not that good.
There is a reason the American people the past 100 years elevated only two sitting senators into the White House -- JFK and Warren Harding. It's because they believe most senators, adept at compulsive compromise, have no political compass and will sell them out. Now voters have to do what they prefer not to. Yes, Sen. McCain has honor and country. Another month of illogical, impolitic remarks and Sen. McCain will erase even that. Absent a coherent message for voters, he will be one-on-one with Barack Obama in the fall. He will lose.
Write to henninger@wsj.com
Slowlane
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Posts
- 13,307
There have been similar threads started about Obama. I thought they were ridiculous as well. It's easy to make anybody look bad, or good, using short clips out of context.
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
Someone's on their meds.
U
unregistered
Guest
Slowlane
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Posts
- 13,307
That's why it was so easy to pick up on that. Maybe you need to take yours?
Slowlane
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Posts
- 13,307
Standbys one and all.
Dixon Carter Lee
Headliner
- Joined
- Nov 22, 1999
- Posts
- 48,682
When you put all those people in the same basket you're choking on Fox Cock.
U
unregistered
Guest
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
From Wiki Answers:
"By eye witness accounts [Vietnam war] POW's were often moved from one camp to a secret camp and never stayed in the same place for long. They understood the language, walked in a zombie-like fashion, were not bound and were hardly guarded at all, but followed their enemy leader to the next camp. Most were extremely weak and obviously had severe mental break-downs.
…Many soldiers who served in the Vietnam War have terrible nightmares, many seek out psychological counselling to try and beat "the werewolf" and the "hidden closet syndrome". Night sweats occur, flash-backs, and a never-ending unsettled soul. …Many were left with broken bodies and broken minds."
"By eye witness accounts [Vietnam war] POW's were often moved from one camp to a secret camp and never stayed in the same place for long. They understood the language, walked in a zombie-like fashion, were not bound and were hardly guarded at all, but followed their enemy leader to the next camp. Most were extremely weak and obviously had severe mental break-downs.
…Many soldiers who served in the Vietnam War have terrible nightmares, many seek out psychological counselling to try and beat "the werewolf" and the "hidden closet syndrome". Night sweats occur, flash-backs, and a never-ending unsettled soul. …Many were left with broken bodies and broken minds."
Slowlane
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Posts
- 13,307
If you are trying to say what I think you are then you are truly misguided.
You don't say!
Maybe you should start a thread about it. Some people might have missed the news.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/30/politics/animal/main4401085.shtml
Manifestly Unserious
By Steve Benen
Aug 30, 2008
(Political Animal) MANIFESTLY UNSERIOUS.... At this point, I realize I'm belaboring the point. "Sarah Palin is an awful choice for a running mate," I can hear you saying, "We get it."
…
Palin's qualifications are, to a very real degree, secondary to the issue at hand. What matters most right now is John McCain's comically dangerous sense of judgment. He picked a running mate he met once for 15 minutes, who's been the governor of a small state for a year and a half, and who is in the midst of an abuse-of-power investigation in which she appears to have lied rather blatantly. She has no obvious expertise in any area, and no record of any kind of federal issues. McCain doesn't care.
Sensible people of sound mind and character simply don't do things like this. Leaders don't do things like this. It's the height of arrogance. It's manifestly unserious. It's reckless and irresponsible. It mocks the political process. Faced with a major presidential test, McCain thought it wise to tell an imprudent joke of lasting consequence.
Kevin (Drum of Mother Jones) noted:
This is all part of what I was talking about the other day when I noted that McCain is running such a palpably unserious campaign. Steve Schmidt seems solely interested in winning the daily news cycle; his staff spends its time gleefuly churning out juvenile attack videos; McCain himself has retreated into robotic incantations of simpleminded talking points; and now he's chosen a manifestly unqualified VP that he knows nothing about. I've honestly never seen anything like it.
No one has; it's without precedent in modern American politics. The novelty and gimmickry might hold sway with those who base their votes on who they'd like to have a beer with, but that doesn't make it any less of a joke.
(National Review's Andrew) Sullivan added, "Palin isn't the issue here. McCain's judgment is. It's completely off the wall. Is there something wrong with him?"
That may sound like a flippant question, but it deserves a serious answer. Is there something wrong with him? Might this be evidence of some kind of impulse problem, as reflected in his shoot-first, think-second approach to foreign policy?
When I think about the respect that John McCain had worked so hard to develop, the stature he'd taken years to cultivate, and the reputation he'd built his career on, it's breathtaking to see him throw it all away. If there's a more complete collapse in modern political times, from hero to clown, I can't think of it.
We're poised to learn a great deal about Sarah Palin, but we've just learned even more about John McCain. He's fundamentally unsuited for the presidency.
Copyright 2008
Manifestly Unserious
By Steve Benen
Aug 30, 2008
(Political Animal) MANIFESTLY UNSERIOUS.... At this point, I realize I'm belaboring the point. "Sarah Palin is an awful choice for a running mate," I can hear you saying, "We get it."
…
Palin's qualifications are, to a very real degree, secondary to the issue at hand. What matters most right now is John McCain's comically dangerous sense of judgment. He picked a running mate he met once for 15 minutes, who's been the governor of a small state for a year and a half, and who is in the midst of an abuse-of-power investigation in which she appears to have lied rather blatantly. She has no obvious expertise in any area, and no record of any kind of federal issues. McCain doesn't care.
Sensible people of sound mind and character simply don't do things like this. Leaders don't do things like this. It's the height of arrogance. It's manifestly unserious. It's reckless and irresponsible. It mocks the political process. Faced with a major presidential test, McCain thought it wise to tell an imprudent joke of lasting consequence.
Kevin (Drum of Mother Jones) noted:
This is all part of what I was talking about the other day when I noted that McCain is running such a palpably unserious campaign. Steve Schmidt seems solely interested in winning the daily news cycle; his staff spends its time gleefuly churning out juvenile attack videos; McCain himself has retreated into robotic incantations of simpleminded talking points; and now he's chosen a manifestly unqualified VP that he knows nothing about. I've honestly never seen anything like it.
No one has; it's without precedent in modern American politics. The novelty and gimmickry might hold sway with those who base their votes on who they'd like to have a beer with, but that doesn't make it any less of a joke.
(National Review's Andrew) Sullivan added, "Palin isn't the issue here. McCain's judgment is. It's completely off the wall. Is there something wrong with him?"
That may sound like a flippant question, but it deserves a serious answer. Is there something wrong with him? Might this be evidence of some kind of impulse problem, as reflected in his shoot-first, think-second approach to foreign policy?
When I think about the respect that John McCain had worked so hard to develop, the stature he'd taken years to cultivate, and the reputation he'd built his career on, it's breathtaking to see him throw it all away. If there's a more complete collapse in modern political times, from hero to clown, I can't think of it.
We're poised to learn a great deal about Sarah Palin, but we've just learned even more about John McCain. He's fundamentally unsuited for the presidency.
Copyright 2008
Faneros
USA
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2007
- Posts
- 11,086
You never really do...
Slowlane
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Posts
- 13,307
This is, indisputably, one of the most ridiculous articles ever written, by anybody or about anybody.
Republican reaction to Palin:
Republicans
* Charles Krauthammer: "The Palin selection completely undercuts the argument about Obama's inexperience and readiness to lead.... To gratuitously undercut the remarkably successful 'Is he ready to lead' line of attack seems near suicidal."
* Noah Millman, presenting a defense for Palin: "I realize, of course, that she's totally unqualified to be President at this point in time. If McCain were to die in February 2009, I hope Palin would have the good sense to appoint someone who is more ready to be President to be her Vice President, on the understanding that she would then resign and be appointed Vice President by her successor."
* Ramesh Ponnuru (from the National Review) called it "tokenism," adding, "Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?"
* David Frum: "The longer I think about it, the less well this selection sits with me. And I increasingly doubt that it will prove good politics. The Palin choice looks cynical.... It's a wild gamble, undertaken by our oldest ever first-time candidate for president in hopes of changing the board of this election campaign. Maybe it will work. But maybe (and at least as likely) it will reinforce a theme that I'd be pounding home if I were the Obama campaign: that it's John McCain for all his white hair who represents the risky choice, while it is Barack Obama who offers cautious, steady, predictable governance.... If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?"
* Kathryn Jean Lopez: "As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc."
* Mark Halperin: "On the face of it, McCain has failed the ultimate test that any presidential candidate must face in picking a running mate: selecting someone who is unambiguously qualified to be president."
Alaskans
* The Daily News-Miner in Fairbanks: "She has never publicly demonstrated the kind of interest, much less expertise, in federal issues and foreign affairs that should mark a candidate for the second-highest office in the land.... Most people would acknowledge that, regardless of her charm and good intentions, Palin is not ready for the top job. McCain seems to have put his political interests ahead of the nation's when he created the possibility that she might fill it."
* State Senate President Lyda Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla: "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?"
* Dermot Cole, a longtime columnist for Alaska's second largest newspaper, The Daily News-Miner, called McCain's choice of Palin "reckless" and questioned her credentials.
* Mike Doogan, a former columnist now serving as a Democrat in the state legislature: "John McCain looked all over the United States to find the single Republican who is qualified to be, as the saying goes, a heartbeat away from the presidency, and he came up with Sarah Palin. Really? ... {L}et's be honest here. Her resume is as thin as the meat in a vending machine sandwich.... The long and short of it is this: We're not sure she's a competent governor of Alaska. And yet McCain, who is no spring chicken, has decided she's the best choice to replace him as president if he should win and then fall afoul of the Grim Reaper. Sarah Palin? Really?"
* The Anchorage Daily News' Gregg Erickson: " tends to oversimplify complex issues, has had difficulty delegating authority, and clearly has some difficulty distinguishing the line between her public responsibilities and private wishes.... It is clear that she has not paid much attention to the nitty-gritty unglamorous work of government, of gaining consensus, and making difficult compromises. She seems to be of the view that politics should be all rather simple. That often appeals to the wider public, but frustrates those who see themselves as laboring in the less glamorous parts of the vineyard."
Republicans
* Charles Krauthammer: "The Palin selection completely undercuts the argument about Obama's inexperience and readiness to lead.... To gratuitously undercut the remarkably successful 'Is he ready to lead' line of attack seems near suicidal."
* Noah Millman, presenting a defense for Palin: "I realize, of course, that she's totally unqualified to be President at this point in time. If McCain were to die in February 2009, I hope Palin would have the good sense to appoint someone who is more ready to be President to be her Vice President, on the understanding that she would then resign and be appointed Vice President by her successor."
* Ramesh Ponnuru (from the National Review) called it "tokenism," adding, "Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?"
* David Frum: "The longer I think about it, the less well this selection sits with me. And I increasingly doubt that it will prove good politics. The Palin choice looks cynical.... It's a wild gamble, undertaken by our oldest ever first-time candidate for president in hopes of changing the board of this election campaign. Maybe it will work. But maybe (and at least as likely) it will reinforce a theme that I'd be pounding home if I were the Obama campaign: that it's John McCain for all his white hair who represents the risky choice, while it is Barack Obama who offers cautious, steady, predictable governance.... If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?"
* Kathryn Jean Lopez: "As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc."
* Mark Halperin: "On the face of it, McCain has failed the ultimate test that any presidential candidate must face in picking a running mate: selecting someone who is unambiguously qualified to be president."
Alaskans
* The Daily News-Miner in Fairbanks: "She has never publicly demonstrated the kind of interest, much less expertise, in federal issues and foreign affairs that should mark a candidate for the second-highest office in the land.... Most people would acknowledge that, regardless of her charm and good intentions, Palin is not ready for the top job. McCain seems to have put his political interests ahead of the nation's when he created the possibility that she might fill it."
* State Senate President Lyda Green, a Republican from Palin's hometown of Wasilla: "She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president?"
* Dermot Cole, a longtime columnist for Alaska's second largest newspaper, The Daily News-Miner, called McCain's choice of Palin "reckless" and questioned her credentials.
* Mike Doogan, a former columnist now serving as a Democrat in the state legislature: "John McCain looked all over the United States to find the single Republican who is qualified to be, as the saying goes, a heartbeat away from the presidency, and he came up with Sarah Palin. Really? ... {L}et's be honest here. Her resume is as thin as the meat in a vending machine sandwich.... The long and short of it is this: We're not sure she's a competent governor of Alaska. And yet McCain, who is no spring chicken, has decided she's the best choice to replace him as president if he should win and then fall afoul of the Grim Reaper. Sarah Palin? Really?"
* The Anchorage Daily News' Gregg Erickson: " tends to oversimplify complex issues, has had difficulty delegating authority, and clearly has some difficulty distinguishing the line between her public responsibilities and private wishes.... It is clear that she has not paid much attention to the nitty-gritty unglamorous work of government, of gaining consensus, and making difficult compromises. She seems to be of the view that politics should be all rather simple. That often appeals to the wider public, but frustrates those who see themselves as laboring in the less glamorous parts of the vineyard."
Similar threads
