Saturday, August 30, 2008
"Scholars" as a political weapon
The Politico polled four "scholars" -- all of whom with documented ties to the Democrats -- who declared Sarah Palin less qualified than any national ticket selection in "the modern era." Technically that may be true, but barely. History tells a different story. Me, this morning:
There is also the question of history. The sainted and none-too-healthy Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt picked Henry Wallace as his running mate in 1940. Here the United States was being drawn inexorably into a world at war, and apart from being an Iowan Wallace's only relevant experience was as Roosevelt's Secretary of Agriculture. Thomas Marshall, Woodrow Wilson's running mate, had served as governor of Indiana for less than three years. When George McGovern offered Walter Mondale a seat on his ticket in 1972, Mondale had served only one term in the Senate (perhaps he proved his wisdom by turning McGovern down). [DOH! I can't believe I forgot John Edwards! Maybe he really was sucked down a black hole...] Point is, Democrats great and lame have chosen running mates who were no more qualified than Sarah Palin.
The Politico did not mention any of these men, although it did cite Spiro Agnew, who was governor of Maryland for two years, as more experienced than Palin.
One is forced to wonder whether any of these men actually had more meaningful experience than Sarah Palin has had, even if they spent a couple more years as governor or Senator. Does anybody actually think that she would be more acceptable to these historian-shills if she had been governor of Alaska for five years instead of two? The Politico's sock-puppet argument is driven more by rank sexism -- Palin does not seem experienced if you are used to seeing men in the job -- than a fair reading of history, especially the history of Democratic running mates.
18 Comments:
By 
Unknown, at
Sat Aug 30, 07:23:00 PM:
Maybe it will help to fight sexism if people judge her by the same criteria as the men: who they are on paper & who they are in person.
After all, JE was the VP candidate in 2004 - and on paper his only experience was as a one term USA Senator. However, as a person - people felt a connection to him and to what he had to say. Plus, in 2008 he was considered as serious a 'top tier' candidate for President as BO or HRC - and he still had the same level of experience.
Then there is the fact that in 2008 JB was selected in part because of his to-be-hoped connection with rural, working class, 'Regan Democrat' voters. I could see SP doing the same.
By davod, at
Sat Aug 30, 07:47:00 PM:
When Politico started I read that it was a creation of the Washington Post. If so, this explains the slanted reporting of some of the writers.
By JPMcT, at
Sat Aug 30, 07:57:00 PM:
The Politico also listed the 6 things the choice of Palin tells us about John McCain. Of course, they were all conjectural and negative. It set off a fusiladde of responses...here was mine, ehich is cogent to the present topic:
Interesting piece of conjecture...er..."journalism". As "Barack's Big Adventure" failed to make the Friday news spash it had intended, and his "greater than 16 point" predicted bump in the polls failed to materialize, I am happy for you guys at Politico that you have enough insider clout to be First Responders to the DNC talking points.
There's a job at MSNBC waiting for you guys...hey! an UPGRADE!!
Unfortunately, like Obama...it's just talk. Palin has won every election she's entered, cleaned house of corruption regardless of party and has been in political administration for years. Meanwhile, all Barack Obama has run consistently is his mouth while "community organizing" with associates of Saul Alinski in Chicago for $13,000 a year. Quite a portfolio....call it a Manifesto, if you will.
Sarah Palin is a living example of her political beliefs...whereas Obama's slogan of "change we can believe in" is actually closer to "Beliefs We Can Change".
As far as I know, Palin has no radical or Marxist connections or dear friends that she would throw under the bus when the going gets tough.
So, let's compare apples to squash...the professional loudmouth Joe Biden. Res ipsa loquitur, my friends. Are you guys implying that the nomination of the ultimate Washington insider, old white guy, plagerist, graduated-bottom-his-class windbag was not a cynical and desperate move by Obama?
Yeah...real nice piece of politcal journalism, POLITICO...your ass (as in Donkey) is hanging out a bit too much to take seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JP McT
By Who Struck John, at
Sat Aug 30, 08:08:00 PM:
To be accurate, she did lose in the primaries in a race for lieutenant governor of Alaska in 2002. But when she came back in 2006 for governor, she knocked off an incumbent governor in the primaries and a two-term former governor in the general election.
Show me one of your other examples who's done that.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Sat Aug 30, 08:18:00 PM:
Re: "The Politico's sock-puppet argument is driven more by rank sexism"
Kate Zernike in the New York Times (Week in Review): "Sarah Palin’s selection unleashes gender as a live issue again, just when Democrats thought they had it under control."
Permalink:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/weekinreview/31zernike.html?ex=1377835200&en=48097723262b74fb&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
By Mrs. Davis, at
Sat Aug 30, 08:19:00 PM:
By TigerHawk, at
Sat Aug 30, 08:39:00 PM:
"Eagleton" -- good point! Eagleton had been in state electoral politics since 1956 -- 16 years -- which is exactly Palin's record. The positions held are comparable. Good analogy. Let's hope that Palin never had electric shock treatments!
By davod, at
Sat Aug 30, 08:50:00 PM:
Wasn't the guy who wrote the misleading qain and his houses from Politico.
By 
, at
Sat Aug 30, 09:19:00 PM:
Does anyone think that the Troopergate issue will 1) have legs, or 2) be trounced by the gender issue?
By , at
Sat Aug 30, 09:24:00 PM:
Lest we forget, Sargent Shriver was a major party VP candidate way back in ... 1972. Not that we'd expect "Presidential Scholars" to know that.
By TigerHawk, at
Sat Aug 30, 09:32:00 PM:
Sargeant Shriver was actually a pretty experienced guy; he had had numerous senior positions leading major agencies. He was actually more experienced than Eagleton.
By , at
Sat Aug 30, 09:47:00 PM:
Not to mention that Shriver was related to the Kennedy's by marriage. That helped a lot.
It's also very possible that Henry Wallace was an NKVD mole for the Soviets. Scary to think that HE was a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
There have bee a lot of wise, experienced politicians in this country that have served well, that were frankly not capable of being President. Experience can be a good teacher, but experience alone is only an indicator that you can plug away at something and persevere.
-David
By , at
Sun Aug 31, 12:52:00 AM:
I guess I could be called a post-feminist woman. I am strong enough that I don't need some party looking out for my "special" interests. I am thrilled with Palin's selection not because she's a woman, but because she is an accomplished person. True, given another situtation, I wouldn't be all that thrilled with her lack of experience, but I look at facts. And the facts are that Palin has much more experience than the Dem pick for President. There is no question that Palin was chosen in order to "pick-off" the disaffected Hillary voters, but I don't really care. Biden wasn't chosen to offset Obama's lack of a clue on foreign policy? It's politics!
I'm just having a hoot watching the so-called "party of unity" imploding because McCain had the Audacity of Hope to name a woman for VP!
Okay for me, but not for thee! It's a strange world!
By , at
Sun Aug 31, 01:21:00 AM:
The democrats should be careful not to underestimate her. Just ask former governor Frank Murkowski and former governor Tony Knowles
By Dawnfire82, at
Sun Aug 31, 11:21:00 AM:
"Does anyone think that the Troopergate issue will 1) have legs, or 2) be trounced by the gender issue? "
If you check out the actual details of the case, (rather than raving Democratic propagandists) it's not even an issue.
The asshole in question 1) tazed an 11 year old, his own step-son, (i.e. the governor's nephew, hence the personal interest), 2) killed big game out of season, 3) was caught drinking and driving *in his squad car*, and some other 4th thing I've forgotten.
That the official she dismissed wouldn't fire this officer sounds like the 'good old boy' corrupt system that she's credited with fighting.
By , at
Sun Aug 31, 04:20:00 PM:
There is an update to the “objective scholars” article. Apparently these scholars are not as “objective” as one might think. As Deep Throat said, follow the money.
UPDATE: After reading this article, the McCain campaign issued the following statement: "The authors quote four scholars attacking Gov. Palin's fitness for the office of vice president. Among them, David Kennedy is a maxed-out Obama donor, Joel Goldstein is also an Obama donor, and Doris Kearns Goodwin has donated exclusively to Democrats this cycle. Finally, Matthew Dallek is a former speech writer for Dick Gephardt. This is not a story about scholars questioning Gov. Palin's credentials so much as partisan Democrats who would find a reason to disqualify or discount any nominee put forward by Sen. McCain."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/13001
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Mon Sep 01, 01:04:00 PM:
Eisenhower had no specifically political experience at all.
Obama gave a great speech a few years ago. Other than that, he has hung around the Illinois Senate doing little, and hung around the US Senate doing little. Oh, and campaigned a lot.
I wonder if the media folks count the Washington stuff and the campaigning stuff because it was in their presence and thus real.
By , at
Tue Sep 02, 12:47:00 AM:
Sarah Palin - city council 4 yrs; mayor 6 yrs; AK gov 2 yrs. Alaska is #47 by population - pop 683,478 (2007).
Plenty of Dem candidates have either come from very small states, or had little prior experience in elected office.
Joe Biden (2008) - senator Delaware (#45) - pop 864,764 (2007)
Even the mighty Bill Clinton (1992) came from a pretty small state: AR (#32) pop 2,350,725 (1990)
George McGovern (1972) - senator South Dakota (#46) - pop 665,507 (1970)
Sargent Shriver (1972) - no elected office prior to race
Thomas Eagleton (1972) - senator from MO for <4 years prior to 1972 race
Charles W. Bryan (1924) - prior to race, had been mayor of Lincoln, Nebraska for 2 yrs and gov of Nebraska for one year
John W. Davis (1924) - prior to race, only elected office was two years as rep from WV (now #37) - pop 1,463,701 (1920)
Thomas R. Marshall (1912) - had been gov of IN for 3 years
Woodrow Wilson (1912) - prior to race, only elected office was two yrs as gov of NJ.
John W. Kern (1908) - prior to race, had been Kokomo city attorney 13 yrs; Indiana Senate four years; serving at the same time as assistant U.S. Attorney for Indiana. Then 4 yrs city solicitor of Indianapolis.
William Jennings Bryan (1896, 1900 and 1908) - prior to first run, only elected office was 4 yrs as rep of Nebraska (now #38) - pop 1,066,300 (1900)
Whew! Scholarship is hard stuff, requiring minutes and minutes of googling.
Cali Tiger
