[LollyB]

Not interested in taking a formal poll, just want to know your thoughts: Should Sarah Palin, in light of her two disastrous interviews with Katie Couric and obvious inability to answser a simple question from a voter (hardly 'gotcha journalism'), bow out now and let John McCain save face? At least he wouldn't have to admit he was wrong in his choice, he could just let someone more credible (his pool man, maybe) step in?

By the way, she's in Arizona at debate camp right now... How many of you want to bet the campaign manager takes her aside, kindly, and asks if she isn't needed more at home with her kids?

[wakeyboy]

She should not bow out.

If McCain wanted her as VP then be it on his head!


I'll be laughing from the comfort of my sofa. I'm looking forward to some Palinisms.

[Caer Ibormeith]

I agree with Wakey. McCain made the choice and should have to stick with it. Although it shouldn't be an issue given McCain's stubornness.

The debate should be interesting. The McCain camp will try to paint Biden as sexist because they can't attack his credentials. This is ridiculous. He has done more for women than almost any other Senator.

Biden has been working with Hillary Clinton on his debating style to ensure he doesn't make any comments that could hurt him with women, and she is helping him to focus on his constant support of women's issues over the years. He wrote the violence against women act, he voted for the pay equity bill (McCain did not), he supports expanding the Family Leave Act (McCain does not), he supports expanded health care for children, and more funding for early childhood education. He was also a single parent, who went home to his sons every night when they were young.

The debate will not help McCain overcome Obama's increasing lead in key battleground states. He is ahead in Ohio by 8 points, in Pennsylvania by 15 points, and in Florida (!) by 8 points.

[JuanaLaLoca]

By the way, she's in Arizona at debate camp right now... How many of you want to bet the campaign manager takes her aside, kindly, and asks if she isn't needed more at home with her kids?

It wouldn't work - her husband and kids are at the 'debate camp', too.

No, she shouldn't bow out - it's too amusing to watch her self-destruct. I know that sounds mean, but, my God, the woman is clueless!

[Caer Ibormeith]

No, she shouldn't bow out - it's too amusing to watch her self-destruct. I know that sounds mean, but, my God, the woman is clueless!

And ruthless. She doesn't deserve your sympathy.

[tonyrockyhorror]

You want to hear clueless?
Here's a quote from Biden "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said 'Look, here's what happened"

You don't hear much about that one of course because it's all Sarah Palin all the time.

Next we'll be hearing that she colors her hair and wears dreadful shoes

[Caer Ibormeith]

Next we'll be hearing that she colors her hair and wears dreadful shoes

In case you're wondering, this is a sexist statement.

I don't care about her hair or fashion sense. I'm concerned about her competence and whether or not she has any level of interest in and experience of things outside of Alaska. Joe Biden has been on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for years. He also has a record of voting in the Senate that everyone has access to. You can make up your mind one way or another about him based on a record. To ask Sarah Palin what her national and international interests are, is a fair question considering most people have no idea of her opinions or knowledge. She hasn't been able to communicate with people in any way that hasn't been coached or scripted.

[tonyrockyhorror]

Next we'll be hearing that she colors her hair and wears dreadful shoes

In case you're wondering, this is a sexist statement.

You got it wrong, I'm saying that Palin is almost all you're hearing about the election from the media

Spoiler:

some say liberal

. Joe Biden? He's a ghost.

Sooner or later they're going to exhaust all there is to find out about this woman.

God help her if she has big feet

[JuanaLaLoca]

I never said Biden was a prize - you may recall that I expressed reservations when Obama chose him. However, compared to Palin, he certainly is much more qualified for the job.

[bll]

Like you, Caer, I've been reading up on the voting records. Except for Palin, as she doesn't have any. I watched the interview with Katie Couric that was lampooned on SNL; I found it ironic that SNL actually used her own words, and people laughed because they thought it was scripted. That frightens me.

[ruexperienced]

Next we'll be hearing that she colors her hair and wears dreadful shoes

In case you're wondering, this is a sexist statement.

I don't care about her hair or fashion sense. I'm concerned about her competence and whether or not she has any level of interest in and experience of things outside of Alaska. Joe Biden has been on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for years. He also has a record of voting in the Senate that everyone has access to. You can make up your mind one way or another about him based on a record. To ask Sarah Palin what her national and international interests are, is a fair question considering most people have no idea of her opinions or knowledge. She hasn't been able to communicate with people in any way that hasn't been coached or scripted.

No one's complaining about asking Sarah Palin anything, I think Tony's sarcasm is directed at the disturbing inability of you and the other posters on this thread to apply the same rules to the Obamessiah.

You talk about a record ?

Name one major legislative accomplishment of Obama's (without googling). Quick! Don't cheat !



...and this guy's at the TOP of your ticket !

As for Gov. Palin, go ahead and underestimate her.

We'll see how you all feel the morning after the debates my friends...

HUBRIS !

You gotta love it...

[mr dragon]

From what I understand about Palin she is actually a formidable debater, but more in the sense of coming across in a populist way. She's very light on details and knowledge. Which could be the thing that screws the McCain campaign given what is going on right now. There are only a few weeks left to go.

It is kind of ironic. You've got Biden and McCain who are both very experienced in Government, and Palin and Obama who are not nearly as experienced. Kind of balances itself out a little- as an argument at least. To be honest I don't actually think a good leader needs to be experienced- it's the usual criticism of anyone new and often totted out by an incumbant or the opposition, and has been frequently proved to be wrong. What matters is whether someone has good leadership skills and knows how to make the right decisions, and that's innate. Whether she has that remains to be seen.

It's still a very interesting election going on. Though very badly effected in credibility by the levels of partisanship going on by both sides, in my view.

[ruexperienced]

From what I understand about Palin she is actually a formidable debater, but more in the sense of coming across in a populist way. She's very light on details and knowledge.

I can honestly say the same thing about Senator Obama (not the formidable debater part) as a populist.

He talks about the future so much because it's the only place his accomplishments are...

[bll]

I was reading a blog at a UK newspaper website and this was one of the comments:

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old Texas rancher, a doctor struck up a conversation. Eventually the topic got around to Sarah Palin.

The old rancher said, "Well, you know, Palin is a post turtle.'"

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, "What's a post turtle?"

The old rancher said, "When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle."

The doctor looked puzzled, so the old rancher explained, "You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, she doesn't know what to do while she is up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put her up there to begin with."

[Caer Ibormeith]

Unlike Palin, Obama has been elected to national office. (He was not supported by the Chicago Democratic "machine," by the way. He actually pissed them off.) He also went through the primary process against formidable opponents, and again was elected by actual voters on the national level, all the while answering questions about foreign policy, the economy, and social programs and issues. If you don't like what he has to say, then you don't have to vote for him. That's your choice. Palin has not gone through this process and has been unable to answer fairly simple questions in any kind of coherent way. Given that McCain is 72 years old, his choice for VP is odd to say the least. One of the reasons for choosing a VP, one would hope, is to have someone who could competently run the country should anything happen to the President, which is why VPs used to be elected by the people and not appointed by the nominee. Maybe it's time to revisit this policy.

As far as I can see, whether you like Joe Biden or not, Obama made a fairly well thought out choice for his running mate, while McCain caved to the Christian right (one of his major campaign advisers is Lindsay Graham). The VPs he actually wanted were either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, both pro-choice. There were also many competent Republican women he could have chosen, Kaye Bailey Hutchison and Condoleeza Rice come to mind. Even conservatives have questioned his choice. All of this calls McCain's judgment and abilty to act independently into question, IMO.

Believe it or not, this is sad for me to have to say. I used to admire McCain, even when I didn't agree with him. Not anymore.

[wakeyboy]

I think a McCain-Rice ticket would have really given Obama a run for his money.

It would have trumped Obama on experience, women and race.


The actual choice is just an utter joke.

[eddie2003]

The idea that Sarah Palin hurts McCain is utterly laughable...It's a theory put out there by partisans who have no idea what they are talking about.

The fact that the Dow dropped 8 million points this week, and thus the economy is the main issue, is the reason McCain is behind at the moment. When the economy is down, it always helps leftist parties...Pick any democratic country on the planet, and you will find this to be the case. When the economy is good, it helps rightist parties (or the party in power, i.e. 1996)

[ruexperienced]

Unlike Palin, Obama has been elected to national office. (He was not supported by the Chicago Democratic "machine," by the way. He actually pissed them off.) He also went through the primary process against formidable opponents, and again was elected by actual voters on the national level, all the while answering questions about foreign policy, the economy, and social programs and issues. If you don't like what he has to say, then you don't have to vote for him. That's your choice. Palin has not gone through this process and has been unable to answer fairly simple questions in any kind of coherent way. Given that McCain is 72 years old, his choice for VP is odd to say the least. One of the reasons for choosing a VP, one would hope, is to have someone who could competently run the country should anything happen to the President, which is why VPs used to be elected by the people and not appointed by the nominee. Maybe it's time to revisit this policy.

As far as I can see, whether you like Joe Biden or not, Obama made a fairly well thought out choice for his running mate, while McCain caved to the Christian right (one of his major campaign advisers is Lindsay Graham). The VPs he actually wanted were either Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, both pro-choice. There were also many competent Republican women he could have chosen, Kaye Bailey Hutchison and Condoleeza Rice come to mind. Even conservatives have questioned his choice. All of this calls McCain's judgment and abilty to act independently into question, IMO.

Believe it or not, this is sad for me to have to say. I used to admire McCain, even when I didn't agree with him. Not anymore.

So let me get this straight, you do not "admire" McCain any longer, even though he has a good record of service to this country to run on, but you are for Obama, who has NO record to speak of whatsoever.

All this time since my previous post and NOT ONE PERSON HERE CAN NAME A LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT OF OBAMA'S.

See now I know why he's always talking about "hope" and "change" all the time, you lot all "hope" he "changes" his ways from a do nothing Senator into Presidential material overnight.

3 years in the Senate and nothing to show for it but the party's nomination.

Talk about blind faith in an empty suit...

[LollyB]

I agree Wakey, as I've said before... I believe Condoleeza would've taken him up on the offer, too, and at least been a credible candidate, whether or not people liked the current administration.

And, I also did some trash talking about Obama when he was up against Hillary, but I have to admit that he's imminently preferable to anyone associated with Bush or his policies (and utter incompetence). I feel sorry that McCain, an honorable man, has not shown more good judgment in his choice of running mate. I want Obama to win, yes, but the fact that one of the tickets looks so inept to its own country and the rest of the world is just pitiful.

Obama and Biden are both scholars, erudite and thoughtful, whereas Palin (despite her degree) is singularly stubborn when it comes to nonsense like wanting creation theory taught in public schools and believing the cause of global warming is 'unimportant'. I wonder if McCain would've chosen someone like her as custodian of his minor children, should something happen to him? Isn't the welfare of the country at least as important as that?

Like it or not, these two are our choice. Most voters just hold their nose, punch the ballot, and hope for the best, but at least they get out there and do something. I hate to say it, but some members of my own family don't plan to vote. That really makes me sad.

[Morning]

1. Palin has attacked Alaska Native Subsistence Fishing
Perhaps no issue is of greater importance to Alaska Native peoples as the right to hunt and fish according to ancient customary and traditional practices, and to carry on the subsistence way of life for future generations.
Governor Sarah Palin has consistently opposed those rights.
Once in office, Governor Palin decided to continue litigation that seeks to overturn every subsistence fishing determination the federal government has ever made in Alaska. (State of Alaska v. Norton, 3:05-cv-0158-HRH (D. Ak).) In pressing this case, Palin decided against using the Attorney General (which usually handles State litigation) and instead continued contracting with Senator Ted Stevens’ brother-in-law’s law firm (Birch, Horton, Bittner & Cherot).
The goal of Palin’s law suit is to invalidate all the subsistence fishing regulations the federal government has issued to date to protect Native fishing, and to force the courts instead to take over the roll of setting subsistence regulations. Palin’s law suit seeks to diminish subsistence fishing rights in order to expand sport and commercial fishing.
In May 2007, the federal court rejected the State’s main challenge, holding that Congress in 1980 had expressly granted the U.S. Interior and Agriculture Departments the authority to regulate and protect Native and rural subsistence fishing activities in Alaska. (Decision entered May 15, 2007 (Dkt. No. 110).)
Notwithstanding this ruling, Palin continues to argue in the litigation that the federal subsistence protections are too broad, and should be narrowed to exclude vast areas from subsistence fishing, in favor of sport and commercial fishing. Palin opposes subsistence protections in marine waters, on many of the lands that Natives selected under their 1971 land claims settlement with the state and federal governments, and in many of the rivers where Alaska Natives customarily fish. (Alaska Complaint at 15-18.) Palin also opposes subsistence fishing protections on Alaska Native federal allotments that were deeded to individuals purposely to foster Native subsistence activities. All these issues are now pending before the federal district court.

2. Palin has attacked Alaska Native Subsistence Hunting

Palin has also sought to invalidate critical determinations the Federal Subsistence Board has made regarding customary and traditional uses of game, specifically to take hunting opportunities away from Native subsistence villagers and thereby enhance sport hunting.
Palin’s attack here on subsistence has focused on the Ahtna Indian people in Chistochina. Although the federal district court has rejected Palin’s challenge, she has carried on an appeal that was argued in August 2008. (State of Alaska v. Fleagle, No. 07-35723 (9th Cir.).)
In both hunting and fishing matters, Palin has continued uninterrupted the policies initiated by the former Governor Frank Murkowski Administration, challenging hunting and fishing protections that Native people depend upon for their subsistence way of life in order to enhance sport fishing and hunting opportunities. Palin’s lawsuits are a direct attack on the core way of life of Native Tribes in rural Alaska.


3. Palin has attacked Alaska Tribal Sovereignty

Governor Palin opposes Alaska tribal sovereignty.
Given past court rulings affirming the federally recognized tribal status of Alaska Native villages, Palin does not technically challenge that status. But Palin argues that Alaska Tribes have no authority to act as sovereigns, despite their recognition.
So extreme is Palin on tribal sovereignty issues that she has sought to block tribes from exercising any authority whatsoever even over the welfare of Native children, adhering to a 2004 legal opinion issued by the former Murkowski Administration that no such jurisdiction exists (except when a state court transfers a matter to a tribal court).
Both the state courts and the federal courts have struck down Palin’s policy of refusing to recognize the sovereign authority of Alaska Tribes to address issues involving Alaska Native children. Native Village of Tanana v. State of Alaska, 3AN-04-12194 CI (judgment entered Aug. 26, 2008) (Ak. Super. Ct.); Native Kaltag Tribal Council v. DHHS, No. 3:06-cv-00211-TMB (D. Ak.), pending on appeal No 08-35343 (9th Cir.)). Nonetheless, Palin’s policy of refusing to recognize Alaska tribal sovereignty remains unchanged.


4. Palin has attacked Alaska Native Languages.

Palin has refused to accord proper respect to Alaska Native languages and voters by refusing to provide language assistance to Yup'ik speaking Alaska Native voters.

[Caer Ibormeith]

The idea that Sarah Palin hurts McCain is utterly laughable...It's a theory put out there by partisans who have no idea what they are talking about.

Republicans will vote for the Republican nominee regardless of how Palin performs tonight. That wasn't my point anyway. My point was that there is a basic right, not to mention duty, to question someone who wants to hold high office in this country, especially if he/she hasn't been elected to anything nationally and has had no national exposure. Maybe the old system of requiring that the VP nominee be the candidate who came in second in the primaries should be reinstated.

[LollyB]

From what I understand about Palin she is actually a formidable debater, but more in the sense of coming across in a populist way. She's very light on details and knowledge. Which could be the thing that screws the McCain campaign given what is going on right now. There are only a few weeks left to go.

From that 30 second video clip, I would guess she made a decent showing in Alaska, where she was actually somewhat informed about the subject at hand, but she's so far out of her depth in a discussion of national issues that she ends up babbling incoherently until she can think of something to say... then she still talks in circles, and stops abruptly when she runs out of steam. Karl Rove should've gotten her into a room and drilled her on this stuff, like he did with Bush, so she could at least answer a few simple questions extemporaneously. She's a 'nice person' and has populist appeal, but she can't do the job, for all her willingness. Would you ask your butcher to perform surgery on you because he has a peripheral knowledge of anatomy?

My guess is that when people acknowledge she could someday be in charge of their military and economy, it will scare them sufficiently to vote for Obama.

[Caer Ibormeith]

Talk about blind faith in an empty suit...

The same criticism was made of JFK when he ran for President. He was a junior Senator from a state known for it's democratic political machine, Massachusetts. Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had no national experience whatsoever, but one was a Rhodes scholar who studied politics and law, and the other was the Governor of the largest state in the country that has the most diverse population in the world. They both had leadership ability and backgrounds that helped them perform in the toughest job in the world. Not to mention the fact that they were elected, not appointed.

My problem with Sarah Palin is not where she's from, or that she likes to hunt, or that she doesn't have a Harvard degree, it's the idea that it's somehow okay to be ignorant. And that she wants to paint working class people as unintelligent, beer drinking couch potatoes is just cynical. I know they're hard working and smart, smarter than her anyway.

[LollyB]

One of the comments Palin made about herself when talking to Katie Couric was that (she) was "the breath of fresh air, with the new ideas" and "He (McCain) is the one with the experience". Um, what good will his experience do if he (God forbid) dies in office and she's our only safety net? And, does anybody know -- has she said -- exactly what her "new ideas" are?

She told Katie Couric that she would "counsel" a victim of incestuous rape to "choose life". Excuse me? Exactly how would she do that? She admitted that privacy is an important issue for all women, but didn't seem to get that that is the crux of Roe v. Wade, whether the law goes into the hands of individual states or remains Federal.

And she couldn't name a single Supreme Court decision besides Roe v. Wade that she disagreed with. Doubt that she could name even half of the Supreme Court justices, either. And with a straight face, she told Couric that the cause of global warming "really wasn't important, it's just important to fix it." My God, if you don't laugh a this woman, you have to cry.

[ruexperienced]

Talk about blind faith in an empty suit...

The same criticism was made of JFK when he ran for President.

You're leaving out the part about JFK being a decorated Naval Officer who commanded a PT boat with honor and distinction.

...Or the fact JFK was a Congressman from 1947 to 1953, when he was elected to the Senate.

Throw in that he was a Senator from 1953 to 1960 and the man had 13 years of legislative achievements to run on when he ran for President.

Obama is NO JFK and suggesting that to be the case in ANY way, shape or form diminishes greatly the memory and record of JFK's life and career.

As for Clinton, he spent the better part of his Presidency dodging legal issue after legal issue and avoiding the offer to put Bin Laden in US custody. Not much to be proud of there.

As for Reagan, he may have been a populist, but he was a Governor with a hell of a lot more executive experience than Obama has when he ran.

But the JFK reference is what really bothers me.

The fact you could even mention the Obamessiah in the same breath with him shows a truly unhealthy disregard for reality.

To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen "I knew Jack Kennedy and you sir, are NO Jack Kennedy"...

[JuanaLaLoca]

You want to hear clueless?
Here's a quote from Biden "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said 'Look, here's what happened"

Try this rather similar one on for size (from the presidential debate):

McCain: President Eisenhower, on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letters.

One of them was a letter congratulating the great members of the military and allies that had conducted and succeeded in the greatest invasion in history, still to this day, and forever.

And he wrote out another letter, and that was a letter of resignation from the United States Army for the failure of the landings at Normandy.

Hmmm - was Eisenhower President at the time? And does this sound like a letter of resignation?:

Eisenhower (June 5, 1944): Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.

That is the full text.

[tonyrockyhorror]

You want to hear clueless?
Here's a quote from Biden "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said 'Look, here's what happened"

Try this rather similar one on for size (from the presidential debate):

McCain: President Eisenhower, on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letters.

One of them was a letter congratulating the great members of the military and allies that had conducted and succeeded in the greatest invasion in history, still to this day, and forever.

And he wrote out another letter, and that was a letter of resignation from the United States Army for the failure of the landings at Normandy.

Hmmm - was Eisenhower President at the time? And does this sound like a letter of resignation?:

Eisenhower (June 5, 1944): Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.

That is the full text.

Not even close

[Caer Ibormeith]

Obama is NO JFK and suggesting that to be the case in ANY way, shape or form diminishes greatly the memory and record of JFK's life and career.

As for Clinton, he spent the better part of his Presidency dodging legal issue after legal issue and avoiding the offer to put Bin Laden in US custody. Not much to be proud of there.

As for Reagan, he may have been a populist, but he was a Governor with a hell of a lot more executive experience than Obama has when he ran.

But the JFK reference is what really bothers me.

The fact you could even mention the Obamessiah in the same breath with him shows a truly unhealthy disregard for reality.

To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen "I knew Jack Kennedy and you sir, are NO Jack Kennedy"...

Why do conservative Republicans always want to claim JFK as their own? He was a liberal Democrat and has much more in common politically with Barack Obama than John McCain. His daughter, Caroline, supports Obama as well as his brother, Ted.

JFK's political career was hardly perfect. Joe Kennedy's arm twisting, and that of Joe's father-in-law, Honeyfitz (gerald), got JFK the Senate seat in Massachusetts. Bribery and influence peddling was the name of the game in old style Boston politics. JFK did not disginguish himself particularly as a Senator, and won the Presidency largely because his father bought him West Virginia. Read a history of Boston or of any of the Kennedy children of that era, if you think I'm making this up.

Of course, none of this means that JFK was not a great President or a great man. He just came from a slighlty shady backgroud and was largely untested in real politics when he ran for the Presidency, which is why LBJ was chosen as his running mate. What I admired about JFK most was the fact that he read about philosophy and history and politics, and so was a three dimensional person who knew how to think for himself. He could tell you the books he read. He was not a patch on Bobby, however.

[Morning]

Wait a dang minute....... McCain sits on the BIA and defends against cases that Palin has brought before as per writen in above post. No comments?

[tonyrockyhorror]

Wait a dang minute....... McCain sits on the BIA and defends against cases that Palin has brought before as per writen in above post. No comments?

None here, are you a native Alaskan?

[LollyB]

Caer wrote:
"Of course, none of this means that JFK was not a great President or a great man. He just came from a slighlty shady backgroud and was largely untested in real politics when he ran for the Presidency, which is why LBJ was chosen as his running mate. What I admired about JFK most was the fact that he read about philosophy and history and politics, and so was a three dimensional person who knew how to think for himself. He could tell you the books he read. He was not a patch on Bobby, however."

Agreed on all points. Every human being is a mixed bag, and we have to judge them on balance. I wouldn't marry a cad like either of those Kennedy brothers (or the one still living) but to be fair, they did accomplish some good things. I adored Reagan on a personal level (who wouldn't?) but I fail to see how he advanced the good interests of this country (economically, at least), however good his intentions were. It seems they all let us down in one area or another, but the only thing we need to be concerned with is how well they do the job they're hired to do. And, incidentally, RU, one of the biggest "legal issues" Clinton had to fight off had more to do with Conservatives trying to make his private life public; they simply couldn't nail him any other way Whitewater, Vince Foster's suicide -- none of it stuck. At least he only screwed one person (that we know of), while his successor has screwed us all for eight years.

[Morning]

No I am not an Inuit.........but am American Indian.......however it bothers me that McCain would bring on board a woman who has worked so hard against the Inuits when since the 80's he has represented all natives thru the BIA. I believe that our rights need to stay in place. I have attended events where McCain has strongly defended our hunting-fishing rights and language freedom............. One might say if a man who would pick a vice that is against a honoured office he has held with the BIA only leads me to believe no one or nothing is sacred to him.

Palin wants to take away Inuit's villages to open up the land for hunts and recreation......BAH!!!!!!

[tonyrockyhorror]

honoured......BAH!!!!!!

Hmmm....me thinks Chief Watchdog speak with fork-ed tongue

[LollyB]

The McCain/Palin ticket lives to fight another day -- that's just not enough for John McCain. What Sarah managed to do was not embarass herself, and that's more than most people expected of her. It's not, however, all we expect of a potential VP or President.

She had the nerve to say she wasn't going to answer the questions put to her, (and Ifill didn't do much followup) and spent the last half of the debate winking and mugging for the camera. Can't wait to see what Tina Fey does with all this on SNL. Meantime, Biden behaves like a gentleman (maybe too much so) but he had been warned not to attack the little lady. He knew John McCain's record better than Sarah (which almost everyone does) and definitely could point to myriad accomplishments of his own, while Sarah said, "Well, as you know, I've only been at this for 5 weeks, so I haven't made any promises I can't keep." Duh.

I for one am thrilled. All polls name Biden as the winner, and most interviewed personally said they'd feel better with Biden in the VP slot, considering he could be asked to take over the presidency at a moment's notice. Sarah did fine, aside from the grinning, winking and sarcasm, but in a few weeks, she can go back to Alaska and be a mom, a grandma, a governor, and field dress another moose.

[wakeyboy]

Palin did as well as could be expected. She didnt make any gaffes and she didnt scupper McCain at all, so in that way she did well.

Biden was much better on substance and his knowledge and experience came accross. Unfortunately he wasnt as likeable as Palin and seemed boring at times.

They both did ok IMO.

But in terms of who would you want as the VP then I would say Biden was the most convincing.


I also thought Palin was going for the guinness book of records, for the most ammount of times someone could say "maverick". Every 'answer' had "maverick" in it!

[JuanaLaLoca]

... Sarah said, "Well, as you know, I've only been at this for 5 weeks, so I haven't made any promises I can't keep." Duh.

Yes, that was a dumb answer. The question was about what each ticket would have to cut from what they had said they would do, since the bail-out will take so much money. Obama and McCain didn't do so well with that question, and ended up saying what they would still do, instead of saying anything that they would drop. With time to prepare, Biden did have some specifics. Palin said that she hadn't promised anything because she's only been at this for five weeks. Sometimes it sounds like she thinks she is the presidential candidate - I guess McCain's promises don't count, only hers do.

I also thought Palin was going for the guinness book of records, for the most ammount of times someone could say "maverick". Every 'answer' had "maverick" in it!

Part-way through the debate, I was thinking I should have been prepared to take a shot every time she said that!

On the whole, I think both Palin and Biden did very well in the debate. They both seemed intelligent and knowledgeable. I did think that Biden had more specific answers, while Palin stuck to her talking points more (and didn't stick to the topic all the time, even telling Ifill that she wasn't going to answer the questions that Ifill and Biden wanted her to answer). They both made some factual errors, especially on each other's running mates' records. They obviously had learned from last week's debate, and there was a lot of eye contact and back-and-forth. Overall, they were respectful of each other. Palin didn't look like a deer in the headlights, and Biden didn't ramble on and on. They both surpassed expectations.

[Caer Ibormeith]

To give Sarah Palin her due, she dug herself out of a very deep hole. Actually, I thought she did a much better job at being personable and polite than McCain did in his debate with Obama. She showed at her best when she talked about dealing with big oil and gas campanies in Alaska, something she could talk about from experience. At her worst, she avoided answering questions that she was thrown by, giving canned answers that she was oviously coached on. The "gosh darn, dogonit" moments seemed really disengenuous to me, as well. On substance, she just wasn't there. Joe Biden knew more about McCain's actual voting record than she did, and she defended McCain's policies on bread and butter issues like the economy, healthcare and education without really defining them in any significant way. She often resorted to the "tax and spend liberal" jargon that Repulicans usually fall back on instead of making the case for McCain's actual policies.

I thought Biden did very well. He came across as much more human to me than Palin, and showed a real uderstanding of middle class and working class issues, as well as issues of energy and foreign policy. He defined Obama's positions well and made a very strong case for them. The two moments that really stood out for me with him were his passionate response on the Cheney question. Palin said that she, like Cheney, liked that the Constitution had such flexibility on the VP's duties. It, in fact, states the responsiilities and limitations of the position very clearly. Biden called her on her statement. He was at his best, however, when he talked about being a single father and his love and concern for his sons as they recovered from the accident that killed his wife and daughter. He managed to support them through their severe injuries all the while worrying about how he was going to pay for the medical bills that were piling up. And he did it alone. No, Joe, you don't have to be a woman to really understand how hard it is to raise a family.

The worst moment of the debate: the white flag of surrender statement by Palin. It was a slur, and she knew it. Biden was wise not to rise to her bait.

[LollyB]

I'm curious about something. Does anyone think McCain may have had it in mind to trump the gender issue by choosing Palin, keep her mostly under wraps until the election, then have her bow out for personal reasons AFTER he's elected? Then, he could ask Joe Lieberman to step in as VP, and it would be too late for his conservative base to do anything... for four years, by which time they would've seen that Roe v. Wade is not the key issue at stake.

Nah, too complex and Machiavellian for him. But an intriguing thought. I'll ask this instead: Do any of you want to guess who Sarah Palin would choose as her VP, if we were so unfortunate as to have her in the top spot someday?

[JuanaLaLoca]

Nah, too complex and Machiavellian for him. But an intriguing thought. I'll ask this instead: Do any of you want to guess who Sarah Palin would choose as her VP, if we were so unfortunate as to have her in the top spot someday?

Would her husband be allowed? I suppose there's probably no law against it.

[LollyB]

I don't believe there's any law against it, as long as he's a U.S. citizen and not a convicted felon. And I can completely see her doing this, given that he's had more exposure to her activities as governor (sitting in on meetings, official interviews, access to emails that deal with government business) than is deemed proper by many people.

True, JFK appointed his brother Bobby as Attorney General, but the man was qualified for the position and trusted by those outside the family.

My real fear about Palin is that she is completely clueless about the scope of power within her current position and that of VP of US. And this is the best choice McCain could've made? At best, she could react instead of act, and she can't even begin to do the job on her own. Who else does that sound like?

[wakeyboy]

Alaskans speak on Palin:

Anne Kilkenny's e-mail on Sarah Palin
Anne Kilkenny of Wasilla, Alaska, shared some thoughts on Gov. Sarah Palin in an e-mail to a few friends. Below is what she wrote.

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Plain in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

You may distribute it to your friends/Email list with my name and Email address attached, but please do not post it on any websites.

[Editor's note: This e-mail has already been posted to the Web and widely distributed.]

Anne

ABOUT SARAH PALIN

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city.

She is enormously popular; in every way she’s like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe".

It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.

She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a baby with Down syndrome . There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.

She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.

She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.

Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin’s kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.

Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.

She's smart.

Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.

During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign.

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a “fiscal conservative”. During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren’t enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn’t even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.

While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.

These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.

As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.

In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.

She’s not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren’t generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren’t evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.

While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.

Sarah complained about the “old boy’s club” when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State’s top cop (see below).

As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla’s Police Chief because he “intimidated” her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.

She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn’t like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.

Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.

When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was criticizing her pay as too high in the press . I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the “old boys’ club” when she dramatically quit, exposing this man’s ethics violations (for which he was fined).

As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the “bridge to nowhere” after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.

As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as “anti-pork”.

She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.

Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her “Sarah Barracuda” because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.

As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as “AGIA” that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.

Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned “as a private citizen” against a state initiative that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State’s lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior’s decision to list polar bears as threatened species.

McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President.

There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.

However, there’s a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.

CLAIM VS FACT

•“Hockey mom”: true for a few years

•“PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since

•“NRA supporter”: absolutely true

•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconstitutional).

•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.

•“Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation

•“Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.

•political maverick: not at all

•gutsy: absolutely!

•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.

•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no

•”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.

•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!

•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.

•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents

•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla’s history.

•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

WHY AM I WRITING THIS?

First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.

Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.

Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that’s life.

Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.

Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.

CAVEATS

I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.

You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The day Palin’s selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90’s.

Anne Kilkenny



And another:

Dear Classmates (Bryn Mawr Class 1968)
As an Alaskan, I am writing to give all of you some information on Sarah Palin, Senator McCain's choice for VP. As an Alaska voter, I know more than most of you about her and, frankly, I am horrified that he picked her.

The most accurate description of her is red neck. Her husband works in the oil fields of Prudhoe Bay and races snow mobiles. She is a life time member of the NRA and has worked tirelessly to allow indiscriminate hunting of wildlife in Alaska , particularly wolves and bears. She has spent millions of Alaska state dollars on aerial hunting of these predators from helicopters and airplanes, dollars that should have been spent, for example, on Alaska 's failing school system. We have the lowest rate of high school graduation in the country. Not all of you may think aerial predator hunting is so bad, but how anyone (other than Alaska wolf-haters, of which there are many, most without teeth), could think this use of funds is appropriate is beyond me. If you want to know more about the aerial hunting travesty, let me know and I will send some links to informative web sites.

She has been a strong supporter of increased use of fossil fuels, yet the McCain campaign has the nerve to say she has 'green' policies. The only thing green about Sarah Palin is her lack of experience. She has consistently supported drilling in ANWR, use of coal-burning power plants (as I write this, a new coal plant is being built in her home town of Wasilla ),strip mining, and almost anything else that will
unnecessarily exploit the diminishing resources of Alaska and destroy its environment.

Prior to her one year as governor of Alaska , she was mayor of Wasilla, a small red neck town outside Anchorage. The average maximum education level of parents of junior high school kids in Wasilla is 10th grade.


Unfortunately, I have to go to Wasilla every week to get groceries and other supplies, so I have continual contact with the people who put Palin in office in the first place. I know what I'm talking about. These people don't have a concept of the world around them or of the serious issues facing the US. Furthermore, they don't care. So long as they can go out and hunt their moose every fall, kill wolves and bears and drive their snow mobiles and ATVs through every corner of the wilderness, they're happy. I wish I were exaggerating.

Sarah Palin is currently involved in a political corruption scandal. She fired an individual in law enforcement here because she didn't like how he treated one of her relatives during a divorce. The man's performance and ability weren't considered; it was a totally personal firing and is currently under investigation. While the issue isn't close to the scandal of Ted Steven's corruption, it shows that Palin isn't 'squeaky clean' and causes me to think there may be more issues that could come to light. Clearly McCain doesn't care.

When you line Palin up with Biden, the comparison would be laughable if it weren't so serious. Sarah Palin knows nothing of economics (admittedly a weak area for McCain), or of international affairs, knows nothing of national government, Social Security, unemployment, health care systems - you name it. The idea of her meeting with heads of foreign governments around the world truly frightens me.

In an increasingly dangerous world, with the economy in shambles in the US , Sarah Palin is uniquely UNqualified to be vice president. John McCain is not a young man. Should something happen to him such that the vice president had to step in, it would destroy our country and possibly the world to have someone as inexperienced and inappropriate as Sarah Palin. The choice of Palin is a cheap shot by McCain to try to get Hillary supporters to vote for him. When McCain introduced her today, Palin had the nerve to compare herself with Hillary and Geraldine Ferraro. Sarah Palin, you are no Hillary Clinton.

To those of you who, like me, supported Hilary and were upset that she did not get the nomination, please don't think that Sarah Palin is a worthy substitute. If you supported Hillary, regardless of what you think the media and the Democratic party may have done to undermine her campaign, the person to support now is Obama, not Sarah Palin. To those of you who are independent or undecided, don't let the choice of Palin sway you in favor of McCain. Choosing her shows how unqualified McCain is to be president. To those of you who are conservative, I guess you have no choice for president. But please try to see how the poor choice of Palin tells us a great deal about McCain's judgment.


While the political posturing inherent in the choice of Palin is obvious, the more serious issue is the fact that the VP is, literally, a heartbeat away from the presidency. Sarah Palin is totally and unequivocally unqualified to be vice president, let alone president.

I know this is a lengthy and emotional email, but the stakes are high. I thought it might help for all of you, regardless of political affiliation, to know something about Palin from someone who has to live with her administration in Alaska on a daily basis.

Jackie S.

[LollyB]

The pundits are saying Palin's performance did a world of good for... Sarah Palin. Not so much for McCain. She obviously believes that we're all still idiot enough as a nation to go for style over substance. She was a formidable opponent in once sense -- she knows how to connect with the camera, and through that -- people. Although she smiled so broadly on occasion I don't know whether she had gas or was smirking ala GWB at the show she was putting on. The fact that she couldn't really give details, but relied solely on rhetoric will not harm McCain, but her lack of knowledge of his record was obvious. People are saying she has her eyes on 2012 -- by which time most people will have forgotten her completely. If we Democrats are so unfortunate as to lose this time, at least Hillary will be able to step in and wipe the floor with S.P.
One cannot 'cram' for either the Vice Presidency or the Presidency -- at debate camp or anywhere else. We've seen what we get when someone (Bush) is drilled with talking points (by Rove) in preparation for the role instead of being the kind of forward-thinking, decisive, intellectual the country needs. Neither McCain nor Palin is a lawyer (not that it's a prerequisite), but lawyers are trained to debate, to negotiate and to advocate for others -- abilities that any US president should have in abundance. Lawyers are also, by definition, not adverse to reading -- something Sarah obviously has to be lead to kicking and screaming. She actually said she read "all of them, whatever's put in front of me". Is this the level of intellect we want in our leader?

[tonyrockyhorror]

You want to hear clueless?
Here's a quote from Biden "When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the princes of greed. He said 'Look, here's what happened"

You don't hear much about that one of course because it's all Sarah Palin all the time.

Next we'll be hearing that she colors her hair and wears dreadful shoes

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gN2U ... gD93VQJE00



Someone, tell me it's not the same.

[mr dragon]

Like many of us outside the US, we're kind of now starting to get bored of the whole media thing in the last few weeks with the US elections, it's dragged on and on, and on- and on. We'd now appreciate you guys electing a President, and getting on with sorting out the big fucking mess your country made with the worldwide economic system. Sorry to be so brutally blunt, but there you go. Those are the facts. This is not about anti-Americanism, it's about the effect the US has had economically on the world as a super power in the last few years, all within the system we all equally embrace together, which has effected just about everyone else recently. So, let's cut the crap about what the candidates are all wearing in the US elections- no one else gives a shit about that. Nor should they. It's innane as a debate- to say the least. And let's get to the real issues. Is that hard?

Seriously.

Neither McCain nor Palin is a lawyer (not that it's a prerequisite), but lawyers are trained to debate, to negotiate and to advocate for others -- abilities that any US president should have in abundance. Lawyers are also, by definition, not adverse to reading -- something Sarah obviously has to be lead to kicking and screaming. She actually said she read "all of them, whatever's put in front of me". Is this the level of intellect we want in our leader?

...On the subject of lawyers. You're telling us lawyers make better leaders!?

Lawyers???

C'mon.

Fuck me sideways!

When you get over your beauty pageant/ partisan bickering/ pointless point scoring/ political naval gazing across the Atlantic- that everyone is getting tired of given the economic situation your country has created! We'd all like you to actually move on! And join the rest of us.

Lawyers?

Fuck me. Are you serious?

Sure they are 'prerequisite'

What a load of bollocks.

Know what I mean.

Thank you.








*Dragon gives an exasperated groan*

[NogginGrog]

Remember Blur was a Lawyer and look what that gave us - All lawyers like to do is create legislation. In most western democracies lawyers are an over represented ethnic group in the political process.

I guess most people's reasoning goes something like this:

Lawyers know how to interpret the law and use it to their own ends.

Therefore:

They should be able to study potential legislation and spot the loop holes in it.

Therefore:

They are the best qualified people to create new legislation.

Therfore:

They are the best qualified people to govern.

Er actually NO - When it comes to running a country you want some who:

Has a sense of vision about the future. Who can think inspirationally and not allow their ideas to be restricted to current rules. A person who is skilled at understanding complex systems and large organisations. A person who knows how to motivate others and lead.

Now you will certainly find those qualities among people who have founded and built large and successful businesses. They are qualities less common among the "rentaCEO" crowd though exceptions exist but I suggest they are rare qualities to be found among lawyers.

If the government wants people who are able to:

To study potential legislation and spot the loop holes in it.

Then they should hire some legal advisors instead but also make those advisors fully justify their arguments, not simply accept them at face value.

[LollyB]

Noggin/Dragon -- I don't follow the logic of either of you on this point. If you read what I said, you'll see that I indicated lawyers are trained in many of the SKILLS a good leader needs: to negotiate, to articulate, to advocate -- are you actually disagreeing with that? The fact that some leaders use these skills to their own advantage -- and sometimes to the detriment of those they are sworn to protect -- well, that's a separate issue, and hardly a surprise. I would rather the US be represented by someone I trust, who also has these skills in abundance. Why do you think Sadaam Hussein came off as such a buffoon to us? He was neither extensively educated nor articulate -- and seemed completely thrown off by Barbara Walters when told that we actually had the power to disagree with our leader. He hadn't even bothered to study the tenets of true Democracy. Ahmadinijad? The same. I would like to have this country represented by a President who is intellectually curious, articulate, a skilled negotiator and who can debate with anyone without extensive preparation. I think our choice is pretty clear.

[Caer Ibormeith]

Correct me if I'm wrong, Ben or noggin, but I believe that lawyers in the US have much different educational backgrounds than those in the UK. From what I understand you guys begin you're training in a profession from the moment you enter university (studying law, biology, engineering, etc.) without the series of CORE subjects in other areas of study, which are mandatory to earn an undergraduate degree in the US. Law is a graduate program here. You must have a four year degree in some other field before you even apply to law school (which is another three years). Most people who become lawyers in the US have a very well-rounded education. They can either make good leaders or become self-serving scum, but I think that largely depends on the person, not the profession.

I do wish more people with backgrounds different from business or law went into politics, though. It would nice to see some doctors,teachers and, yes, even artists participate in government. Unfortunately, most do not have the spare time required to campaign for office. Their too busy doing the important work in their communities.

[LollyB]

They can either make good leaders or become self-serving scum, but I think that largely depends on the person, not the profession.

I do wish more people with backgrounds different from business or law went into politics, though.

Caer -- I'm sure you realize there's a wide range between good leaders and self-serving scum, but I agree with you, it depends on the person. Like all professions, there are those who bring honor to it and those who help perpetuate the worst stereotypes.

Unfortunately, I think the other professions who go into politics do so out of frustration with what our system ignores. We occasionally see teachers, doctors -- even actors -- go into politics because they've developed some special skill or wish to further some particular cause, but they're in the minority because they are out there doing important work. My sister-in-law doesn't want to leave teaching because she cares more about the kids than making a hefty salary. But she also gets frustrated with things like "No child left behind," which is nothing more than a set of unfunded mandates -- and a nice soundbite for W.

[NogginGrog]

I am prepared to accept that the education of Lawyers is very different in the US than in the UK. Yes our education system does tend to make people specialise much earlier. In fact that process actually starts at the age of 16 when most of those staying on at school start their A level courses where they will probably be only studying 3 or 4 subjects as the basis for their entry to University.

When talking about the qualities of lawyers as people to run governments, you mention negotiating skills as well as being able to debate and argue a point. Certainly Lawyers are good at that sort of thing and Tony Blur was an excellent example of that. Especially in the Northern Ireland peace process, which is the one and only thing I will always give him credit for. Just as he was also prepared to hold a TV debate with members of the public many of whom were hostile to the Iraq adventure.

Unfortunately however I feel that while those skills are useful it is actually more important to have people who understand the management and direction of large and complex organisations. I would rather see system analysts, engineers or economists running governments than lawyers everytime.

The impression we get from lawyers is that they will always try to Legislate their way out of problem rather than Manage their way out. So if something is wrong they pass some new laws and think everything will be fixed. Instead of making the people on their payroll do their jobs differently or do them better and in some cases do the things that are really essential and stop doing the things with are largely pointless.

So if crime is a problem then pass a few more laws (like complusory ID cards or a DNA database for all citizens) rather than improve how the police do their job within the existing framwork of law.

Maybe this is a cultural thing perhaps we in the UK just tend to see lawyers as people who have the sort of minds that simply interpret rules rather than people who use original or creative thought.

If I had my way then I would make unconstitutional for Lawyers, ExMilitary Officers or any former Religious Official to hold any political office.

[Caer Ibormeith]

Maybe this is a cultural thing perhaps we in the UK just tend to see lawyers as people who have the sort of minds that simply interpret rules rather than people who use original or creative thought.

People who study law here are not necessarily going into the legal profession per se. I work at Harvard Law School and know many professors who write, study and teach subjects as varied as legal history, human rights, community building and Constitutional law. Most have backgrounds in history, philosophy, economics, literature and science. They can also hold other secondary degrees such as a Masters in Liberal Arts or a Ph.D. A former student I remember is both a lawyer and a doctor. So many do think very creatively. Of course, there are those who go into the actual practice of law as well, some to help their communities (District Attorneys and Public Defenders), some to become judges and others simply for the money (Corporate Law).