Hello, friends. I [got the following email saying] that PBS is running an online poll posted asking if Sarah Palin is qualified. Apparently the right wing knew about this in advance and is flooding the voting with YES votes.
The poll will be reported on PBS and picked up by mainstream media. It can influence undecided voters in swing states.
Please do two things – takes 20 seconds.
-Community Organizer
-Graduate of Harvard Law School
-President of the Harvard Law Review
-Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago (Birthplace of Neo-conservatism)
-Civil Rights Attorney
-Illinois State Senator
-US Senator
So wait. Even ignoring the that whole Constitutional thing about them both being equally qualified, you’re saying Palin has more experience? I’m also assuming, by the way, that you’re ignoring the lack of correlation between experience and awesomeness.
I almost completely disagree. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but don’t they have the same amount of years of political experience (aka not that many)? You can argue that Palin was in charge of something as mayor/governor, but I think, at least for me, Obama has the ideal level of experience. Experience enough in Washington to understand how the whole shabang goes on, but not enough so that he’s just become resigned. I assume, of course, that Obama is actually being genuine about his distaste for Washington politics.
Be that as it may, experience or not, the thought of Sarah Palin being president damn near terrifies me. The viral interview with Matt Damon sums up my feelings pretty well (youtube it if you haven’t seen it). I don’t want a woman who ignores that whole science thing when it’s inconvenient being able to influence (read: damage) my or my future children’s* education.
*random grammar question: did I phrase that right? I choose you, Miss A.
“Why are liberals comparing Obama’s experience to Palin’s instead of to McCain’s? The answer to that is simple. Because they cannot even begin to compare Obama’s thin resume to McCain’s extensive experience and service to this country. Liberals are attempting to belittle Palin’s resume in a desperate attempt to distract voters from the fact that McCain is far more qualified than Obama. Amusing, isn’t it?”
“Why are liberals comparing Obama’s experience to Palin’s instead of to McCain’s? The answer to that is simple. Because they cannot even begin to compare Obama’s thin resume to McCain’s extensive experience and service to this country. Liberals are attempting to belittle Palin’s resume in a desperate attempt to distract voters from the fact that McCain is far more qualified than Obama. Amusing, isn’t it?”
I think that just McCain choosing someone as unqualified, unintelligent, and unreasonable as Palin show’s that McCain can’t be the brightest of men.
Choosing a fascist as your replacement does show a great deal of stupidity and irresponsibility, and all the experience in the world can’t help McCain with that. He may be significantly more experienced, but Obama would significantly be a better leader.
Barack Obama
Joe Biden
John McCain
Sarah Palin
BillyTheMountain
all are fully qualified. None are convicted felons, all are naturalized citizens, and all are over 35. I think the not-a-naturalized citizen argument against Obama is much weaker than the one against McCain which is already pathetic.
Senator Obama has nearly 20 years of experience in constitutional law. He’s affiliated through degree and fellowship with two of the nation’s most prestigious law schools, having presided over the most heavily cited law review in country, taught constitutional law at a university that claims Supreme Court Justices, clerks, and other staffers in every federal judiciary in the country, and he has consistently used this background as a public advocate, lending his experience (free of cost) to the promotion of community volunteerism and also, notably, directing a voter registration drive that added 150,000 new voters to the registrar. Beyond this, he has 10 years of combined legislative experience, certainly outmatched by his opponents 26 years, but within his age and has laid out clear and comprehensive policy strategies for the task at hand.
Experience is as much an issue of ‘exceptionalism’ as it is with simply showing up to work.
You’re calling yourself a liberal now? I’m not buying it. In other words, you brought it up, so make up your mind.
Yes, McCain clearly has more experience in politics, and in Washington, than Obama. Biden has way, way more experience in politics, and in Washington, than Palin (who has zero in Washington). Even if you call it even on the experience part, which I don’t, it then boils down to who’s policies you like. Policies are more important than # of years in a job, long as you think your candidate will be able to make them realities.
How am I calling myself a “liberal”? I’m surprised at that assertion from you, John. I simply posted a quote from someone else, and linked the article from where I had excerpted it.
Again, I didn’t ask the question, (it was clearly quoted) although I do feel that it’s a good one, but I’m still wondering how that makes me a liberal? I do believe that if Obama had been properly and full vetted early on, as all candidates should be, Hillary would be the nominee. Remember just as he was being vetted late into the primaries, Hillary was winning a lot of the big states by wide margins!
If B.O’s questionable associations, from J. Wright, to the admitted domestic terrorist W. Ayers were reported early on by the media, Hillary would have probably been the DNC’s nominee. He got a total pass by the liberal media. It’s finally coming to light now, and many on the left will call it an act of desparation, or that it’s irrelevant, at least the undecideds will have something more to think about come November.
Okay, I’ll try again. But then I’m giving up. First you responded to the Palin poll with a request for an Obama poll (not a Biden poll). Then the quote you posted said "“Why are liberals comparing Obama’s experience to Palin’s instead of to McCain’s?” Okay, so you called for an Obama poll in response to a Palin poll, then your quote asked why liberals are doing this. Get it? Sheesh, where’s your sense of humor? Nobody here is going to actually think you’re a liberal, heaven forbid!
Was that about the same time that Rudy was winning the big states by wide margins for the Republicans?
BTW, how old was Obama when W. Ayers was doing his “terrorist” activities, and is this relevant? Was he convicted of anything? Please watch the clip Maestro posted in the other Sarah Palin thread and respond.
Ok, sorry for the confusion on the Palin/obama/biden/mccain thing!
But now the actual ties between B.O. and Ayers are coming to light, and it’s becoming abundantly clear that Obama was/is being, well, less than truthful about his association with this terrorist: (This is something that both democrats and republicans should read and do your own research, to help make a more informed decision about who could be elected as the most powerful person of the free world for the next 4 years!)
In the best tradition of Bill Clinton’s famous declaration that the answer to the question of whether or not he was having an affair with Monica depended on “what the definition of ‘is’ is,” Barack Obama was clearly splitting hairs and concealing the truth when he said that William Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”
The records of the administration of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), released last week by the University of Illinois, show that the Ayers-Obama connection was, in fact, an intimate collaboration and that it led to the only executive or administrative experience in Obama’s life.
After Walter Annenberg’s foundation offered several hundred million dollars to American public schools in the mid-'90s, William Ayers applied for $50 million for Chicago. The purpose of his application was to secure funds to “raise political consciousness” in Chicago’s public schools. After he won the grant, Ayers’s group chose Barack Obama to distribute the money. Between 1995 and 1999, Obama distributed the $50 million and raised another $60 million from other civic groups to augment it. In doing so, he was following Ayers’s admonition to grant the funds to “external” organizations, like American Community Organizations for Reform
Now (ACORN) to pair with schools and conduct programs to radicalize the students and politicize them.
Reading, math and science achievement tests counted for little in the CAC grants, but the school’s success in preaching a radical political agenda determined how much money they got.
Barack Obama should have run screaming at the sight of William Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn. Ayers has admitted bombing the U.S. Capitol building and the Pentagon, and his wife was sent to prison for failing to cooperate in solving the robbery of a Brink’s armored car in which two police officers were killed. Far from remorse, Ayers told The New York Times in September 2001 that he “wished he could have done more.”
Ayers only avoided conviction when the evidence against him turned out to be contained in illegally obtained wiretaps by the FBI. He was, in fact, guilty as sin.
That Obama should ally himself with Ayers is almost beyond understanding. The former terrorist had not repented of his views and the education grants he got were expressly designed to further them.
So let’s sum up Obama’s Chicago connections. His chief financial supporter was Tony Rezko, now on his way to federal prison. His spiritual adviser and mentor was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, of “God damn America” fame. And the guy who got him his only administrative job and put him in charge of doling out $50 million is William Ayers, a terrorist who was a domestic Osama bin Laden in his youth.
Even apart from the details of the Obama/Ayers connection, two key points emerge:
a) Obama lied and misled the American people in his description of his relationship with Ayers as casual and arm’s-length; and
b) Obama was consciously guided by Ayers’s radical philosophy, rooted in the teachings of leftist Saul Alinksy, in his distribution of CAC grant funds.
Since Obama is asking us to let him direct education spending by the federal government and wants us to trust his veracity, these are difficulties he will have to explain in order to get the votes to win.
Now that Obama is comfortably ahead in the polls, attention will understandably shift to him. We will want to know what kind of president he would make. The fact that, within the past 10 years, he participated in a radical program of political education conceptualized by an admitted radical terrorist offers no reassurance.
Why did Obama put up with Ayers? Because he got a big job and $50 million of patronage to distribute to his friends and supporters in Chicago. Why did he hang out with Jeremiah Wright? Because he was new in town, having grown up in Hawaii and Indonesia and having been educated at Columbia and Harvard, and needed all the local introductions he could get to jump-start his political career. Why was he so close to Rezko?
Because he funded Obama’s campaigns and helped him buy a house for $300,000 less than he otherwise would have had to pay.
I simply 
