A Second Hand Conjecture

An interesting debate occurred through email over my short jab at Obama’s experience. Now, I think it’s great when we have substantive debate about important issues, but I’m not above taking pot shots at our political class. A little sarcasm can go a long way towards highlighting a particular issue.

Mudslinging - the act of throwing around outright lies, innuendo, and gossip, in the hopes of tarnishing the opposition. There may be the whiff of truth somewhere, but it’s usually hidden beneath a partisan agenda.

Pot shots - humorously pointing out a negative feature of the opposition. Should be true in and of itself.

Substantive debate - the point/counter-point revealing of facts about a topic.

Now, I’m not claiming that the following is a complete debate about the issues brought up. But it does show that, a pot shot may lead to a greater discussion of the issues. I think if you look through some of the comments on recent posts about Palin you’ll see examples of mudslinging. Actually you can look through the mainstream media and see enough mudslinging.

Names have been replaced, because this isn’t about the people presenting these arguments.

Original Post:
Barack Obama has less experience then Geraldine Ferraro had when she was nominated for VP.

A:
Ouch. Um. Didn’t the Republicans freak about Bill Clinton’s non-experience in 1992, which was vastly more than Sarah Palin’s 21 months in office?

I’m just saying. The “experience” argument is a shallow one, and avoids the more substantive issues of the election. For both sides.

1:
Oh, I agree, there’s better things to talk about, but if they are going to advance an argument, then I’m of the mind to open up with all barrels to counter it. That’s certainly not the candidates or campaigns place in all cases, but someone has to counter these arguments.

And you’re forgetting the 6 years in elected office in Wasilla. While it may not be the biggest burg in America, it’s still more experience then Obama, or many of us have in running a government.

A:
Huh. So 6 years as a part-time mayor of 8,500 (while racking up a $20 million debt), and 21 months running the biggest state welfare recipient in the country equals 8 years in a state senate while teaching law at a top university and four years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? Remind me how that’s more, or better experience, please. Math is obvi not my strength.

My point is, the experience argument was silly against Obama, and it is silly against Palin. Notice at Mother Jones, the Nation, Washington Monthly, and even Think Progress, the focus is on Palin’s decisions while in office, such as demanding the Wasilla library ban books she didn’t like, or her position in a separatist movement and Ted Stevens’ 527, while her tenure’s length is noted only for the small-N it provides. I don’t recall such a consideration factoring into the “Is He Ready to Lead” commercials about Barry Hussein.

Again, if we’re being fair.

2:
Re: the experience argument against Clinton in 1992 was, as you say, an attempt to avoid more substantive issues of that election. But the reason it held water at the time was not because he was objectively inexperienced in governance. It was because he was comparatively VASTLY inexperienced in foreign relations. People supporting experienced candidates push that because experience is something of a weeding out process. And it’s one they trust, whether they ought to or not.

I think Obama would do well to argue that it’s not that important, rather than try to assert that his experience in running a campaign somehow gives him executive experience. I think his reluctance to do that is a sign that he expects to lose votes on the experience issue. It’s a circular logic that, like you said, both sides need to back off of.

3:
You should probably check out how many of those accusations against Palin are true (hint: closer to 0 than you obviously know).

Moreover, Obama doesn’t have half the experience you’re giving him credit for. For example, “four years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee”? He’s been running for POTUS for the last two years, reliably absent from Congress for the large majority of that time. Not exactly real foreign policy experience, is it? And he was a part-time lecturer at UofC, which is nowhere as demanding as it might sound.

The point is, Obama does not have the executive experience that Palin has, and in any case, she’s not running for POTUS, but instead for VP. Why is Obama comparing his experience to hers anyway?

A:
First off, as best I know, Obama hasn’t made the experience charge. People like David Frum have. And given Dick Cheney’s current trip to Azerbaijan, I think the importance of at least some indication of curiosity about foreign relations would help Pallin’s case, instead of her admission last month that she doens’t even know what a VP does, or her first ever passport issued late last year, issued only so she could visit the troops in Kuwait. If the argument about Obama is that he is vastly inexperienced in foreign relations, that is precisely what his selection of Biden was meant to remedy. How does Pallin’s presence on the ticket strengthen McCain on any substantive issues?

1:
Those are supposed to be serious questions about her decisions?

Since when are 527’s verboten, and what makes one organized by Ted Stevens more so. While McCain may be against them, I’m all for them. In fact, I donated to the Swift Boat Veterans before they made headlines. I also made a donation to Nader because what the Democrats were doing to him was positively undemocratic (which I still suffer for by getting his campaign mail.)

“The group was designed to serve as a political boot camp for Republican women in the state. She served as one of three directors until June 2005, when her name was replaced on state filings.”

That sounds like a positively good thing for any group to do. But I suppose the goal of that line of questioning is character assassination by association.

“her position in a separatist movement” I assume you’re talking about the AIP which has already been debunked. It was her husband, and the group has changed over the years.

About the book banning:

“She asked the library how she could go about banning books,” he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them.

That’s a far cry from “demanding the Wasilla library ban books she didn’t like” You know what, I’m sure mayors all across the country get asked some strange things from their constituents. And their responsibility is to see what is possible in order to serve their constituents. It also doesn’t sound like the request didn’t go far. And don’t many libraries have sections where more adult oriented material is located.

And the real question is what did Obama actually accomplish in that time period? What hard decisions did he make during all that time?

A:
Wait, are you wondering why it’s relevant Pallin was a prominent member of a type of group McCain has campaigned to forbid?

1:
Oh that John McCain, he’s such a Maverick. He even partners with someone who doesn’t fall in line 100% with his views.

4:
agree with 3 – especially “she’s not running for POTUS, but instead for VP. Why is Obama comparing his experience to hers anyway?”. VP’s do learn on the job.

no hate mail from anyone - but - in SOME respects, i think that WJC was a good president. (nafta, welfare reform, etc.) still - he had a steep learning curve, and probably at least some of it was due to less experience, both of clinton and his staff.

nevertheless, you cannot deny that the man has strong intellect and certain good abilities. in the long run, those with smarts, ability to observe and learn rapidly, and excellent judgement will always be able to trump a fair amount of experience.

She’s challenged those in her party who deserved to be booted out - and she did it successfully. She’s cut costs for her state. She is able to work with people on the other side of the aisle (”country first”).

Other factors, but I see these as the prime ones.

5: Also interestingly, he has a campaign manager that oversees those responsibilities, he does what?… shows up and give speeches. What executive decisions does he make? Where to eat on the campaign trail?

What foreign policy experience does he have, really? Giving a speech in Europe doesn’t count. Obama who was chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs has convened no policy hearings since he took over as its chairman. Take that back, Sen. Obama presided over only one subcommittee meeting since he became chairman — and that one was not until April 8, 2008, over fifteen months later? And what meeting was that for? THE SITUATION IN IRAQ? Nope. How ’bout IRAQ AFTER THE SURGE: MILITARY PROSPECTS or IRAQ 2012: WHAT CAN IT LOOK LIKE, HOW DO WE GET THERE? ? Nada. Maybe he’s interested in TREATIES, guess not, it must be THE CONTINUING CRISIS IN DARFUR Damn not that one either. The meeting he presides in is NOMINATIONS. Tsk Tsk, so many lost opportunities to learn.

BTW, with regards to bordering Russia, President Vladimir Putin has long promised to restore Russian control over a 47000 sq. km (18000 sq. mile) piece of the Bering Sea, who do you think will fight for it, Obama and Biden or Miss Alaska, God fearing, gun tottin, moose killin, mother. I’m guessing she doesn’t fears bears.

Sphere: Related Content

Trackback URI | Comments RSS