To be fair, I have never heard a VP candidate asked questions about their running mate's votes. Not Biden, not Lieberman, not Edwards, not Cheney, not Gore, not Kemp, no one. I would think if it were me and I had precious time to ask a candidate questions, I would focus on what the candidate would do if she were elected, not what she knows about her running mate's record or whether or not she knows the particular label for a policy. Then again, I hate "gotcha" questions.
I fear Russia is moving toward a war with us. We can't stand by while the Russians try to reabsorb the former states that comprised the Soviet Union.
To be fair, I posted that I found the videos to be pretty stupid gotcha things, and that I wouldn't take much from them because of the grueling schedule the candidates are under - flying to 5 states in a day giving 15 speeches and not getting much sleep. To be fair, people are scouring through 30 or 40 hours of interviews with Palin looking for anything they can to put her down, too. And those interviews are over the top by the media who are holding her to some higher standard than they do the other candidates - no softball questions, and a staff of researchers coming up with whatever tough things to ask her to get a gotcha moment on film.
It's funny to me how some on this board are flocking to Palin's defense, saying "she shouldn't be required to know how John McCain has voted in his 26 years in the senate." Listen - if you are going around promoting McCain as a maverick and talking about how he has stood up to members of both parties and lobbyists who have pushed for deregulation, you better be able to produce one solid example of when McCain has actually fought for increased regulation. Just one. Or don't make it part of your platform. The fact of the matter is that McCain has almost always sided with less regulation, not more. Which is exactly what got us into this mess. Now if a member of the media actually came at Palin with a question completely unrelated to anything she has talked about during this campaign, it would be fair to say she shouldn't be expected to know the answer. But when you're promoting your own foreign policy experience, or your own energy experience, or your running mate's record on deregulation, you sure as shit better be able to talk about it. If you can't, you're either lazy, unprepared or making up lies to deceive the voters. Neither of which qualities are desirable for a president or vice president. -Pop
I can't say that I've seen a lot of her interviews, but thats what I've come out of them thinking She'll come out and say something about McCain, they'll ask her "Well what is a time when he did that?" and then can't back it up. Like I saw part of something yesterday and her answer was "I don't know. I'll look it up and get back to you." She just comes off looking bad every time.
NEW YORK - Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin defended her comment that the proximity of Russia to her home state of Alaska gives her foreign policy experience, explaining in a CBS interview aired Thursday that "we have trade missions back and forth." Palin, the 44-year-old Alaska governor, has never visited Russia and had never traveled outside North America until last year. She also had never met a foreign leader until her trip this week to New York. In the interview, she did not offer any examples of being involved in any negotiations with Russia.When Couric asked how Alaska's closeness to Russia enhanced her foreign policy experience, Palin said, "Well, it certainly does because our ... our next-door neighbors are foreign countries." Alaska shares a border with Canada. ******** Palin didn't answer directly when Couric inquired about whether she had been involved in any negotiations with the Russians. "We have trade missions back and forth," she replied, although Russia is not among the state's top 20 export partners. As she continued, Palin brought up Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. "It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where — where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is — from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to ... to our state," she said. Palin has two trade specialists working for the governor's office. The top countries receiving Alaskan goods are Japan, Korea, China, Canada and Germany, according to 2006 export data, the most recent figures published, with seafood accounting for 50 percent of exports http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080926/ap_on_el_pr/palin Part of that interivew: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=9907575&ch=4226716&src=news
Again, all I ask for is consistency. Was Joe Biden ever asked why he believed that Barack Obama wasn't qualified to be President and has now changed his mind? If he was, did he give a satisfactory answer? I know it's hard for someone on the left to believe, but one can be a maverick and not believe in increased governmental interference. This conclusion leads me to believe you have no idea what you're talking about. My point was they should ask her about what she would do, not which legislation her candidate would put through. She has to toe McCain's line while she's VP. I'm interested in her views if she ever becomes President. You seem horrified that any candidate would ever play politics. Thank goodness the Democrats don't.
You're completely missing the point. Palin is/was talking about McCain as a maverick in relation to his record for pushing for more regulation. Which apparently doesn't exist. Surely McCain has stood up to his own party in the past, and I'm well aware of that. Unfortunately for his campaign, his running mate doesn't know one example of that, and his own policies now go against the very items he bucked his own party line on before this campaign. That doesn't sound like a maverick to me. That sounds like "you better align your policies more closely to typical conservatives, or you're going to lose your base." More regulation would have helped or hurt this situation? If you believe the latter, I'd like you to explain your position. I'm a strong believer in free market as well, but unchecked markets are a disaster waiting to happen. I'm sure that sounded good when you typed it. Perhaps your reading comprehension is lacking. I accept that all candidates play politics. The good ones actually have something that sounds intelligent to say when they are called on inconsistencies. Palin seems completely out of her league. And to think, if McCain somehow wins in November, there's a better-than-average chance she'll end up being the one sitting across the table from world leaders, Cabinet members, members of Congress, financial leaders, heads of government agencies, etc., not knowing what she is talking about. You'll have to excuse me if the thought doesn't exactly inspire confidence from me as an American. -Pop
And he talked about reforming oversight of the GSEs. It only takes one. Other than that, he's argued for less regulation--like Janet Reno not demanding an end to redlining under threat of investigation. Actually, Sarah Palin was asked about one area where he requested more regulation, not where he bucked the party. And exactly what policies now go against his own beliefs? In comparison, he's certainly more willing to challenge the status quo in his Party than is either Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain. The problem ocurred BECAUSE the government interefered in the free market. Let's go back to 1977, shall we? Let's start with The Housing Financial Discrimination Act, pushed through by a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President. Let's then move forward to the Clinton Administration, where he instructed his Attorney General to threaten banks who did not make sub-prime loans to affected areas. Finally, let's talk about this Democratic Congress who demanded that Fannie and Freddie securitize these sub-prime mortgages and who were allowed to cook their books by those very oversight committees. Previously, they had been only in the conforming loan business. I could go on and on and on and on, but at some point you're going to have to do your own research. The MBS business is supposed to be a sleepy backwater with the tranches overcollateralized. However, at some point one party decided that EVERYONE should be allowed to own a home, regardless of income or ability to pay. It wasn't deregulation that caused this problem; it was over-regulation--forcing banks to write bad loans and FNMA and FHLMC forced to securitize garbage. She is out of her league. I don't know why you want me to defend her. But let's not hold up Barack Obama as another Bill Clinton. Without a teleprompter, he's a babbling idiot. If you'd like an example, I'll point to any debate in which he's participated. First, check his response to Rick Warren's question about when life begins. Second, check his reponse to Charlie Gibson's question about capital gains. He's all forest and no trees. He can't get past the nuance to make a concrete decision. How is that different than Obama sitting across from these people?
Honestly, the only difference I see is that one is treated with kid gloves by the media while the other has been demonized and actually vetted. They both seem to be big draws for their respective base, and they both seem to flounder when they don't have their teleprompters. What has Obama accomplished to warrant him be ready to lead the nation? The most significant achievement I can find is that he's written two autobiographies. I wish the White House would release the tape of yesterday's meeting in the Cabinet room. I would love to see exactly how Obama handled himself in that situation as the "head of the party", even with Paulson's cheat sheet. I can tell it must have been a disaster, because otherwise everyone would be saying what a bang-up job Obama did instead of playing the blame-game with McCain.
Not in terms of experience--they're both completely unqualified. I completely disagree with Barack Obama's worldview, and I don't think Gov. Palin has one. I hate my choice in November.
