TheAgitator.com
Vaguer, Please
Thursday, September 18th, 2008Sarah Palin, when asked at a controlled “town hall” meeting what specific foreign policy experience she has that qualifies her to be president:
Well, I think because I’m a Washington outsider that opponents are going to be looking for a whole lot of things that they can criticize and they can kind of try to beat the candidates here, who chose me as his partner, to kind of tear down the ticket. But as for foreign policy, you know, I think that I am prepared and I know that on January 20th, if we are so blessed as to be sworn into office as your president and vice president, certainly we’ll be ready. I’ll be ready. I have that confidence. I have that readiness.
And if you want specifics with specific policy or countries, go ahead and you can ask me. You can even play stump the candidate if you want to. But we are ready to serve.
Okay, so I was wrong.
Too bad she doesn’t know how to articulate that she doesn’t have a clue like Alan Greenspan could. My favorite Greenspan quote from after 9/11/2001:
“In light of the unusually large uncertainties clouding the geopolitical situation in the short run and their apparent effects on economic decision making, the Committee does not believe it can usefully characterize the current balance of risks with respect to the prospects for its long-run goals of price stability and sustainable economic growth. Rather, the Committee decided to refrain from making that determination until some of those uncertainties abate. In the current circumstances, heightened surveillance is particularly informative.”
Why such a focus on having someone with experience? Experience in politics, as we see daily on your site and others, simply means Already Corrupted. I say we open up the phone book, spread out all the pages, and throw two darts. One for President and one for Vice President. I’d much rather have someone like Palin as someone like Biden or McCain for that matter.
Don’t be to hard on yourself. A lot of people are wrong when they take a first look at a politician. In my 31 years on this Earth I’ve learned that the more you look at pols the less you like them, even if at first glace they appeared okay :)
She could spin it as “I’ll give a fresh look at a clearly flawed policies of our predisesors and opponants” but this outright denial of lack of experience is disturbing. Its clear she doesn’t have the exeperience but instead of admiting and spining she just lies. It seems to be a theme for McPalin.
@Dale Boley
So by that logic – Obama is the choice then.
@ Dale
Bingo. Why would having “experience” in US foregin policy the last 50 years be a plus? Anyone?
Radley,
you were in Alaska recently- were you able to view Russia?
if so then step up to the plate and consider a VP nomination.
If that is all it takes, Alaska will see a rash of visitors in the next election cycle.
My favorite: “..if we are so blessed as to be sworn into office as your president and vice president..” She really believes that G-d will make her VP. And this belief means that anything done on the campaign trail is out of her hands. Will of G-d dontcha know?
Dale,
I am almost with you. But there is a big difference between a randomly selected person from the phone book and Palin. The problem and danger with Palin is that she thinks she is somehow qualified. Your typical man on the street is going to admit that he has no clue what the fuck is going on.
Not being part of the Washington machine is probably a good thing in a President, but you need to have a clue, especially about foreign policy which is one of the few things that the president is actually supposed to do.
And I may just be picky (or unrealistic) here, but I would really like to see a politician who, even if he is going to lie, will at least answer the question asked of him (or her) rather than going on about some irrelevant bullshit.
Exactly. This question isn’t about having experience. It’s about having a knowledge and understanding of what foreign policy is, when has it worked and when has it failed. She obviously is ignorant about the subject and so chose not to answer the question. And, like our current President, she’s so incredibly arrogant, she actually thinks ignorance is an acceptable quality for someone in high office.
My concerns about her foreign-policy experience are twofold:
1) She might end up as president, and presidents have the power to get us into wars, including wars with nuclear armed opponents. Having someone both clueless and arrogant about foreign policy (she fits both bills) in a position that can get us into that much trouble scares me. I wouldn’t mind someone who honestly admitted they don’t know a bunch about foreign policy, but that had an even remotely humble outlook about it.
2) Because she’s inexperienced she’s being coached (ie corrupted) by McCain’s advisers as we speak. Just listening to that interview she did last week she’s already starting to sound scary.
1) She might end up as president
If McCain gets elected to two terms, I would bet a lot of money on her being president before 2017.
as I said in that thread:
If Radley’s original premise is “McCain could have done worse” I agree, although it’s looking like even I might have to eat those words with each new development.
could’ve used some Old Bay, my words would have tasted better.
- to add to jonathan’s post above, remember that this is just one small area of power the president has. his reasons for foreign policy are just as applicable to other areas of concern.
except energy. she’s a genius about that topic.
Why should Palin have experience in foreign matters, when libertarians have similar non-experience with history? Libertards have faith in their ideology; Sarah Palin has faith in her ideology. Palin and libertarians are basically the same.
That’s HILARIOUS, the way Blueskyboris took the last letters of “libertarian” and turned it to “libertard!” Because, like, libertarians are retarded! Man, he is awesome with wordplay.
Boris,
Maybe if you were Bortarded yourself you’d realize that Libertarians don’t put faith in anything other than ourselves because that’s the only thing you count on in the end. History has a habit of pointing that out time and time again. Ideology fails and corrupts, individuals prevail and prosper.
What, exactly, was Bill Clinton’s foreign policy experience in 1992?
What, exactly, was John Edwards’ foreign policy experience in 2004, when he was selected as Kerry’s VP in the middle of his single term in office?
What, exactly, is Obama’s foreign policy experience, aside from secretly negotiating in violation of the Logan Act?
Instead of just reading today’s talking points, why don’t you seriously consider if you are actually worried about Palin’s foreign policy experience verses Obama’s, or verses Edwards’, or verses Clinton’s. The fact is, each party brings with it its team of advisors and think-tank people. So a President always learns on the job, along with the Vice President.
The person with the MOST foreign policy experience ever to be Vice President was probably Dick Cheney. Yet you’d recoil at him. So I detect no consistency at all in the level of support of a person based on experience, yet I do detect a lot of snark.
Keep patting yourself of the back. No one is laughing at you.
Let’s look at the educational background of your two options:
Obama:
Occidental College – Two years.
Columbia University – B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.
Harvard – Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
& Biden:
University of Delaware – B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.
Syracuse University College of Law – Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain:
United States Naval Academy – Class rank 894 of 899
& Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University – 1 semester
North Idaho College – 2 semesters – general study
University of Idaho – 2 semesters – journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College – 1 semester
University of Idaho – 3 semesters – B.A. in journalism
Now, which team are you going to hire ?
Two political science majors verses two real Americans? Excuse me, but political science is a hack, B.S. major. I should know, because I majored in it also. It’s complete garbage.
Sydney, do I understand correctly: by “real Americans” you mean “uneducated”, and you consider that a plus?
I don’t mean “uneducated” when I say “real Americans.” But if that’s what you think, it really says a lot about you.
by “Real Americans” he means those who ditch their disfigured first wives to marry millionaire heiresses, or those who install tanning beds in their mansions. Like me.
and “Juris Doctor” isn’t even a real doctor- another strike against Obama!
Contest! Guess what constitutes a “real American” to Sidney Carton! I say, “white people with guns.” Or maybe just, “Republicans.” What say all of you?
So when do we go to war with Spain?
Academics make terrible politicians. They have no clue about administrating anything and they think that they know how to do it.
Sydney, as I said above, it’s not about experience. It’s about knowledge and understanding. And, again, it takes a lot of arrogance to be as confident and ignorant as Palin is.
To say that someone with an education (through graduate or law school) is an “academic” is a pretty limited viewpoint. I think an academic is someone who stays in education after receiving their degrees — that’s a fairly commonly accepted definition, so I think Andre’s point is rather moot.
I think both parties would be apt to lie or mislead about their experience with foreign policy. The hot button topic at the moment is the economy, and I tend to think that right now, because they are connected to the Bush record with a Republican Congress for several years, McCain has many things he will have to defend (and likely lie about).
On either side, I see no solutions coming from either of these people, and that’s pretty freaking scary.
David Brooks (with whom I frequently disagree) had a very good column in Tuesday’s NY Times on the question of Palin’s qualifications. The reality is that there is no life experience that adequately prepares someone to be president. What is deeply troubling about Palin is that she exhibits the same disinterest in anything outside of her ideological worldview as Bush.
When she flies off the handle at Russian incursion into Georgia, and proclaims that we may have to fight Russia, does she understand that not only is there the WWII analogy of Neville Chamberlain to consider, there is also the web of alliances and over-”readiness” that led to WWI? Does she even know how that war began and the lessons it teaches about the stupidity of bluster in international affairs? Does she really know the difference between the Sunni and the Shia? What about the Kurds? What’s her position on Kashmir? Where does she think the US should be on Darfur? Can she find it on a map? Does she own a map?
She brags about how energy policy is “her baby.” Give me a break. Does she know anything substantial about energy policy other than crude oil mining in Alaska? Does she know anything at all about solar, nuclear, geothermal, ethanol? What’s her position on the Investment Tax Credit? What about the Production Tax Credit? Should both be extended at current levels? How about Yucca Mountain? Does she know what state it’s in and why it’s relevant to energy policy? Is that part of “her baby,” or something she still needs to bone up on before debating Biden?
I have no doubt that all three of the other candidates– McCain, Obama, and Biden– are each intellectually curious people who view knowledge of history and current affairs as an absolute necessity to the jobs they’re seeking. Palin’s faking it, and it shows. That’s what the Putins, Chavezes, and, yes, Bin Ladens of the world will see: that she’s not just unqualified now, but unqualifiable ever because of her incredible shallowness.
Contrary to the McCain/Palin campaign, America does, in fact, need elite– in the sense of well-educated, intelligent, thoughtful– people in key positions of government and business. The system normally produces that result, with notable exceptions. Explicitly rejecting the need for intellectual depth and breadth, and picking someone because of their similarity to some oversimplified version of “real America” (e.g., “hockey moms”) to steer the country through a tremendously complex world is national Russian roulette.
It’s an American tragedy that she ever rose beyond the ranks of TV news.
As for McCain, the Social Security Administration’s actuarial tables give him a 1 out of 7 chance of dying during his first term, and a 1 out of 3 chance if the country were foolhardy enough to elect him to a second term. I don’t think she’ll be any more qualified then than she is right now, which is to say– not at all.
Very interesting comments and rejoinders. It would be more effective for all to remain more civil in disagreeing. I was born in 1934 to a Depression-ruined farm family that finally pulled through, thanks to FDR, the New deal and hard work. I eventually got a good college education, followed by graduate school and became a teacher of music. My higher education degrees came with much hard work and at times I felt like giving up like some of my friends did. It is easy to find excuses to do so.
The college records of candidates say a lot to me about people and their perseverense and goals. Obama’s ‘magna cum laude’ law degree says that among very select bright peers, he was graduated “with great honor”, the only higher designation being ’summa cum laude’ reserved to one recipient. There can be more than one ‘magna’… Next down fom ‘magna’ is ‘cum laude,’ in itself hard to come by without a lot of hard work. To read how low a standing John McCain had in his West Point class is disturbing. What on earth was he doing instead of studying? Don’t bother to answer that onel
To me, Obama has the intellect and judgement to make full use the knowledge gained from really applying himself during his years of formal education. I want someone smarter than myself in the White House, and have been waiting a long ime for someone of his stature to come along. He represents my values and I am sure he has the skills and experience necessary to lead our country.
This goes way far beyond Palin not having any experience. It’s not having any perspective, not having any knowledge and not having any true grasp on our relations in the wider world and their impact.
Please expand on this. I was alarmed by her answer as well and I hope people noticed there was zero meat on the bones. What is her foreign policy experience specifically? Apparently none, according to her.
Palin is no fool, but that sounded like something a stereotypical beauty pageant contestant would say.
Not only does she not bring anything to the table in terms of foreign policy experience, but the statement she made was totally incoherent. It is not even a well thought out answer to the question.
Can’t you tell Sydney just trolled you guys?
Is an obvious troll.
I spent a summer in the Soviet Union, can I be a VP too?
John Adams read Homer – in Greek. Our founding fathers – and mothers – studied ancient history and philosphy and had a much broader understanding of the world than just about any one in government these days. They had a thirst for knowledge and they founded Universities.
Since when is it a bad thing to have a Harvard education and it is a good thing to barely graduate from college and have no interest in the world other than through the Bilble’s interpretation?
I realize its not a great circumstance, the problem is that Barack Obama sets the bar on experience so very low that I’m willing to vote for the ticket with a veep who needs brought up to speed. She does have a couple of solid accomplishments; we’ll just have to hope she’s a quick study.