You don't just walk into Washington, unless you're a maverick like John McCain, who walks the walk and has been reforming Washington all along, which is why it's so desperately in need of reform. Its Beltway is guarded by more than lobbyists, which is why we must have that reform and that process of reforming also. There is corruption there that doesn't sleep much, it's kind of wide awake; the Unblinking Eye is, you know, watching constantly and it's very watchful. It is an elitist wasteland, just full of earmarks and taxes and inefficiencies, and special interests also.
Larison's also very good on how McCain has taken someone who's to all evidence a good person, and a good governor, and elevated her via a kind of political affirmative action to a position vastly beyond her competence, and probably destroyed her.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Marty, Biden has a long legislative history in which his opinions and abilities are clearly demonstrated. Like his history, or don't, a single misspeak won't change it.
Palin came to the interview armed with talking points. One of which included that McCain was an 'economic reformer'.
All Couric did was to ask her to give an example to back her claim. It was a reasonable request, it would've been unreasonable to expect that anyone would hear any claim made and not look for some proof that it was true.
And the duty of the VP isn't to 'break ties in the Senate', though that can be useful, maybe once or twice in their term.
It is to SERVE as PRESIDENT if the President no longer can.
And given that, in the history of our Presidency, this has happened 9 times out of 40'something, that means almost a quarter of all VP's have ended up being our President.
As far as the Secretary of State becoming President, you're asking that it become a regular duty of a person appointed by the President, after they are elected, in which the electorate has no role in picking, have a 25 percent chance of becoming the head of our country.
Yes, you are absolutely right -- coherent and even persuasive speech is an important part of the job, and I'm sorry if I underrated it. It does matter.
But even if you give that it is 30% of the job (surely knowing what you want to persuade people to do should take more brain space than figuring out how to persuade them), it constitutes 80% of politicking. And because we are so concerned about getting the kind of smooth answers we see from scripted actors and long successful spin artists on TV, sincere extemporaneous speaking is near dead in our public discourse. Everything is talking points, everything is rhetoric (in the bad sense of the word), everything is about style instead of substance. So Palin follows the rules, and she does it very, very badly. If she tried to talk like a real person would talk, she might make a lot more sense -- but that would torpedo her immediately. No one talks on TV like you do in your living room (or at a diplomatic summit, or to a Senator in your office, etc.). If we let her talk naturally, she might make no sense at all then, either. I'm just saying, we'll never know as long as she's running for office whether she's smart enough or not. Guys that look smart can be slick and heavily advised. Guys that look dumb might just have bad PR teams. It's a fault in the system that makes it reasonable for people to vote issues instead of personality or character, as dull as that is -- or even makes it understandable when people don't vote at all.
I don't know about you, but how she spoke in the interview is NOT how I speak, even in my living room.
Again, I wasn't talking about intelligent speech, even. (Big words, impressive concepts, complicated syntax), I was talking about INTELLIGIBLE speech.
Namely, even if you don't agree with what she said, you should be able to know, and understand what it was she was trying to say.
This isn't about slickness, it is about coherence.
We can't read minds, we can't peer into souls (at least most of us). So, I don't know what she knows, or what she'll do, or what she thinks, unless she effectively communicates it to me.
By the time she is able to show me what she is going to do, it is a little too late to decide if I want her in the position to do so.
Col. Lang's idea about getting rid of the VP is just that, an idea. I am loathe to amend the Constitution so I don't know that I'd favor it. It does seem that Constitutionally at least, the VP has little to do and should spend it reading up on stuff and shadowing the Prez in case he/she has to take over.
However, I don't want to see anymore Dick Cheney type VP's that's for sure! That's a little too much hands on for me!
I also think that unlike Palin, the similarly inexperienced and resume-thin Obama is an effective communicator. I thought his speech at the Democratic National Convention was inspiring. But what did he say? I couldn't tell you now, a month later. We need change. We need a lot of stuff done that's going to cost a lot of money, and the government is going to do it for you. I am just as dedicated to being Team America World Police as McCain. Well, ok. Here we are. Neither presidential candidate seems to really have a plan for the economic mess. Obama even says he might to put his grand plans on hold due to the mess.
How about a bumper sticker that says "We're Screwed '08.
The other thing that bugs me is that for years Ron Paul has said that our financial markets and system are on shaky ground and everyone acted like he was some sort of kook or something.
All you people who didn't vote for my man Ron, you have no one to blame but yourselves ;->
No, Karen, I do know that she did a poor job of communicating. And your correction is taken well, it does matter.
I'm trying to say that if you were sitting at a kitchen table with her she would try to talk one way, but since she's running for office she is instructed to talk in this very specific manner, and she is no good at that. No contention there, she is definitely not good at that. But I don't KNOW if she's be good at talking to me at her kitchen table, and I never will. And I can't KNOW if Biden or McCain or Obama or Palin would absolutely creep me out, or totally puff me up with admiration, or whatever, at my kitchen table, because campaigns are all show in a nation that puts on the most and biggest shows ever.
You can argue that this is that water she will be swimming in when she is VP, and you would be absolutely right. So, we make our leaders part P.T. Barnum I guess we need to elect someone who is good at hawking. But I wish we didn't do either.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.