“There are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, ‘Who is this man?’ and ‘Can we trust this man with the presidency?’ “
— Fred Thompson on John McCain, Sept. 2
This was the most effective line of the entire Republican convention: a ringing affirmation of John McCain’s authenticity and a not-so-subtle indictment of Barack Obama’s insubstantiality. What’s left of this line of argument, however, after John McCain picks Sarah Palin for vice president?
Palin is an admirable and formidable woman. She has energized the Republican base and single-handedly unified the Republican convention behind McCain. She performed spectacularly in her acceptance speech. Nonetheless, the choice of Palin remains deeply problematic.
It’s clear that McCain picked her because he had decided that he needed a game-changer. But why? He’d closed the gap in the polls with Obama. True, that had more to do with Obama sagging than McCain gaining. But what’s the difference? You win either way.
Obama was sagging because of missteps that reflected the fundamental weakness of his candidacy. Which suggested McCain’s strategy: Make this a referendum on Obama, surely the least experienced, least qualified, least prepared presidential nominee in living memory.
Palin fatally undermines this entire line of attack. This is through no fault of her own. It is simply a function of her rookie status….
I like Krauthammer, but he’s off-base here. If there’s a weakness with Palin, it’s her lack of foreign policy experience. But on the Republican side, that weakness is in the backup position, on the Democratic side it’s in the point position. This makes the Democratic talking point, “What happens if McCain croaks?!” Of course, the Republican response should be, “What if Obama doesn’t?”
If you can trust McCain with the Presidency, why can’t you trust him to pick a Vice President?
And that is the point, Palin is just as experienced as Obama. Palin will have time to learn on the job, Obama doesn’t.
That having been said I think experience is overrated.
Rookie? The O man has 146 hours in Congress actually. No doubt he has spent the rest of his “four years” in deep study of the international scene, domestic policies, and planning all the “change” needed. Too bad he hasn’t articulated it so we could evaluate it. It seems that we have the community organizer as top pick for the Dems and 2nd -in-command sequence for the GOP – at least to this Independent.
yes #3, lost in all the talk of experience is the ability to analyze and judge. I am far more confident in Palin’s ability than Obama’s, based on what I have seen of their past record. More confident in McCain too than Obama….
CK is usually on target, but I really get tired of this “too inexperienced — too young”, i.e. you are never ready to lead until you are an old gray wizard nonsense.
Have these people never heard of Joan of Arc? She took command of the French army and whipped the English left and right. She was about 18, and burned by the English for heresy before the age of 20.
Have these people never heard of Alexander the Great? He took command of his dad’s army at about 16 and ruled the whole known world by the age of 20. Palin is twice that age plus four more years for good measure.
I close my eyes and imagine some underling telling Alex that he is too inexperienced to rule. In the next scene the underling is tumbling down the steps in hot pursuit of his rolling head.
Charles Krauthammer was apparently a quite accomplished surgeon prior to his accident. Now he is a quite accomplished journalist, however he does not seem to have a good sense of leadership abilities. That is something that Palin has in abundance despite CK’s total misread as follows: “Palin does not reach Obama’s mesmeric level. Her appeal is far more earthy, workmanlike and direct. Yet she managed to banish a week’s worth of unfriendly media scrutiny and self-inflicted personal liabilities with a single triumphant speech.”
“Banish”, that is the point, Charles. She got exactly what she wanted in one hour. You have listened to Obama for hundereds of hours before falling under his spell.
Back to Joan and Alexander. I guess we would have written them of too. Too “earthy, workmanlike and direct.” What a shame.
I agree #6. CK is reliable but here he is wrong. I like what I see in Sarah. I think there is even MORE in her ability than has been “projected”. She is a God given natural in politics, gifted as one commentator said. She is ready. I hope they are called.
Heh! Remember to look for the lipstick.
Even Charles nods.
The first thing a President must do is get elected, and the first thing a vice president must do is help.
In a twisted way, the lack of experience that CK perceives is an asset; there is nothing else to attack her with other than policy issues that were going to be used against McCain anyway. This lets McCain graciously allow his opponent to play to McCain’s own strength.
I think experience is very important. I think the person’s character is more important. Young talented, inexperienced people emerge all the time who are up to the challenges they face (e.g. 6 above). Likewise, experienced, seasoned people can fail. The first President Bush had an incredible resume, but no Democrats seem to think that was enough…. I do wish tha Palin (and Obama) had more experience, but in the end who they are as people remains the most important issue. Also, it is always the case that Presidents have to lean heavily on advisors. You cannot know about everything and humility is helpful. In either case, God grant us the leadership we need and not what we deserve.
Inexperienced can be easily fixed. Ignorant and arrogant is harder to fix.
Obama’s choice of Biden came after months of vetting and judgment. It is a good way to handle policy and make choices.
What seems to be the case is that McCain went on his gut. It may have been bold and shrewd, but it does not reflect wisdom or prudence.
I’m always amused by the swipes toward Obama’s experience and intelligence. He has shown good judgment in his hiring of campaign staff; he has managed a flawless campaign over the last year.
Could Palin have had the same success? Her record of management of Alaska seems no better than other governors. And Alaska is small – about 670,000 people. Karl Rove once denigrated another candidate with a much greater pedigree….
Obama has shown a much stronger ability than any Democrat for the last 40 years to respond to attacks. That’s commander in chief quality. He even brought down the Clintons and the DLC.
Is he arrogant? Perhaps. It doesn’t seem that way to me. He does radiate confidence – a plus, I think – and calmness under fire seems like a useful trait.
And as far as Obama’s character, how does one evaluate that?
His family life is a bit more … traditional than McCain’s.
He called Sarah Palin to congratulate her; he said her children were off limits.
He even took up McCain’s foreign policy challenge by visiting Europe and the Middle East.
He has not discussed McCain’s ties to the Keating scandal or to Abramoff.
Nor has he attacked McCain’s wife.
He’s continually praised McCain’s service to the country.
As the son of a single mother he worked hard, studied, played by the rules, and wasn’t satisfied by second best. Unlike many college students, he went to college to read and study. And he was successful.
I’m always perplexed by the anti-intelligence wing of the right. Why shouldn’t we want someone who knows the law well enough they taught lawyers – and taught them at one of the most conservative law schools in the country?
Deeply problematic? Fatally flawed? Oh please, I really dislike hyperbole. “Palin is an admirable and formidable woman. She has energized the Republican base and single-handedly unified the Republican convention behind McCain” and for that the MSM [i]must[/i] find any opportunity to discredit her and her ticket. Obama must win, it is pre-ordained.
Some people forget Alaska’s neighbors on the north and west are Russia and on the east and south are Canada. She already has more foreign affairs experience then most politicians, especially those from the midwest. Besides she shows common sense, which I trust more than all the pundits inside the beltway or New York City.
#11–I was thinking pretty much the same thing. When I was 24 years old Uncle Sam handed me a .45 and told me to go lead Marines. I got over my inexperience relatively quickly. But stupid is forever.
#12–I respectfully disagree. When someone like Iran, Cuba, Russia, China etc., etc., etc. decides to challenge Obama, he can’t take months to decide. Life and geopolitical reality will not allow us the luxury of another Jimmy Carter in the White House.
To all–Anyone who can kill and dress a moose before dawn can’t be bad. Sounds like a ladder TR to me; which suits me just fine.
I just noticed, if you say: “Obama and Biden” real fast, it sounds a lot like: “Osama Bin Laden.” Coincidence? Not so far fetched. There are many so-called coincidences, such as Steven Wright’s: “24 cans in a case of beer, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence?”
OOPS–That should be “ladder day TR”.
For whatever it’s worth, “US” Magazine has lost in excess of 10,000 subscribers for their article on the Palan’s, thousands more are boycotting the things that they advertize in “US” magazine.
#12: I think better of Obama than of Biden. (Biden has always come accross to me as a nasty piece of work and his promise to use his office to prosecute his predecessors does not inspire me).
“And as far as Obama’s character, how does one evaluate that?”
Well, we can look at what he has, or hasn’t done.
1. His family life is traditional, however he voted for partial birth abortion, and refused, while chairman of the committee to allow infants born alive to receive protection.
He takes care of his kids and wife, but has a half brother in Kenya who lives on less than a dollar a day. When he went touring around the world, he somehow did not find time to see his brother or to help him in any way. (I think family values includes not just looking after your kids, but also protecting infants, and making sure blood relatives don’t starve).
2. He has been civilized about Sarah Palin and others, and I appreciate civility. Civility is a good thing.
3. It is nice to be able to go on a world tour, especially on someone else’s dime. I would have felt better if he had gone to Kenya to see his brother, rather than doing the triumphant round the world “victory lap thang” during preseason. Whatever. However a trip to foreign parts (which many kids do in college, and which I have done myself) does not give one experience in foreign affairs. Going to say “Hi” is different from sitting down and trying to negotiate a difficult treaty on the subject of nuclear missiles or trade. Palin, on the other hand, has had to discuss trade limits with Russia and Japan, simply because they are in her back yard.
“As the son of a single mother he worked hard, studied, played by the rules, and wasn’t satisfied by second best. Unlike many college students, he went to college to read and study. And he was successful.”
Granted. So did Palin. So did I. So do most people. This is what is considered “normal”. It is not usually considered a reason for a big parade down Main Street. Most people expect to study hard and to play by the rules. Fewer are rewarded as richly as are those who also happen to be young black men who have the benefit of affirmative action. That’s something that Palin did not benefit from. I see lots of poor white kids from single mother homes, who study hard, play by the rules, hold three jobs (none of them “community organizer” in order to put themselves through college, who don’t have his advantages, and who are no less deserving of them.
However, Obama can’t help having had the advantages of affirmative action (any more than W could help being born wealthy) and both would have been fools not to take advantage of advantages honestly come by. I do not hold this against him. Neither do I consider it a signficant virtue.
“I’m always perplexed by the anti-intelligence wing of the right. Why shouldn’t we want someone who knows the law well enough they taught lawyers – and taught them at one of the most conservative law schools in the country? ”
Probably because there is a difference between the sort of native shrewdness, and commonsense of Palin, and the “too clever by half” “intelligence” of folks like “We will prosecute” our predecessor Biden, who, clever or not, was busted plagerizing.
Obama does strike me as intelligent, so did Hillary, and so did Bill Clinton. (I thought Nixon, the first president I am ashamed to have voted for (mea culpa) was also intelligent. Character is more important than intelligence. I have not seen any character flaws in Obama other than arrogance (the “victory lap around the world”) and self centeredness (he is not his brother’s keeper). Those are flaws of youth, and he may well grow out of them. I know nothing bad about him beyond that.
As to whether his intelligence will flourish into the kindly, service directed intelligence of an Adlai Stevenson, or into the self serving cunning of other US politicians, time will tell.
John McCain did what John McCain always does …………he picked who John McCain wanted.
AP+
Actually, David it’s “latter day T.R.”
Palin is going o be like Reagan. To the thoughtful and careful, she will be an embarassment. To the run-of-the-mill voter and to the Rep. party, she will be an absolute godsend. The vp is not supposed to be the Mind, the vp is supposed to be the hot fudge that makes the sundae. If you want a careful, skilled, politically canny, powerful effective power behind the throne, you get Dick Cheney. I am not a Bush-loather, but I DO fear the likes of the eminence grise who wields a power that is too often invisible and beyond remonstrance. She brings vitality, effervescence, up-from-the log-cabin populist energy, and the party desperately needs this.
Let’ s just hope that she never has to face being president. Larry
22. Larry: “Let’ s just hope that she never has to face being president.” Change the ‘she’ to ‘he’ and that is what the pundits and party bosses said about Harry Truman in 1944. By ’45 he had proven himself pretty well. I was certainly cheering for him in ’45.
John McCain could be still kicking 20 years from now. His mother is 96. Sarah Palin might make a better president than either John or Harry.
There are no guarantees with any of them. Nixon, Clinton, Carter, and Kennedy all should have been much better presidents, based on their abilities. Johnson was more effective in getting things done than any of the four — trouble is some of the things (not counting civil rights, for which he should be greatly admired) would have been best left undone.
It seems to me Mrs. Palin might get down on her knees to pray a bit more frequently than most presidents we have had. That always seemed to be a help for Geo. Washington, even before he was president. Could it be she is on to something?
John Wilkins: I judge a person by their associations and by what they’ve accomplished. Obama is a left wing Marxist who has spent years rubbing elbows with other left wing Marxists/terrrorists (Bill Ayers), Chicago crooks, and a liberation theology pastor (read “hate”) and has voted “Present” in the Illinois Senate and U.S. Senate more times than I can count. He’d make a terrific President.
CK misses an important point. Despite all the initial buzz about Palin being chosen to attract Hillary supporters, it is now clear that for McCain the decisive factor was her anti-corruption reputation. Given that, it is sure to become a campaign focal point that Obama is the product of the Cook County Democratic machine, one of the three most corrupt (if not #1) political machines in the US.
While there is much talk about Obama’s lack of experience, the related concern is the total lack of any record. Without a record of commitment to any any issues, it is difficult to treat his speeches as more than empty rhetoric. This lack of record raises a legitimate question of whether Obama is just a two-dimensional cardboard puppet whose strings are being pulled by those behind the scenes.
Whatever else we may think about experience, it is important that Palin’s executive experience is far more than Obama and Biden combined. Lest anyone think executive experience is not important, I would remind everyone of what happened the last time we elected a slate of two senators, with a very junior one heading the ticket (1960). We got Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, and Vietnam. To JFK’s credit after Bay of Pigs, he admitted, “This never would have happened under Eisenhower.” Being an executive and having responsibility is radically different than being a legislator. While many of us have policy differences with Bill Clinton, few would deny that he was an effective administrator. So the total lack of administrative experience on the Dem ticket is really the problem.
[i] off topic [/i]
Who was it that said “Nothing narrows the mind like travel” or something to that effect? The idea is that there are some experiences that do not broaden understanding but simply reinforce one particular view. I think government service is like that, and Senate experience is the worst of the bunch in that regard. Too much time in the Senate removes the Senator from real life and the consequences of the laws they debate and pass, and also from the need to make real decisions. Biden has too much time in the Senate and not enough time outside it. McCain also has been in the Senate too long, but he has other “experience” which broadens him in a much greater way. Obama doesn’t really have anything.
Maybe we should have a constituional amendment mandating all Presidents have at least five years of adult life outside govenrment. That doesn’t count military service. That might exclude people like Sarah Palin, but I think the trade off would be worth it, like Term Limits.
#24 – Athanasius, you can believe what you’d like. Doesn’t make it true. Obama’s economic advisers are libertarian paternalists. He is, himself, a pragmatist. And yes, if in your world there is no difference between progressives and marxists, then so be it.
It sounds as if you think that Obama was close buddies with Ayers, and that Obama is some sort of theologian himself. I admit, as someone who went to Wright’s church a few times, I never found it hateful. And as far as “chicago crooks,” you’ll have to get more specific. Besides, given McCain’s connections, Obama still looks a lot cleaner.
Clueless, it sounds like you’re grasping at straws. His stance on abortion rights is fairly mainstream. And you probably know more about Obama’s half-brother than Obama does. Judging Obama for a family relationship is something I would hesitate to do. I wouldn’t judge McCain if he’d done the same thing.
As far as affirmative action goes, Obama may have benefited from it. But at no point did people regret giving him those opportunities. Obama demonstrated that he deserved the spots he was given.
Although I’m sure you’re bright, clueless, Most blacks – or whites – do not just study hard and go to top schools. They do not just get asked to join top law firms. And they don’t just turn them down. Obama turned down very lucrative positions for the sake of serving people. That’s character.
This is why I think it’s odd when conservatives think he’s in it for himself.
Look – if you want to know what you are in for, and what he has in store for America, this is a good video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnhmByYxEIo
#15 – David Keller, I think we can see how Obama would react given his rapid responses to the Clinton and McCain campaigns. He showed prudence when necessary in selecting a VP [no – not my choice, but it did respond to the critique he needed foreign policy experience and knowledge of Washington], and responds quickly when attacked.
Of course, the republican response is to call it “whining.” Which is a politically smart move on their part. They don’t like it when Obama fights back. As they shouldn’t, given that they also want to win.
I don’t think “most people” support partial birth abortion. Obama killed a measure suppressing it three times.
Wilkins writes: “As far as affirmative action goes, Obama may have benefited from it. But at no point did people regret giving him those opportunities. Obama demonstrated that he deserved the spots he was given. ”
Substitute “legacy admissions” for “affirmative action” and “W” for Obama, and you will realize why most folks who receive the benefit of either usually have the good sense to be silent about it. Obama has such good sense, you do not. Saying that he is a nice young man who might have ended up a crack dealer but managed to do well in high school and deserves a shot at an Ivy makes sense. I agree. Saying he is a nice young man who might have been a crack dealer but managed to do well in high school and therefore deserves to be President of the free world does not make sense.
Once you get through law school, the “give the poor little guy a break” affirmative action stuff needs to end. Obama needs to run on his record not on the fact that he’s a poor little black kid from a single parent home. His record is thin. It’s not bad, but it’s pretty thin. He would have done better as Veep to Hillary, though I truly despise both Clintons as the sleeziest polls in Washington since the Nixon days.
Wilkins wrote: “Most blacks – or whites – do not just study hard and go to top schools.”
Well obviously. That’s sort of the point, which I don’t understand why you keep pushing it since it isn’t a good thing. If you are saying the the O got into top schools on account of his brilliance not on account of affirmative action, then it would be instructive if Obama would release his SAT and ACT scores. It would be even more instructive if his alma mata would release the scores of the top 100 Asian or white kids who were turned down. As you say, it usually takes a little more than just studying hard to go to those schools. Being a legacy helps. Being the “right” minority of whatever income or class helps. And of course if one is brilliant that works too.
If they replay them, I recommend the CNN shows tonight: McCain Revealed and Obama Revealed. They are, in a way, fluff pieces in which the biographies of the two men are given in a fair amount of detail without critical analysis. The candidates are asked directly about touchy subjects, such as his divorce and the Keating business in McCain’s case, and the Rezko business for Obama, and their answers are not challenged or analyzed.
Also, if it’s online, try to watch the CNN Newsroom interview with Gov. Palin’s ex-brother-in-law. He admits shooting the moose (the trooper claims he didn’t know it was illegal). He admits tazering his 11 year old step-son, claiming what he did was poor judgement, but he used a training tazer set up because the kid wanted him to (I believe this one, actually, knowing a few 11 yo boys). He denies drinking and driving (twice, with witnesses in each case). He denies threatening Gov. Palin’s father, which was also heard by witnesses.
Bush’s SAT was 1206 Not brilliant, but quite respectable. A bit low for Yale, however. Legacy. But he’s never pretended to be brilliant, and he would have gotten into a a place like Northwestern or Stanford with those scores at that time. (The SAT was renormed upward later).
Michelle and Barack Obama have refused to release either their LSAT or SAT scores. They also refused initially to release Michelle’s senior thesis at Princeton, but later did so. It can be read here.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html
(it is in four parts all of which can be accessed there)
Michelle Obama apparently graduated cum laude from Princeton. I am not sure that she would have graduated at all from my school.
So the comments about “most people” not just studying hard and getting into top schools are quite appropo. It would simply be best to not mention the Ivy credentials until one is willing to release the raw data (LSAT and SAT scores) .
That leaves, of course an even thinner record. Community organizer. Senator who votes “present”. Ability to go on field trips around the world and shake peoples’ hands.
It appears Palin’s “problem” may yet be re-defined as a result of an Alaska judge’s decision not to seal a friend’s divorce transcript in the last couple of days.
#32–Are you passing rumors/Obama’s talking points along or do you have any idea what may be the truth? If you are just kicking rumors around from some left wing web site, you might want to think about it. Elves–I believe this posting is outside the bounds of the rules here, unless Jaundevaras has some substantiation of these scurrilous allegations. If they are true, we all want to know; but if this is an internet rumor being passed on for politiocal reasons, it should be deleted from this site.
Juandeveras–I have checked out your rumor. Apparently, the man in the divorce you refer to asked the Court to seal the record since Palin’s name came up as a possible VP, because the press and liberal bloggers have been using the court papers to get his address and phone #, and he has been inundated with calls and emails. The Court papers do not have the allegations which you hope for. If my research proves wrong, I will happily apologize. Will you do the same?
Clueless, do you resent Obama’s success?
He is young, but by most accounts, everything he’s been offered has been deserved. Obama was brilliant, according to conservatives who knew him at Harvard Law (you don’t just get to be editor of Harvard Law because you’re black. Remember that conservatives also vote for that position). He wrote a disciplined and brilliant best-selling memoir – himself. That’s pretty impressive
And he built the best political organization around, better than the Clintons. He speaks English better than George Bush, writes most of his own speeches and didn’t take his education for granted. He knows the law.
What did George Bush do as a legacy? It was only his blood that got him into Yale and Harvard: not work or intelligence. And being proud of being a “c” student doesn’t exactly demonstrate great character, in my view. Bush pretty much feels that he is entitled to all the special treatment he’s ever gotten, as one former professor of his at Harvard – Yoshi Tsurumi noted. Obama – in all his speeches – shows gratitude and humility.
Now I have no problem ensuring that someone with as much talent as Obama gets rewards. It would be nice if other people did, as well.
Given the quality of Obama’s campaign and his rapid rise to authority, he’s done better than most Harvard or Columbia graduates. He was clearly in the top tier being black or not. So if he was an Affirmative Action choice, who cares? It was a risk he has shown he deserved.
“Obama – in all his speeches – shows gratitude and humility.” No, really, John Wilkins. A person capable of giving a speech saying that his election will mark the moment when the sick begin to be healed and the oceans stop their rise cannot be seriously described as “humble.”
Wilkins, let’s get something straight: Obama is half black African (Muslim parentage) and half white American. It is his White American mother/grandmother who kicked his butt enough mentally to get him motivated to study. Palin’s comment that he has written two memoirs and not one law to date says it all.
Mr. Wilkins, look up the term ” shuck and jive ” and determine if it fits Mr. Obama.
Katherine, you haven’t heard him very much. You once said so – you try not to, because you don’t want to be influenced. That’s fine.
With good policies, people might actually be healed and the oceans might stop their rise. He didn’t say he’d be Jesus. That’s what you say that he is.
#37 – and your point? His father was brilliant – the first Kenyan to graduate from Harvard. He might have been motivated by his white grandmother, but the expectations were clearly set by the African side. Muslim parentage? Um – you don’t know his biography. His father abandoned him. His was an agnostic, besides. Religion by the way, isn’t biologically transmitted.
I’m not sure what Palin’s comment says, except what you want it to say. What laws has Palin passed in Washington? Has she passed that many in Alaska? Her comment just admits he’s smarter than she is, and more patient.
Wilkins I don’t resent Obama’s getting into Harvard.
Unlike yourself, I also don’t resent W’s getting into Yale.
I, my sister and brother got into equivalent schools and while we did not have the advantage of affirmative action (no aa for asians) nor of legacies, we did have the advantage of great parents who were totally committed to our success.
However getting “A”s is pretty easy when you are a black political science major (Obama) or a black sociology major (michelle). Read her “thesis”. My sister and I were reading it out loud, and I assure you that it would not have gotten us through the rather difficult high school my parents sent us to, let alone at any higher level.
I don’t resent that either O or M had an easy time of it. I recognize that they did have challenges of family structure that we did not need to deal with, and I am sure that my high school prepared me better for college than did theirs.
What I am saying is that when you are a legacy, or when your college work is glossed over with “affirmative action” then what you do after college is more important. Two memoirs and no bills kind of tells people where one’s priorities are. Apparently O’s writing skills and his time for writing were not wasted on his job as Senator.
But no. I look forward to O and M releasing their SAT and LSAT scores (as W has done).
#33 – Relax. I am a Palin fan. I refer to a matter involving one Scott A. Richter’s 2007 divorce file which Mr. Richter sought to have sealed on 09/03 – it was denied on 09/04. I hope this is not the case the Enquirer was hanging its hat on.
[i] Slightly edited by elf. [/i]
#34 – What ‘allegations’ was I ‘hoping’ for ? I’m a Palin fan. Are you all right ? I also grew up proudly in Juneau, Alaska a long time ago and was an acolyte at Holy Trinity Church there – which recently was burned by an arsonist. What else do you want to know ?
#39 – Here’s a tidbit from the Sat’y WSJ called ” What Palin Really Did to the Oil Industry”: She revised the existing tax plan, which had been “disastrous”. The legislature had never properly defined the accounting procedures. She chose a 25% profits tax, but it reverts to 10% in lean years. It works. It is called “Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share ( ACES)” and works better than that proposed by Mr. O., who simply wants to give eeveryone a check for $1000.00.
Clueless, you seem to be pretty resentful. You keep qualifying Obama’s record. What would their test scores tell us? Not much. I scored well, myself, and have met brighter people who scored worse than I did.
The fact is that Princeton and Harvard should be proud to have them as graduates. They’ve done better than most graduates given their industry and contributions to society. You talk about Michelle (and granted, I share your skepticism about sociology) but then take a swipe at Obama, who is a talented writer – one that clearly deserved some attention from any school..
Clueless, its the sense of entitlement that bothers me. Bush thought he deserved Yale. Look – I could have been a legacy, myself. But I think of myself as lucky (I chose to go to a different school, in the end). Perhaps you are comfortable with people feeling entitled to the wealth and luck they’ve inherited. Personally, I think it is a character issue, and not one for a president. Obama could have gotten into Harvard, given his writing skills and experience in the field, but we just won’t know. What we do know is that they decided he was a qualified candidate for Law School, and in the end, he demonstrated that he was. Your attempt to undermine his skill seems to imply that you, yourself, could have done better.
And that’s a lot like resentment.
John Wilkins #39, where did I say that Obama thinks he’s Jesus? What I said was that he is not humble, and that is consistent in his published speeches.
Wilkins, what is your issue ? Why are you harping on Obama and Bush ? My father attended Yale, was in the same house as Bush. Bush was no dummie. Give it a rest. He was just written up as today’s Truman. Bush and Kerry were in Skull and Bones: a group that only invited leaders. My great grandfather started it; left them an island on the St. Lawrence. Stop peddling all of this goofy stuff.
I continue to be bemused by left-wing harping on Bush at this late date. He’s not running. The efforts by Democratic political strategists to paint McCain as Bush III appear to be failing except with dyed-in-the-wool Democrats who weren’t going to vote for McCain anyhow. McCain, if elected, will likely do one thing which Bush infuriatingly failed to do: veto some spending bills!
[i] This thread appears to be going off topic and getting personal. Please return to the original post. [/i]
[i] Deleted by elf. Off topic. [/i]
[i] Deleted by elf. Off topic. [/i]
The article is about Palin. Despite all this bantering back-and-forth on Mr. O, there is one issue, abortion, that is a clear black-and-white choice between the two parties. Both Palin and McCain are pro-life. That alone is enough for me to vote Republican. All the other things I like about Palin and McCain are just icing on the cake. I can tell you that practically 100% of our church in Michigan will also vote pro-life. There are some school teachers who will probably vote with their union bosses.