Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
My 2 cents on Palin/Russia comment
When she originally made the "you can see russia" comment during Gibson's interview her answer was cut off to make it appear as if that was all she said, in response to the question on foreign policy credentials. She did actually answer his question with a legitimate answer and she reiterated that again to Couric - about the trade missions.
So now whenever it's brought up she has to say what she really said in Gibson's interview again and again to make up for CBS screwing her over. I personally don't give a crap that Alaska touches Canada. I'm 20 minutes from the Canadian border. Who cares.
The thing is, a candidate cannot be blunt and honest in this day and age. She is not going to say, "I have no foreign policy experience b/c I'm a governor and governors don't have the same experience as senators." But that's the truth. (She actually did try to say this to Gibson in a less blunt way, but she had to list the trade thing too.)
The reason this question (foreign policy experience) keeps getting asked is that everyone knows she has none and they think this is a "gotcha" question. It's the same reason Obama gets asked about his executive experience. Note that when he answers that question he also didn't say "I don't have any." He BS'ed about how running a campaign was exec experience, as if thinking about leading a bureaucracy is the same as actually doing it.
It's funny to mock both of their answers and everything, but I wish we (the society, not the board) would encourage more honesty. Obama has no exec experience but he brings other things to the table. He's a senator and he can't be expected to have the experience of a governor. Palin has no foreign policy experience but she brings other things to the table. She's a governor and can't be expected to have the experience of a senator, especially since she's just a VP.
I'm not saying we can't point out each candidate's flaws. I just don't think they should be mocked for not having a certain kind of experience just b/c they chose a career path that leaves them with other kinds of experience.
Re: My 2 cents on Palin/Russia comment
The thing is, a candidate cannot be blunt and honest in this day and age. She is not going to say, "I have no foreign policy experience b/c I'm a governor and governors don't have the same experience as senators." But that's the truth.
Caden, thank you for acknowledging that Palin has no real foreign policy experience. Seriously... I mean this. I'm not trying to be snarky. I keep hearing conservative pundits who argue that she has experience in this area, and I wonder if they're all nutso.
It's ok to admit that our candidates have flaws! None of them are close to perfection.
Does anyone remember what W said in 2000? That's the thing that bothers me is that neither W nor Reagan had any foreign policy experience, and I felt like that was a better answer (well, maybe not W, but definitely Regan). I guess we really have come to a point where no one can say no.
Edited for extreme overuse of quotes. The first step to overcoming a problem is admitting you have one.
Ditto caden and mxolisi! Great points on both sides.
I hear you on the honest mistakes. My OP was just about honest, straight-forward answers, but I'll comment on both now that you bring it up. Can you imagine what would have happened to Obama if he actually answered the exec experience question with, "None. I'm a senator so I have legislative experience." There would be a hundred commercials and youtube ads with Obama saying, "none." Same with Palin if she were honest. It's funny but sad at the same time that people have to make up fake answers so that those are made fun of instead of a real, legitimate ones.
About honest mistakes- Every candidate makes honest mistakes. It's impossible not to. McCain knows the difference between shiite & sunni muslims - he's made the correct distsinction numerous times over the years. But he screws it in one speech and suddenly he's not qualified, too stupid to know the difference, ignorant, etc. So this goes both ways. They always get blown out of proportion. I really wish we could just laugh w/o acting like an honest mistake is somehow indicative of senility or ignorance. I'm guilty of it so I'm not pointing fingers but it still makes me sad.
Ditto everyone.
Ooh, do we have a unity horse issue? Or am I bringing him out too early?
I agree on both accounts. I also think, at the end of the day, if Obama becomes Prez, or if McCain is elected, chokes on a steak dinner and dies, thus making Palin Prez, that they will suround themselves with people who excell in areas where they lack expertise. That's what frustrates me the most about the "coaching" arguement in relation to Palin. How else is she supposed to learn and gain experience in Foreign Policy without studying up? Why is such "coaching" seen as a negative?
I reeeeeaaallly hope that's coherent. I hurt my back today, and I'm afraid the leftover Vicodin I took might make my responses a bit wonky. I also may deny any posts I make today, tomorrow.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
I have to leave here in a couple minutes, so this is all I will have time to say on the subject, but let me just give you my thoughts anyway.
First, I thought the part they cut out of the Gibson interview about Russia did her no favors. She was better off that they left it out. That second response was just as ridiculous as the first. "it gives her an appreciation for what a small world we live in"???? That's not special insight. That doesn't make me want to trust her with Putin. It just isn't a good answer. So I just don't buy that she wasn't treated fairly on this particular point because I do not think her explanation was at all insightful or meaningful.
Second, I know that choosing a governor involves a trade-off, and you lose some foreign policy creditials. But, some governors have chosen to be engaged on a national level long before being selected to be VP, so they have some public record of thought on foreign policy. Palin was not engaged on a national level in issues. She wasn't head of the Governors Assocation like Pawlenty or Sebelius, she wasn't on Meet the Press commenting about meetings she had or things she was doing in support of candidates, she wasn't writing editorials about important issues of national concern. So the criticism about her lacking "experience" is not so much focused on her specific job duties, but rather the fact that there's just no record of independent thought on foreign policy issues (or really much of anything beyond Alaska).
Finally, it was her campaign that started this nonsense with her knowing something about Russia. THey could have just stopped on energy. Or they weren't prepared to put forward a person whom they could comfortably say would get up to speed on FP issues without having to make crap up, they should have picked someone else.
It's really insulting to me, as an American, to be fed this line without anything of substance behind it.
If Palin is really the accomplished, knowledgeable, and savvy person that they are selling her as, they shouldn't have to make up crap to fill a deficit. I'd be fine with a foreign policy deficit if it was clear a person brought something else to the table. Nobody would have to lie about Romney's lack of FP experience because it would be apparent to everyone he's brilliant on economic issues.
So, if they aren't capable of selling Palin on her merits, I think questioning the crap they use to sell her with is totally fair game.
I agree, she should be able to be more frank.
The reason I think they're not going there is not because America cares so much about foreign policy experience, but because McCain was blasting Obama on this as a major fault.
"As of page 2 this might be the most boring argument ever. It's making me long for Rape Day." - Mouse
I completely disagree with you about her comments in the Gibson interview. Gibson's question was, "What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?" So her answer had to be in the context of AK's proximity.
If you read her entire comment she was referring to the fact that peace with Russia is vital to protecting our interests. That is a great answer for a question about AK's proximity to Russia, and frankly it's the only answer she could have given.
Sarah Palin doesn't need foreign policy credentials to be a VP. They aren't even necessary for President as evidenced by Obama and previous presidents. She's just a VP and she brings to the table experience in energy policy, cost cutting, tax restructuring, and bi-partisan corruption fighting. This "deficit" is created by her opponents and the media. If she is elected VP she will have better exec experience in one month than Obama and Biden have put together. Obama has an exec experience "deficit" but focusing on that means we find out less about what experience he does have.
I don't care who started it. This isn't about who started it. I'm just saying the more we (the society) point fingers the less honesty we're going to get.
Big DITTO, Caden! Big DITTO.
For the record, I wasn't calling "he did it first!" in my post, I saying I think that's why McCain's camp is wary of opening themselves up to the criticism. I would not be criticizing her for lack of FP experience if I thought she had the mental capacity to learn and comprehend situations quickly, which I do not.
"As of page 2 this might be the most boring argument ever. It's making me long for Rape Day." - Mouse
Ok, back from the DMV.
I agree that she doesn't need foreign policy experience. And I agree that someone is in trouble when they say "none." The BS about Obama's executive experience running his campaign is definitely fluffy. And I don't think McCain's executive experience claim (leading his squadron in Vietnam 40 years ago) is strong either. They both spat out something.
But the reason Palin's thing has stuck, IMO, is because they have been using this as one of her selling points. I think they could have stopped right at energy. I think some line about working with Canada to build an oil pipeline or whatever it was that she did is way more interesting and carries more water than just being somebody's neighbor. It never should have even entered the frame of thought, and when it did, they should have shot it right down.
I heard Chris Matthews mention once that he thought that the CIA might have sent weekly briefing papers to AK on what is going on in Russia. Nobody has since echoed that, but if that's true, then why aren't we hearing that? That would be something to talk about.
Anyway, to sum up my rambling point, none of this stuff would even be an issue if they could focus way more on her other strenghts. Nobody would be freaking out about Romney's FP experience because he would be able to talk so competently about the economic crisis that people wouldn't care about a stupid line about him managing the Olympics as his FP experience.
I think what I'm trying to say is, the problem isn't that she doesn't have FP experience. The problem is, they are not doing a very good job of packaging and selling the experience she does have. Everybody knows the bridge to nowhere bit involved some serious stretching of the truth, she's not slamming Stevens and Young, and she's been aggressively blocking an investigation. So it's hard for people to take her strength seriously. If we want to move on from the lack of FP experience, they need to show us her other selling points to distract us from that.
If she comes out and wows everyone with some amazing energy plan or something and people actually see why she was brought to the ticket, people will move on from the made-up reasons. But right now, we aren't seeing that. So that's why people criticize and judge this ridiculous point.
This is exactly why McCain doesn't need a VP with foreign policy credentials. Obama picked Biden b/c Obama has no foreign policy credentials. McCain has foreign policy credentials. He doesn't need a duplicate of himself on the ticket.?
That's your very liberal opinion, which you are entitled to. I like Palin and I don't agree with your assessment at all. FWIW I could easily turn that around on you b/c your candidate is not prepared for the job or the national spotlight (can he speak without a teleprompter yet?). But your ill-prepared candidate is on the top of the ticket. Lucky for me Palin is only the junior partner. ?; )
I think the problem here is that you want her to act like a presidential candidate instead of her proper role as a vice president. Is Biden out there delivering his own energy policies? no. Is Biden out there running on his own credentials? no. He's out there stumping for Obama b/c that's what VP candidates do.?
Palin has become the focus b/c the choice came out of nowhere and everyone loves a good shocker in an election. But she doesn't have to get herself elected, she has to get McCain elected.?
Palin's criticisms have stuck b/c she's an easier target than McCain. No one can bash McCain's experience b/c he has the same experience as Biden and Obama, except longer and at a deeper level.
Energy, fiscal policy. Some others would say social issues. ?
Can you explain to me what you like about her?
This is what I am having trouble with. I can honestly understand why somebody likes McCain, or Romney, or Huckabee.
But I cannot understand why people like Palin. Can you give me examples of why you think she was a good pick? I know we are never going to agree, but like zoe, I just cannot see the other side on this one, so at least if we know where you guys are coming from, it could help us get you a little more.
Energy - she is the ONLY candidate with handson experience dealing with Big Oil and energy policy. The only one! Before she was governor she was part of the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commtte which is a gov't org that manages the state's oil and gas leases. Since Alaska is an oil-based economy that's a significant position. Then as governor she implemented a totally new policy for the state, completely different than what they used in the past, in order to get the new pipeline, which is badly needed and will benefit us all. Again, she is the only 1 of the 4 who has actually done something about our energy problems. Alaska democrats have praised Palin for her new way of doing it b/c apparently the old way (letting one company build & operate it) resulted in little competition from high tarrifs.?She also committed a lot of money to developing alternative energy (putting her wallet where her mouth is). Here's a short article that talks about the old pipeline and the new one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/07/AR2008090701984.html
Fiscal - ?You mention her shifting the type of tax as mayor but you might not realize what she did with the tax code is a conservative principle. I'm sure you've heard of the "fair tax." That's basically what she did. AK has no state income or sales tax, but local sales taxes are common. She lowered property taxes (which I hate), got rid of 2 other random ones, and shifted the structure to being consumption based, just like what the fair tax would endorse. That resulted in a boom for Wasilla. The had billions in increased investment and tax revenues went up. She also cut her own salary. The projects she increased funding for were all the ones we conservatives care about the most (in the way of local/state gov't)- infrastructure and police. Fiscal conservatives don't wring their hands over deficits. Long-term debt to finance long-term, expensive but necessary projects is the right decision. The alternative would be to never invest in any expensive projects or to hike taxes to an extreme level whenever an expensive project came along.?
The Office is on so I'll get back to you on her governor stuff. : )?
ETA: changed the link to a MUCH better/clear story about the pipeline?
But that shows her pay was cut. $64,200--> $61,200. Then again from $68.000--->$66,000. Per TPM (thank you for admitting that's biased!)?
"As best as we can determine, the cuts were engineered by Palin herself through some sort of executive mechanism, and the raises were City Council-mandated hikes."
How awesome is she that she engineered her own pay cuts and then some other gov't body forced her to get paid more?! I think that speaks very highly of her and that has got to be exceedingly rare in the world of politics. Certainly, none of the other top candidates have such a record.?
Ok moving on to her record as governor. Considering that Palin is only mid-way through her term I'm very impressed by what she's accomplished. She picked her 3 top issues and focused on those, instead of trying to do a little bit in everything, which usually dilutes the term. Her big 3 were ethics reform, tax revenues and the oil pipeline. She succeeded in passing major legislation in all 3 areas, and that was through being bipartisan. I think we all know about her ethics reform - taking on both Reps and Dems so I won't get into that. She increased taxes on the oil industry, which normally I would cringe at but Alaska is like the Saudi Arabia of the US so it's a completely different economy than the rest of the country. Her tax doesn't seem to have decreased investment in any meaningful sense (which is usually the result of higher business taxes, prob b/c oil/natural gas isn't everywhere) and revenues soared. So it was successful. She also has super high favorability ratings in AK which shows she knows what the people want.?
::::::::::Kateaggie does her best Rod Stewart impression and serenades Caden:::::::
Have I told....you lately....that I love you....Have I told you, there's no one else....above you.
I seriously need a "Ditto Caden" super blinkie.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
See this all makes sense.
Why doesn't the campaign let her talk about this stuff? Instead we get the bridge to nowhere crap and her constantly using the word "maverick."
Let her give an interesting speech on energy and take questions from the press about it. I guarentee respect for her would soar and people would forget about a lot of other non-sensical crap.
But as long as they insist on keeping her closed off, people will just assume she's got nothing to offer.
I didn't get this out of thin air! She has talked about energy and taxes and all that. I went to a McCain/Palin rally right after the convention and she mentioned all the stuff I just posted (which reminds me I forgot to mention spending cuts). It's just not reported above the fold like the critical, pressing issue of which guest speakers visited her church.
I'm sure this is how Obama lovers felt during the "Obama has a brother starving in Kenya" stories and the like. Somewhere between the stupid stories are the real ones.
LOL! I echo your sentiments
AND I actually used to have a "Ditto Caden" siggy. It was short lived and paved the road to our E08 elections.... ahhhh memmmmmories...