UrbanBaby Asks...
Do you 'enjoy' spending time with your kids?
- Yes, most of the time we really have fun together
- Sometimes it's fun, sometimes it's really dull and aggravating
- Honestly most of the time it's not fun at all, but it's not supposed to be fun
- I really don't enjoy it at all, and wish I could spend less time with them
Already voted? View Results
Stay Connected with UrbanBaby: 
Flashback
UB Like it's 1776!
Posted September 13, 2007(191 replies)
More reminiscing about laughs on UrbanBaby »Inside UrbanBaby
UrbanBabyBuzz
“Mom, what constellation is that?” “Um, I think it’s the Big Dipper.” “Oh. And that one?” “Uh, also the Big Dipper?” Admit it, if it’s not the Big (or possibly the Little) Dipper, you ...
More »
UrbanBabyNewYork
GoClifftord’s Heart-y PartyCuddle up and listen to the Big Red Dog’s favorite Valentine’s Day books, make holiday cards and take a picture with the lovable pup.When: Sat. 2/11, 3pm; Ages 3+; Free.Where: The Scholastic Store, ...
More »
Regardless of her spunk, ambition and dogged determination, how can a thinking, logical person think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president..? Baffling.
139 replies [ Reply | Watch | MoreITA. This woman considered a question about 'which magazines and newspapers she reads' to be manipulative.
[ Reply | More ]What amazes me is that is an ok answer for some. "Ewww, the tricky Katie Couric asked me a surprise question I had no way of answering without preparing for it." In the middle of an interview to be the #2 political person in the country a heartbeat away from the red phone, "What is the cube root of twenty seven?" is a trick question. Not what do you read?
[ Reply | More ]or: well exactly. And isn't that telling? That she needs to "prepare" a response about what she reads? Because perhaps she doesn't read anything of real substance? Which speaks to how much she KNOWS about the world around her? Surreal all of it, really. I'm not running for president but could come up "the right" answer in a heartbeat.
[ Reply | More ]
IF you agree with her, you mgith think she is qualified. there is a really strong anti-elite current in US political thought, and she is seen as a great example of that
[ Reply | More ]ITA. I wouldn't hire Sarah Palin to be a showroom assistant, hanging up clothing that customers try on (I don't think she's smart enough to put everything back where it actually belongs), but I know that there are people out there that think well-educated, articulate people are scary and shouldn't be making decisions that impact "real people". I am not the smartest person out there, I don't have the best education, but I want people who are a lot smarter than I am making the decisions that I know I'm not capable of sorting through.
[ Reply | More ]op: I get anti elite - I really do. But I do not get anti, plain old qualified. Without an ounce of sarcasm, based on competence alone - I am more qualified. And I'm no Einstein.
[ Reply | More ]
Her resume is quite similar to what Barrack Obama's was before he was elected, with the minor difference that Sarah Palin had some executive experience, and he did not. I personally detest Sarah Palin, but the level of Orwellian doublethink that surrounds the issue of her qualifications vis-a-vis those of our sitting president astounds me.
[ Reply | More ]Has she ever read the US Constitution? He taught law school classes on Constitutional Law. I think there is a substantial difference in their resumes, he actually a respectable one. Her's is a bad joke.
[ Reply | More ]-
you can't possibly compare her education to Obama's. She went to 4 different colleges to end up with a degree in journalism and a goal to be a sports commentator on tv. She is a total lightweight.
[ Reply | More ]She's done pretty well for being such a dumb lightweight. Of course, Obama has vastly superior academic credentials, but I don't understand why you think Palin's executive experience is irrelevant, even so.
[ Reply | More ]The "executive experience" you claim she has is laughable. She was the mayor of a small town, with no real authority (all major departments/infrastructure were handled at the county or state level - she had no authority over police or fire dep'ts). She couldn't handle the responsibility of being Governor of Alaska, so she quit.
[ Reply | More ]Still better than zero. Also, I'm not sure where you get the idea that she could not handle the responsibility of being Governor of Alaska. Looks to me like she (correctly, if somewhat cynically) saw that she had the opportunity to become a national figure, and like many politicians have and would, left her state position when it no longer suited her ambitions.
[ Reply | More ]I think you are the one drinking some serious KoolAid. She's not a "national figure", she's a laughingstock, getting into a public shouting match with a teenager. If she wants to be taken seriously, she needs to start acting like it. Finishing the job that she was elected to do would have been a place to start, since she quit that job, she has to make up some ground - let her start publicly speaking on real policy issues to serious groups - Heritage, AIE. Until then, she's just a bad joke who couldn't handle the job she had.
[ Reply | More ]NP. Hold on. You seem to think SP's experience counts even if she wasn't very good and showed no interest in trying to improve. If she's a lousy mayor/governor, then her experience counts against her, not for her.
[ Reply | More ]
Mayor of a town smaller than most NYC suburbs and used it as her personal feifdom (zoning violations ignored so she could sell her house?). She was elected governor as a reaction to widespread corruption accusations against the incumbent and didn't last half her term. It took her 6+ years and at least 4 colleges to get a bachelor's degree from a 5th rate institution. Wow, she's impressive. If she really wants to build a resume, let her start speaking, on the record, to groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, even the Heritage Foundation would be a good place for her to start, and get out of the gutter war with her grandson's teenaged father. Right now, she looks like a publicity whore with no common sense, not a serious presidential candidate.
[ Reply | More ]A dean at a small college has more people they are responsible for than the mayor of Wasilla. And apparently the part time job of governor of Alaska was too much for her.
[ Reply | More ]And this is (1) more or (2) less executive responsibility/experience than Obama had before the Presidency? As I said, doublethink.
[ Reply | More ]Your post exists in a vacuum. There are many people I loathe as ppoliticians, but they are qualified, regardless of my opinion of their views. Stop parcing a poor analogy.
[ Reply | More ]No one ever claimed that he had "executive experience" that you seem to think is all that is the only qualifying factor. His supporters understood that he was/is smart enough to understand his job and it's responsibilities. She, for all her "executive experience", is simply not smart or engaged or capable of understanding the ramifications of her decisions (hence, she quit the only serious job she's ever had because she didn't understand what she had signed on for and couldn't actually do the job).
[ Reply | More ]But what Obama brought to the table was not Executive experience. I mean John McCain has none either. He never had a command position in the Navy. This is like arguing she should get it because she was the best baton twirler.
[ Reply | More ]Right, suggesting that being a state governor is relevant preparation for the presidency is like suggesting a baton twirler is.
[ Reply | More ]-
Umm, what makes you think the job was too much for her? It seems pretty clear to me she dumped it to further her national aspirations. I'm no fan of hers, but that says "smart move" to me, not "dummy who couldn't handle being Governor."
[ Reply | More ]You are almost unique in holding that position. Everyone I've heard, GOPer's included, think it was an idiotic and perplexing move.
[ Reply | More ]If she had "national aspirations" beyond her 15 minutes of fame she wouldn't be whining about not liking the photo on the cover of Newsweek or getting in the mud with her grandson's idiot of a father.
[ Reply | More ]Is she not the most visible and discussed Republican political figure right now? Don't get me wrong, as a moderate conservative the Sarah Palinization of the GOP makes me weep and gnash my teeth -- you have no idea what it is like lol -- but to characterize her as anything other than a shrewd and capable self-promoter strikes me as inconsistent with the facts.
[ Reply | More ]
-
Mayor of Walissa (sp?) is basically a popularity contest. Governor was that spunk and determination.
[ Reply | More ]-
-
-
np: Did you not read about the battle within Wasilla that got her the nomination over the long time mayor? They were both life long Republicans she sicked her church on him... it sounded like Senior Class President at Dysfunction High.
[ Reply | More ]-
I looked it up for you. Anchorage Daily News. "'Fresh face' launched Palin: Wasilla mayor was groomed from an early political age". Anchorage Daily News. http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/background/story/510447.html
[ Reply | More ]
-
-
-
-
I can't stand her but I don't think her resume is the problem, being a governor is good enough (worked for reagan)
[ Reply | More ]Different states have different types of governments and make very different demands on their governors. California has a very active, demanding, executive office. Alaska (like Texas) does not. This was as true when Ann Richards was governor as it was when GWB was.
[ Reply | More ]-
-
-
Hey dopey, I gave California credit for having a demanding executive -- aka Reagan. GHWBush had no experience as governor. Texas for GWBush. See, I went back for all the R presidents over my life time. (And I'm not a liberal. If I was I wouldn't have bad mouthed Ann Richards. They love her -- although God knows why.)
[ Reply | More ]
-
-
-
If Obama had ever read the Constitution he would know there is nothing in the Constitution that permits him to do most of what he has done (and wants to do) as President. Obama has more contempt for the constitution than any President in my lifetime.
[ Reply | More ]
-
executive experience, in this case, is a red herring. McCain ddn't have any. and obama had more private sector experience thatn either mccain or palin. but if you want to make obama look unqualified, you drag this argument out.
[ Reply | More ]You're really saying that executive experience is a red herring? Bizarre. BTW, I'm not attempting to make Obama look bad: I think Obama won the election because he was both a better candidate and a better campaigner than John McCain. The point is that, viewed objectively, Obama's and Palin's experience are sufficiently equivalent that it is irrational to view her as grossly unqualified while treating Obama as qualified. FWIW, I voted for Obama, but the endless and unfair Palin-bashing is most unreasonable.
[ Reply | More ]
np: I see it like this - sometimes you interview someone inexperienced in the actual job and hire them anyway because their education/degrees, life experience, other job experience, other credentials and intelligence lead you to believe that they will be very good at that job. Then you meet other people, whose resume seems to suggest that they have relevant experience at the job and yet based on their education/degrees and your dealings with them, you truly wonder how they ever got the job. Oftentimes you find out that the job was not really what it appeared to be, or that there was nepotism involved or that there were company "politics" at play and somehow this person ended up in a place far beyond their abilities.
[ Reply | More ]their experience was about the same level. his education is superior, but there are lots of qualified intelligent people who don't have access to that level of academia. palin is probably not one of them, but i am completely offended as a woman by the sexist jabs at her by her detractors. between how the dems treated hillary and palin, they have lost my respect.
[ Reply | More ]Intelligent people, of either gender, don't consider "what newspapers do you read" to be a trick question or one that needs prep. My grandmother, who never graduated from high school, could have answered that question without stumbling over it (and had a real answer - the Miami Herald). Palin couldn't answer it and didn't (and still hasn't). I don't think that showing Palin as she really is, inarticulate and willfully ignorant, is unfair or sexist.
[ Reply | More ]I think her point was the mainstream media was just looking to find something wrong with her. She was trying to guard her words. Honestly, you should get passed the fact that you don't like Republicans and look at it in a fair light. She knew she was walking into a lion's den and her handlers were keeping a muzzle on her. I think she deserves a pass. Both parties have candidates that say stupid things all the time. Biden for one, Gore with the internet, Bush, etc...
[ Reply | More ]No, that was her explanation after the fact for why she flubbed the question. It's not that I don't like Republicans, I've voted for Republicans, I just don't like her. There were at least 3 other Republican women who should have been on that ticket before her - Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Olympia Snow and Susan Collins would all have been much better choices. If Palin couldn't handle a real softball from Katie Couric without being caught off guard, how would she be with Vladimir Putin?
[ Reply | More ]But see this is what kills me, Gore never said he invented the internet. "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system." A. Gore But you repeat a lie enough and the dopes out in the hinterland who won't bother to read and figure things out for themselves will buy it hook line and sinker.
[ Reply | More ]
What I don't get is that she keeps getting a pass on being so poorly qualified. Bobby Jindal is smarter than she is, and usually better prepared/more articulate but when he did so poorly on the Republican response to an Obama address to Congress he faded into the woodwork. She keeps inserting her foot into her mouth, gets called on it, responds "you're being sexist", and keeps going. Pointing out her absolute lack of education and non-existant intellectual curiosity isn't sexist.
[ Reply | More ]
What makes a community activist qualified to be President? What about an actor or a peanut farmer?
[ Reply | More ]-
no. one of them has good PEOPLE skills and is a wonderful prolific speaker. the peanut farmer, I am still scratching my head about that one... I guess other than party affiliation they can both pride themselves in the fact that they are both nobel laureates?
[ Reply | More ]Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer in the Navy. He was no hayseed. He also was a non-Washington person in the post Nixon era.
[ Reply | More ]and he lasted only 4 years. people were disenchanted with nixon, fine. Sorry, I was half kidding with my comments. I am (obviously) no huge carter fan, but the truth is he is a very intelligent guy. not much street smarts though IMVHO which I think is a large part of why he was a 1 term president. my point was more that you dont have to be a senior senator with 30 years of experience in politics to be elected president.
[ Reply | More ]
-
More qualified that Obama, easily. She actually ran a state while he was just 1 of 100 senators (and he rarely voted, instead voting "present" on hard issues). I don't want her to be president, for my own reasons, but she is definitely "qualified".
[ Reply | More ]The basic issue is that the people decided in 2008 that they did not want "qualified". McCain was far and away the most qualified of the 4, with Biden clearly in second place. McCain realized his qualifications were a liability and chose her in an attempt to dilute his qualifications. But in the end, and unqualified President trumped an unqualified Vice President in the eyes of the people. Now, a year later we are just starting to see the result of that choice, and just starting to realize it might have been a mistake.
[ Reply | More ]um yeah--his "qualifications" were a liability? How about that he had foolishly sold out his "maverick" positions to kowtow to GWB, turned his back on his own bipartisan immigration bill, and suddenly seemed--in contrast to 2000--older, weaker, less decisive? In an attempt to reassure the right he lurched and stumbled--couldn't decide how to handle the financial crisis, and then yes--picked the MILF from Alaska instead of Pawlenty or some other serious contender. Foolish, foolish, foolish. And seriously--I'd just love to hear what you think he'd have done differently to solve the financial crisis since he certainly couldn't articulate it thirteen months ago.
[ Reply | More ]
-
I'm not sure how relevant "executive experience" is. It seems very important to American voters, but I wonder about it. I'm not American, but it appears that the most important aspect of being President is being able to get Congress to pass the bills you want, as painlessly as you can. Doesn't someone with experience in Congress have a higher chance of getting that right? I mean, even if you've run a city, or a state, the issues you'll be dealing with as a head of a country are entirely different.
[ Reply | More ]The problem is that as a governor, for the most part, you don't have to take stands which piss off half the people. As a Senator, you have to vote on gun control/immigration/funding bills/stimulus packages/etc. so there is all this history behind you. (I'm not saying this is ACTUALLY bad, just that this is one of the reasons political scientists/talking heads often give for why so many more modern presidents have been governors than legislators.)
[ Reply | More ]The U.S. President is in charge of the federal executive branch -- probably the largest organization in the country, not even counting active duty military as employees -- and most of the day-to-day is managing the demands of that. It is an overwhelmingly huge responsibility. I would imagine that much of the actual work is quite similar -- although more complex and stressful due to the higher stakes, larger scale, and lower degree of control over the organization -- to being the CEO of a big multinational corporation like GE or IBM. Obviously legislative affairs is a larger proportion of the President's work than it would be in a private organization, and Obama's health care priorities throw that into more focus, but managing the executive branch is a mind-boggling responsibility.
[ Reply | More ]
Because some people vote with their "guts" and not with their head. It's about who they would share a beer with and pall around with. Voting for the smarter more capable candidate is an admission that the voter is not all that bright and no one wants to feel bad about themselves right? Palin makes peoe feel tough and cool because she can shoot a moose. It's the whole cowboy mystique. Plus, having a degree or an office job does not necessarily make one intelligent.
[ Reply | More ]I like Palin's values and I know other people who do as well. I don't think she is qualified so it would be hard to vote for her in 2012. It's interesting to me how one's intelligence is measured on how well they can deliver a speech and how cleverly they might come up with an answer, oh and being attractive doesn't hurt (ie. Clinton, Obama) One thing to keep in mind though is people are willing to look past this. The jokes about Bush being dumb were relentless and he was elected twice. My vote included.
[ Reply | More ]oh, and Palin isn't attractive? Snort. All of those GOP nerdlings were acting like eighth grade boys. As to intelligence--does that really not matter to you? And no, not just "cleverly" answering a question, but intellectual depth, understanding, curiosity...that's not important to you? Just the "values" of someone who seems to be fundamentally dishonest, ruthless, disloyal...? And btw, you still feel good about voting for Bush--really?
[ Reply | More ]I guess Palin is attractive, that hair just bothers me. Unfortunately voting for me has come down to choosing the lesser of 2 evils, which is what I did when Bush was running. In the last election I wasn't happy with either candidate so I didn't vote for either. Of course intelligence matters, my point was how is seems to be determined by the masses. As for dishonest, ruthless and disloyal I'm not sure what your referring too.
[ Reply | More ]
-
