<p>
</p>
<p>But with somebody of McCain’s age, one must be VERY careful who the VP is because there is a better chance of that person becoming president than the VP of somebody of Obama’s age.</p>
<p>Well not fully romanigypsyeyes, because as I’ve always said, Obama is a walking target. That’s why I’m really happy he chose Biden. Both candidates are at a high risk for death. McCain has had cancer several times. </p>
<p>Dbate, I (and others) attack you because your claims are outrageous. Like, the VP is a worthless position. Seriously, do you think? You don’t help to convince me Conservatives have brains. Furthermore, Obama has done more than just sit around in the Senate doing little as you claim.</p>
<p>Here’s a snippet of what he’s achieved:</p>
<p>Cosponsered the Secure Fence Act
Primary sponsor of legislation requiring nuclear plant owners to notify state and local authorities of radioactive leaks
Cosponsored the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act
Sponsored the “Iran Sanctions Enabling Act” supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran’s oil and gas industry, and co-sponsored legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism
Sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries
Served in Illinois State senate for 8 years</p>
<p>Some committees he’s served on:
Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans’ Affairs
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Chairman of the Senate’s subcommittee on European Affairs</p>
<p>Yeah, tell me has achieved nothing. You’re just ignorant. He knows how to work between party lines. If you wish to call his sound foreign policy experience, strength on national security, sympathy with veterans, and judgment on health care reform insignificant I will continue to make attacks about your intelligence.</p>
<p>What Sarah Palin has done:</p>
<p>Came second in a Beauty Pageant
Likes hunting
Mayor of a town of less than 8000 ppl
Been governor of one of the smallest states
Had a police commissioner fired because he wouldn’t fire her ex-boyfriend-in law
Flip-flopped on her “bridge to nowhere” issue
Met McCain only once before he offered the VP slot to her</p>
<p>Seems so close Dbate. Yeah, that managerial experience counts for something. Who knows, my mayor of 26000 people can one day become VP!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Experience - 2 years as Governor of Alaska (I suppose Obama’s 4 years of time in the senate is light years more than that).
Education - Bachelor’s degree from University of Idaho</p>
<p>At least get the facts straight.</p>
<p>115000 people voted for Palin in the gubernatorial election. I suppose that’s light years more than the 80000 people who watched Obama give his acceptance speech at the stadium and 18 or 19 million who voted for him in the primaries.</p>
<p>Please, governor of Alaska? Obama has run a successful campaign for 2 years - a campaign which has reached out to millions of people, registered tens of thousands of new voters, and made the young want to vote again. He built a campaign from scratch. Did Palin found Alaska? That’s if you want to talk about executive experience. Being governor does give executive experience, but the difference between running a country and running the smallest state is so great. And why is it okay that McCain doesn’t have executive experience?</p>
<p>Palin got a bachelor’s degree in journalism from an extremely mediocre school. Probably not much smarter than “Miss Such-as”. If you call that “education” befitting of the White House be my guest. And Obama served 8 years in the state Senate, was a community organizer and spent 4 years in the real Senate. He got his ugrad degree from Columbia went to Harvard Law school where he was the editor of the Law Review and graduated magna cum laude from the most prestigious law school in the nation. She was what a mayor of a hamlet and governor of one of the forgotten states of America for less than 2 years? Sureeeeeeeee that’s experience and education for ya. NOT!</p>
<p>So unless you went to an elite school you aren’t smart enough to be POTUS or VP? I didn’t realize you were such an elitist…</p>
<p>She has had minimal education. I know that and you probably just don’t want to admit it. Journalism majors from one of the most mediocre schools in the nation don’t prove your intelligent. If nothing else, you can be sure Barack is extremely smart considering his academic achievements. Palin on the other hand didn’t even graduate with distinction. I’m not being an elitist. I’m stating the facts. She went to a mediocre school to study something not challenging, and did not even graduate with distinction. I’m sorry, but that doesn’t make you educated enough to be POTUS or VP.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since when has the threshold been smart or good “enough”? Shouldn’t we be gunning for the best man or woman to lead our country? It’s ridiculous to downplay the importance of intelligence in a leader.</p>
<p>I just thought I’d point out that Palin has only been mayor for 20 months. Usually rounding up four months wouldn’t be all too relevant, but in this case it’s a 20% increase in her actual experience.</p>
<p>Let’s face the facts. Both Obama and Palin are comparably green. But one has won mass support and is embraced by almost half the country who think that he’s the best person for the job. Those are facts.</p>
<p>Nope. They aren’t comparably green. Not no way, not no how. That’s what Conservatives would like to have you believe. Obama (11 years of experience) is green but Palin (2 years of experience rounded up-I don’t count being a mayor of a hamlet as experience) is a nobody.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Glad you can tell from that she isn’t smart enough. I’m pretty sure some extremely intelligent, very educated people have been poor POTUS’ and VP’s. Why don’t don’t you try listening to her and hearing what she has to say…oh wait, why would you do such a silly thing.</p>
<p>I never said she isn’t smart enough. I just said she isn’t educated enough. I don’t know if she’s smart, but that’s unimportant if you’re uneducated. Look, when someone is a skeptic of global warming (one of the biggest issues facing us today) that displays a great resistance to education. Even the moronic BUSH ADMINISTRATION REALIZES THIS. I frankly couldn’t care less what she says at this point, unless she’s elected VP of course. If she had been properly educated I doubt she would ever say she’s a skeptic of global warming. That’s why education is so important. She may be bright, but if she hasn’t developed her intelligence she’s of little use to me as a VP. Sure there’s no doubt some extremely intelligent, very educated people have been poor POTUS’ and VP’s. But that doesn’t mean a dumb uneducated person will make a good one. Sure there have been some people ethical for their whole life who go to Congress and become corrupted. But that doesn’t mean someone who knows nothing about ethics is less likely to become corrupted. You’re using faulty logic.</p>
<p>The reason she’s skeptical about global warming isn’t because she’s uneducated, it’s because she lives in Alaska 
</p>
<p>So that was my attempt at a joke…</p>
<p>Cervantes, do not call my claims outrageous unless you actually respond.
You post all of his accomplishments, but ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE JUST VOTES. That is not managerial exeperience.<br>
The entire arguement was against managerial experience. Nothing that you mention was about managerial experience. She may have only been govern for two years but just go to wiki:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>She bucked her own party. Barak obama speaks that he will change the establishment she already has experience doing that. Here’s another:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Though she has only been govern for two years look at what she has done:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What this woman has done is ALOT more than Barak Obama. Obama promising to reform Washington, she already did that in Alaska. Obama speaks of energy independence, well she offered tangible right now benefits to help ppl in face the energy crisis. </p>
<p>The difference between Barak Obama’s eight years of voting and her two years (which is disengious because she has been an elected offical for over 12 years), is that she got something done. Obama sponsered bill’s (AND THAT’S ALL) and that’s great but it does not compare to actually managerial action.</p>
<p>And I restate, do not attack the person you are debating but attack their arguements.</p>
<p>Also the ppl belittling Alaska are looking at its importance from a population standpoint and not an economic one. Alaska is important to the country bc of the energy sector. This is particularly important given the whole energy issue in America. So that means that her knowledge of energy economics may be higher than that of both Obama’s and McCain’s. This is evident in the pipeline she helped support for efficient exploration.
Her position on this also highlights another weakness in Obama’s campaign. He speaks of novel energy sources and stated that in ten years we would be energy independent, but what do we do for those ten years? We need to be driling for the interim and investing in new energy resources for the long term, that is McCain’s position. In fact McCain also supports nuclear energy which is a real functional means of alternative energy that can be started to be implemented now. Obama is right we need to look to the future, but we also need a president who is going to do something about the now.</p>
<p>Look, I will continue to attack you when you make outrageous claims and for someone who claims to know about politics you can’t even spell “Barack” correctly, okay pumpkin?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those things aren’t just votes. As you stated it, he’s a junior Senator. He couldn’t just rely on influence to get his bills passed. He wrote up the bills and took leadership in getting them passed. That’s managerial. He was a chairman of a Committee. That’s managerial. Sure it’s not the same as being a Governor (which Palin has only been for 20 months of a very small state population wise ) but he still was in several leadership positions in Congress. That’s undeniable. If you don’t believe me look up the definition of managerial:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He was an administrator in getting his bills passed. He couldn’t just write them and hope for them to get passed. It takes leadership. He was supervisory as a chairman. If that’s not managerial I don’t know what is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t insult my intelligence by considering her an elected official for over 12 years. She was mayor of a very small town for more than 10 of those years. Even you won’t consider that preparation at all for being the POTUS (oh and yes, she’s running for POTUS when you’re dealing with 72 year old McCain who’s had cancer several times) She’s only been a high profile politician for all of 20 months of a very small state of under 700,000 people. There are more people in most Congressional districts on the East Coast. It’s not that hard to manage a really small state in terms of population. It’s not as difficult or important as representing Illinois, one of the largest states, on the national level in Washington. And only 20 months into her governorship she’s warranted an investigation. So much for ethics and change. Most of her accomplishments are related to Oil. First off, it’s not hard to make money off oil living in Alaska goddamned it. Secondly, her husband is an oil manager for goodness sakes…I don’t think it’s a leap of faith to imagine that her husbands oil expertise helped her as governor but we know it won’t help as POTUS.</p>
<p>Oh I am sorry I was not aware that writing on a online forum needed editing.</p>
<p>Senators do not write bills their aides do. They simply dictate them, it does not take leadership to get things passed you just have to get ppl to vote your way. It requires no management but rather convincing. </p>
<p>I would like to know which commitee he was chairman of? Because those are usually reserved for more senior senators.</p>
<p>Read my earlier post. The way senators get their bills passed is by debating on the floor. You get in front of ppl and present an arguement that is not managing something, it is convincing ppl to do things.</p>
<p>I never insulted your intelligence (in fact i am sure it was the other way around).</p>
<p>Again you resulted to attacking me and not my arguements. Your basic arguement was that the state was small, okay. But where her actions still indicative of managerial and executive experience yes. Also you never respond to where she lowered her own salary and also reduced the property tax by 60%.</p>
<p>In fact you never refuted any of my arguements. None of the myraid examples of her actually causing real reform. In fact you yourself state that oil is big in Alaska, so did you see where she went against big oil and actually taxed their profits?</p>
<p>I see that you are not interested in debating facts, so i will be leaving. I do hope that one day, you will see that you can debate a person without attacking them.</p>
<p>You’re a wimp because you can’t win you’re accusing me of attacking you and refusing to face the facts. Oh…I’ve presented facts and have gone against your claims. I insult you because of the ridiculous claims you make. You’re insulting me when you think I’m going to believe them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you kidding me? Convincing people to do what you want is a huge part of management like it or not. Passing bills is an operation. Even if Senator Obama did not write the whole bill to suggest that he didn’t come up with the idea and policy is ludicrous. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Chairman positions are usually reserved for senior senators but Barack is extraordinary. Barack was a chairman of the Senate’s subcommittee on European Affairs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I read your post. Convincing people in a bipartisan manner over your bill is managing something-ensuring your bill gets passed.</p>
<p>I am debating facts Dbate. You are manipulating them to the extreme. I said this, oil is big in Alaska. It is sooo easy to make money off oil. Yes it will anger the Oil managers but that doesn’t mean it’s an achievement for her. Furthermore her husband, a big oil manager <em>wink-wink</em> definitely had no role in that. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can debate most people without attacking them because they are reasonable. Your comments are not. If someone wants to support Hitler I will definitely call their reputation into question when debating them. Albeit an extreme, I don’t take kindly to foolish arguments. Furthermore, you haven’t responded to my claims of her lack of ethics and other comments I’ve made in this thread. In fact, most of your statements are irrelevant. Like she cut her salary by 60%. Her husband is a frickin oil manager she doesn’t need the money!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That made me laugh :).</p>