SOLID

One of the best speeches I've heard in a long time.  There's no doubt he's going all the way.

Comments

[assman]

I may be losing my mind but I think I just saw Klompus try to spin this pick as something other than ridiculous...

[H.E. Pennypacker]

Aside from being cast as a stunt to get the female AND black vote, it would undermine any attempt by McCain to dissociate himself from Bush.
I really hope Obama keeps hammering on the "voted 90% of the time with Party Line" thing. Seems like a stat that could really drive home the point that four years of McCain will really just be four more years of Bush43.

[Jack Klompus]

"I may be losing my mind but I think I just saw Klompus try to spin this pick as something other than ridiculous..."

I don't think it's any more ridiculous than the idea of Obama getting the presidential nomination. This is only a VP pick. And if anyone somehow thinks the Biden pick was more for qualification purposes than political purposes -- they're being intellectually dishonest.

[Assman]

I don't think it's any more ridiculous than the idea of Obama getting the presidential nomination.

But knowing that he did get the nomination, and that he and Biden are who McCain would be facing, she isn't an absurd pick?

He basically disarmed his best argument against Obama (which was a very solid argument) in exchange for what? A governor/mayor with a conservative record and no ties to Washington? He could have gotten that from Guiliani, Romney or Huckabee without looking like he's pandering to women or admitting that a lack of experience isn't important.

[Art Vandelay]

I don't think it's any more ridiculous than the idea of Obama getting the presidential nomination.

...or Bush getting a second term.

On that note though, Obama wasn't assigned the nomination. He won an election. Clearly there are an awful lot of people that see nothing ridiculous about it at all. This women didn't have to appeal to any masses for her nomination. It was given to her.

[phil]

But if my choices are Palin, Obama, or Biden -- yes, I want Palin to be President.

Wow.

OK, moving away from this argument, which is bordering on the absurd, we all know the best person for the job wouldn't have it.

So, Klompus, who do you think would be the best person to be President (other than Vandelay of course)?

[Jack Klompus]

@Vandelay
"He won an election. Clearly there are an awful lot of people that see nothing ridiculous about it at all."

Yes, within his own party. Of the people who think Palin is a ridiculous choice, which party do you think they vote with?

@Assman
"He basically disarmed his best argument against Obama (which was a very solid argument) in exchange for what?"

How does that disarm the argument? It downplays it, sure. But you're talking as if it's a likelihood that Palin would be taking over at some point in his term.

"A governor/mayor with a conservative record and no ties to Washington? He could have gotten that from Guiliani, Romney or Huckabee without looking like he's pandering to women or admitting that a lack of experience isn't important.

First of all, you don't think Obama has pandered to women in his campaign? Of course he has, because he knows it's an important demographic he'll need in order to win. So why is it wrong for McCain then? Secondly, this pick wasn't about stealing Dem (Hillary) voters. Most Hillary voters are anti-gun, pro-choice liberals -- something Palin is nowhere near. A big part of this pick was to connect with or energize the ultra-conservative right-wingnut base that MCain has butted heads with over the years. Sure, Huckabee could have given that, but Romney couldn't have. However, neither Huckabee nor Romeny brings a fresh face. I like Romney, but I think it would have looked like another Dole-Kemp ticket.

@phil
"OK, moving away from this argument, which is bordering on the absurd, we all know the best person for the job wouldn't have it.

So, Klompus, who do you think would be the best person to be President (other than Vandelay of course)?"

Oh, I'm sorry phil. I didn't mean to waste your time. I certainly appreciate you taking the time to dumb down to my level. And to answer your question, I honestly don't know. If I had to give a name, I would say I think Mitt Romney would do a good job if elected. I just don't think he'd be able to win an election.

[phil]

Oh, I'm sorry phil. I didn't mean to waste your time. I certainly appreciate you taking the time to dumb down to my level.

Klompus, I by no means intended to appear belittling; sorry if I did. I just didn't see any point in continuing this argument, as we have such opposite ideas about the issue.

In fact, I always enjoy reading your points, whether I agree with them or not, because you always have a cogent argument. One of the things about the A of G, there aren't too many morons around...

[Jack Klompus]

"I just didn't see any point in continuing this argument, as we have such opposite ideas about the issue."

Isn't that the point of arguing?

"In fact, I always enjoy reading your points, whether I agree with them or not, because you always have a cogent argument. One of the things about the A of G, there aren't too many morons around..."

First you condescend, then you patronize. You're a real asshole, phil.

[phil]

I have a good example to follow apparently. Whatever your perception, I really was trying to be sincere.

[Assman]

McCain is saying that, should he be unavailable, the 2nd most qualified person to run the country has zero experience at foreign affairs. While Palin may actually be qualified, please tell me how that doesn't completely destroy his case against Obama?

Good pick or not, all he has left are the issues, which only gives him the support of his active base. He just killed himself.

[phil]

Agreed. Whatever the experiential limitations of Obama, as Vandelay said, he did win an election to get here (yes, a partisan election).

Arguing that Obama is a poor candidate as a defense of the Palin pick does not make her a good choice.

[Jack Klompus]

@phil
"Whatever your perception, I really was trying to be sincere."

Completely uncalled for, phil. Below the belt kind of stuff. You should be banned from this site.

@Assman
"McCain is saying that, should he be unavailable, the 2nd most qualified person to run the country has zero experience at foreign affairs."

Using that logic, what's Obama saying with his pick? "While I am inexperienced and have been wrong about the surge and early withdrawal timetables, my running mate has years of experience, supported the surge, and opposed early withdrawal timetables. So if foreign affairs are important to you, you should hope I become unavailable."

"While Palin may actually be qualified, please tell me how that doesn't completely destroy his case against Obama?"

The case against Obama's experience has never been a strong argument, even before Palin. It was a talking point at best and made for a lousy attack ad. Not saying that argument hasn't been front and center of the McCain camp. But it's a shit argument with little effect on anyone not already voting McCain. The real argument isn't simply that Obama lacks tenure -- it's more that for the limited time he's spent in the U.S. Senate, how accurate has his judgment been regarding foreign affairs.

"Good pick or not, all he has left are the issues, which only gives him the support of his active base. He just killed himself."

What the hell does that mean?

[Jack Klompus]

"Arguing that Obama is a poor candidate as a defense of the Palin pick does not make her a good choice."

Agreed. Who said Obama is a poor candidate?

[phil]

Completely uncalled for, phil. Below the belt kind of stuff. You should be banned from this site.

So wounded am I...

Who said Obama is a poor candidate?

You did.

I don't think it's any more ridiculous than the idea of Obama getting the presidential nomination.

[Jack Klompus]

"Who said Obama is a poor candidate?

You did.

I don't think it's any more ridiculuous than the idea of Obama getting the presidential nomination."

Apologies if you took it that way, but that was not the intended interpretation. My point was that it seems disingenous to call her pick as running mate ridiculous when Obama just managed to win his party's nomination with similar inexperience (and yes, he earned it). Furthermore, I don't believe I've ever said Obama was either a poor candidate or unqualified. If you can find it, I'll stand corrected. However if memory serves, I stated as far back as March 2007 on this site that I believed not only is Obama qualified, but also predicted he would be our next president (In all fairness, I also predicted he would be running against Romney, among other bad predictions). Nonetheless, I'll reiterate that I think Obama would be a suitable president if elected -- and I will be proud to call him my president if and when that happens. I'm just not voting for him for the simple reason that I agree less with his platform than I do with McCain's.

[phil]

I'm just not voting for him for the simple reason that I agree less with his platform than I do with McCain's.

Fair enough.

"Good pick or not, all he has left are the issues, which only gives him the support of his active base. He just killed himself."

What the hell does that mean?

It means 'don't write comments on a Blackberry when you're sleepy.'

It's supposed to say McCain's argument against Obama's inexperience was his best argument for independents. He has others, but issues aren't as compelling to an independent as perceived character/ability flaws. Now, with that off the table, he's just arguing the issues, which - to an independent - costs him against Obama.

The real argument isn't simply that Obama lacks tenure -- it's more that for the limited time he's spent in the U.S. Senate, how accurate has his judgment been regarding foreign affairs.

And who wins that argument is a judgement call. Depends on who is asking the questions, honestly.

[Jack Klompus]

"He has others, but issues aren't as compelling to an independent as perceived character/ability flaws."

I still fail to see your argument. Why wouldn't an independent still perceive chraracter/ability flaws (in either candidate) -- regardless of the question of experience/readiness? But more importantly, how are you defining an "independent?"

"And who wins that argument is a judgement call. Depends on who is asking the questions, honestly."

Yes and no. If the question is "should we have gone into Iraq?" then you're right. We only know what one outcome was for sure. But it would be pretty hard to argue that the troop surge didn't have the positive effect it was intended to. On the other hand, how do we know anarchy would have resulted had we started pulling troops instead of reinforcing them? We don't, but you don't see anyone (including Obama) trying to argue that either.

[soupnazi]

"Soup---Are you voting for Nader?" Nader, no--either writing in Bill Cosby or my old stand-by, Pat Paulson---