con-pilot

And what GF said.

tinpis

This OZ journo wolud agree GF


Piers Akerman
Tuesday, September 02, 2008 at 08:35am


WHAT is there not to like about Sarah Palin, a former beauty queen who enjoys taking down a moose or two and a caribou, while raising five joeys and cleaning up corruption in politics at a municipal and state level in the US?

Quite a bit, according to Fairfax executive and occasional commentator Bruce Wolpe, whose brief experience working for the Clintons in Washington apparently qualified him for the job of corporate affairs head on the amateur hour team selected by academic Fred Hilmer, the former chief executive of the flailing publisher, to decorate its tarnished mahogany row.
Writing in the Sun-Herald, Wolpe, a Democrat who never prevents his political affiliation from colouring his views, says John McCain’s choice as Republican presidential running mate, has, ``neither stature nor tethers.’’
``If [Democrat presidential candidate Senator Barack] Obama is inexperienced what are we to make of a person who has served for only two years as Governor of Alaska?’’ he asked.
Wolpe is half right—Obama is possibly the least experienced person ever to run for US president, having a resume as thin as rice paper and a sad history of cultivating the wrong people throughout his brief career.
Wolpe omitted to mention that among those Obama is tethered to are the unreconstructed 1970s Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, who Obama supported as a community activist; the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a racist church leader who, in the 20 years Obama attended his church, made a career out of decrying America and white people in general; Tony Rezko, the former campaign fund-raiser who assisted Obama with the purchase of his home three years ago, and who was convicted in June on 16 counts of corruption; Nadhmi Auchi, the Iraqi-born billionaire who bankrolled Rezko the day before the housing deal was settled in 2005, and who has had his US visa revoked because of what the Pentagon calls ``significant and credible evidence’’ of involvement in the Oil for Food scandal and illicit smuggling of weapons to Saddam Hussein’s regime.
Quite the Chicago Democratic machine team by any measure, but apparently not worth a mention in Wolpe’s Fairfaxian view of US politics, and Obama has been comfortable with their company ever since he launched himself as a community organiser.
Governor Palin, on the other hand, is no machine woman.
She’s her own woman.
If Obama’s followers were truly looking for a new face for American politics they would be falling over themselves to throw their support behind the 44-year-old Alaskan.
She entered politics at 28, winning a seat on the Wasilla city council as an opponent of tax increases. Four years later she defeated the three-term mayoral incumbent and dumped his cronies from the bureaucracy.
In 2003, she was appointed to Alaska’s important Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and rapidly began examining the ethics of the state’s Republican party chairman for conflicts of interest with big oil interests. The probe resulted in a substantial fine for the chairman. The following year she joined a Democratic representative’s ethics complaint against the Republican Attorney General over a trade deal. The Attorney General resigned.
In 2005 she challenged the sitting Governor in a three-way primary and won 51 per cent of the vote, compared to his 19 per cent.
What’s more, she knows the world of energy, understands the realities of the fuel squeeze and isn’t impressed by New Age Cassandras and their ultimatums on the future of Western civilisation.
This is a record that reflects experience, putting Obama’s part-time job as an Illinois legislator to shame, and making his one-term, one-vote Senate position look pathetic.
Little wonder that some Democrats have already begun to spin the line that Obama’s inexperience should be seen as a plus in a race against real professionals.
Whether Wolpe can swallow that or whether he will choke on its absurdity remains to be seen, but McCain’s choice of Palin has revived interest in what was otherwise a very dull race.
The problem for the Democrats is very similar to that now facing Fairfax journalists, it is a choice between fantasy and reality.
The Obama-Joe Biden ticket is supported by those in the same airhead league as that inhabited by the Wolpes of the world, their media confreres and believers in the vibe, the I-Ching and Joan Collins’ duets with whales.
McCain and Palin represent the real world. Whereas Obama talks of the need for reform yet has been in bed with some of the sleaziest characters in modern Chicago politics.
McCain’s experience would bring a unique wisdom to the top job. His running mate, Palin, is an experienced reformer. She has the scalps and the moose stew on the stove to prove it.
With Democrats like Wolpe attempting to destroy her before the US elections, one can only hope this woman has her guns locked and loaded for bear.
Obama is possibly the least experienced person ever to run for US president | Daily Telegraph Piers Akerman Blog

GetTheFlick

I hate guessing at a man's opinion, WC. Do you have one in the context of this thread -- American presidential elections ?

Which candidate would provide the most effective resolution, do you think ?

Obama -- who has already presented a Bill to send the dispute to an arbitrator ?

Or McCain -- who said union opposition to contracting out services was "labor leaders looking to swell the ranks of federal government unions."

Which do you believe is the appropriate approach and what do you see as the consequences of that approach ?

Don Brown

galaxy flyer

BTW, let's look at some of the other V-P candidates:

Gov Pawlenty MN, Just entered second term as governor, no int'l exp.

Gov Crist FL, Less time as FL governor than Palin-1 year No discernible int'l exp.

Gov Tim Kaine D-VA for Obama's Veep. Second year as Governor of Va. No int'l exp.

Well, which one is better qual'd?

GTF Hate to say it, but I would agree with McCain. Labor unions in government are the only growing part of the union movement because they are very effective at forcing uneconomic contracts by playing politics. Research the state of many State and Local government pension plans-a disaster waiting to happen. San Diego was bankrupted and NJ is next. Having been in ALPA and seen its inability to constructively address the economic effects of consumers demanding ever cheaper fares., seen the demise of the auto industry with the assistance of the UAW and the round-heeled actions of mgt. I might add non-US auto companies are flourishing in the US. Yes, I think much of American management, esp. in government is, at best, unimaginative and at worst, a disaster. I'm not impressed with union ability to manage change in the world.

GetTheFlick

It's amazing to me -- watching this line of reasoning. Who has been questioning Obama's experience ? Not Democrats. But McCain picks Palin -- throwing a serious monkey-wrench into the experience-counts line of attack on Obama -- and now suddenly, its the Democrats that are decrying Palin's lack of experience ? I don't think so.

It's hilarious GF. Tell me again what "executive experience" John McCain has and how it relates to being President ? It's a rather odd thing, when you're President and tell people to do something -- very few poeple salute and say "yes sir." Ask Senator McCain if you don't believe me. Those Senators often have ideas at odds with Presidents.

"International experience" ? That's a hoot ! I guess the only time Republicans want to bring up "international experience" is when they try to accuse Obama of being educated in a madrassa or to showcase his relatives in Africa.

Were your concerns the same when you cast your vote for Shrub ?

And then Biden is an "insider"....and McCain is not ???

Here's a good example of why Obama will make a good President;

Obama Tells Press to Back Off on Palin

"... has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor or her potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories."

He continued, "You know, my mother had me when she was 18.

The moral courage to stand up for what is right -- even if it isn't to his political advantage.

Don Brown

BlueWolf

I don't agree with you Flypuppy, and here's why.

For starters I did say which is the point I don't think you've grasped.
I didn't actually directly compare New Zealand with Britain, I used Australia as a stepping stone, though it would be fair to say that I don't see a fundamental difference anyway, apart from scale, which I don't believe is relevant. You mention budgets, yes, well, the numbers are different, but the percentages and priorities and the demands thereof are not, hence the decisions, and the experience gained from having to make them, are the same.

You posit that ; really? In what way? Urban sprawl? Inner city decay? Inadequate hospital funding? Factory closures due to competition from low-wage Asian economies? Congested traffic networks? Aging population and infrastructure? Ethnic and cultural divisions and conflicts? What differences are we talking about?

Perhaps, if he was the right person, with the requisite abilities; but that wasn't the point I was making. Let's keep the apples and the oranges separate. How about, in keeping with your example, we take the successful Chief Executive of Shell in New Zealand, and make him the Chief Executive of Shell in the UK? Or the CEO of Shell in Ireland, and promote him (or her) to CEO of Shell Canada? Could the proven CEO of Shell Australia make a decent fist of it as CEO of Shell in the USA? Apart from scale, which isn't relevant, what else is different? With regards to the aforementioned, I'm sure you are well aware that such elevations are commonplace in the commercial world.

In the same vein, the Governor of a State with a small population, will face exactly and precisely the same responsibilities, realities, pressures, and decisions, as will the Governor of a State with a large population.

By definition, no-one who hasn't already been the President of the United States has any experience of the job at all. Should candidacy itself be limited to Governors - never mind Senators, who have no gubernatorial experience at all - from States with large populations? If so, how large should such State populations be, in number, or as a percentage of the total population of the US? Should a former British Prime Minister be allowed to stand for the European Presidency, or is the population of the country they come from just too little, relative to the greater whole, for their experience to be considered relevant? Would the Grand Duke of Luxembourg be qualified to officiate over a country whose population and territorial area is vast by comparison to his own nation - say, for example, Fiji?

So Alaska has the fourth smallest population of any State in the Union - so what? Governor is Governor, and even as Mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin notched up more executive experience, and carried more responsibility, than Obama has thus far.

ORAC

Well that's hardly a surprise. Really? The New Republic - The Plank

Interestingly, in view of the previous comments concerning the Republican tactics, it is reported that the news concerning Bristol Palin's pregnancy was released to counter the viscous smearing rumour being spread through the Democratic blogsphere that Sarah Palin wasn't the mother of her last child, but had claimed to be to cover up for Bristol having an illegitimate child.

So much for the moral superiority of the Democratic party machine.

maximus

Hey BlueWolf, there is one thing about Sarah Palin......she has at least got a far better chance of being elected than you did/have at the previous and upcoming NZ elections

BlueWolf

Oh, hello maximus, yes, I have no chance in these elections because I'm not standing, on account of having to sort my life out since my marriage broke up two months ago.

And I achieved about the degree of electoral success in '05 as I was expecting...sometimes people do things on principle, you know.

But thank you for your continued interest in my life and opinions, and for your informed, helpful, and mature commentary.

Capt.KAOS

Just some random thoughts.

All this talk about the experience of McCain. With all his experience why did he choose probably the lightest of all GOP candidates after meeting her only once and talking to her on the phone for 15 mins? Is this the best the GOP has? Why not Romney? Maybe because Romney rejected to work with him?

Palin has everything Obama has been accused of, being inexperienced and lack of patriotism. Palin has been a member of an Alaskian secession-minded fringe group (AIP) in the 90's, which motto is "I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."

So why this gamble of McCain? Just because Palin might attract ex-Hillary voters? It is known McCain that likes to gamble, a frightening thought for a future POTUS in the current global events.

And what makes Palin so effective with the prospect of becoming the next Commander in Chief? Because Alaska borders to Russia? A hockey-mum as President, not so unthinkable at all, McCain is 72 and had already 4 malignant melanomas.

GetTheFlick

Shocked I am...just shocked.

Whatever that means. I thought it was because it was one of the few places left where organizing wouldn't get you fired. The government isn't quite as motivated in keeping unions out see...their unions can't go on strike.

You lost me. Which one gets to manage ? I know which one gets the golden parachute.

Don Brown

galaxy flyer

McCain had a 23-year career as a Naval officer, lots of executive experience and if you haven't been in a squadron as an officer,you won't understand it. Biden has 36 years of being an insider who tows the Democrat line. McCain has consistently worked with both parties to pass legislation. He has many enemies simply because he doesn't play the party line. He would change business in Washington, not Obama or Biden, party hacks.

It means that governments have a very hard time not caving into union demands. Please refer to the history of New York City and the transit union. Governments because they have no economic measures can promise the moon to union demands and then go spend other people's money aka taxes. Union pensions are the next HUGE financial disaster. Most of them are deeply underfunded. Because there is no competition, how does one judge the value of government employees? Private industry goes out of business if they are not profitable and hold costs to what their customers will bear.

Yes, management gets to manage, but what happens when unions make outrageous demands and management cannot afford the strike. You get the US auto makers, the US airlines, the US steel companies. Unions are political organizations that refuse to adjust to the economic facts of life. I saw it at Eastern, "full pay 'til the last day" that kind of BS. Delta and NW guys said the same thing and what did it get them? What is the fat contracts at GM, Ford and Chrysler getting the UAW? Layoffs for the last 20 years. PATCO refused to see the light until the lights went out.

GF

chuks

"McCain picked someone he didn't know..." to which I can only reply, "Oh, really?"

Professional politicians employ professional staff to sort out this sort of thing for them. "Find me a suitable running mate," is the order, when a process of selection starts out of sight of the general public.

Not to be rude but we voters only get to, umm, vote! First we voted for McCain as the Republican candidate for President and now we shall get to vote for him and the person he chose as his running mate. Do you think perhaps he should have asked us to submit names to then choose the one that came up most often, a sort of sub-primary?

I think a lot of the overseas commentators on this, even the one with a degree in "politics", have a grossly exaggerated idea of the importance and power of the President. He's really just 1/3 of our government when you come right down to it, plus he's surrounded by many, many staff not to mention his Cabinet so that whether he might succumb to a stroke brought on by finding a spot the carwash missed on the Presidential limousine (McCain) or else be dragged out of the Oval Office and lynched in the Rose Garden by the Ku Klux Klan (Obama) this is not something likely to bring the government to a grinding halt. We have had some nonentities as V.P. who came surprisingly good when they had to step in. Harry Truman comes to mind, for one.

I would guess that of the people McCain "knew", he didn't want any of them as his running mate or else his Party didn't. Then he looked through the stack of CVs his staff put before him, when he had probably told them what qualities he wanted, and picked the one he (and the Republican party bosses) liked best. People who have a real problem with Palin, well, they probably weren't going to vote for McCain anyway!

You just never know what will appeal to "we the people", do you?

ZH875

Roll on November and the elections.


Still at least the world is now informed that Obama actually has a rival in the shape of McCain.

Capt.KAOS

They do, but usually it's done before the nomination is cleared, not after, which apparantly is a fact...

Palin herself is not so much an issue here, but much more McCain whose judgement is questionable and does not promis a lot for later. Palin underlines McCains weaknesses instead of compensating them. McCain needs someone who, in case he's the next POTUS, will lead him into the 21st Century which is with respect to geopolitics completely different to the 19th and 20th Century.

Dealings with the New Russia, Islamic countries and upcoming (economical) powers in Asia requires more vision than experience, as experience can lead to the same old geopolotical mistakes which the Bush government made over the last 8 years. Simply having the biggest army in the world, sanctions and protective markets have proved not to work. Russia has found new self-confidence and China has become a formidable economic power with many reformations over the last 20/30 years. These countries have to be approached with a completely different attitude as the US and EU has done until now.

For instance Kishore Mahbubani gives here and here a fascinating view how the West is mused on through the Asian perspective. Read it with an open mind and see how the world is beyond the horizon.

Flypuppy

Here is the thing, boys and girls, this is NOT about Sarah Palin, her experience or lack thereof. This is about John McCain and his decisions. As I said before this is his first Presidential act, and I do not trust it. It is not so much that he picked the least experienced Vice Presidential nominee in America's history; it is how it was done, or rather not done.


Meeting Palin once at a Republican governors' conference and having a single phone conversation on the eve of her selection just doesn’t seem right to me. It turns out that background checks by the Republican Party bods and the FBI were not carried out. It seems that a Democratic Party researcher was the first person to ask for access to the archive of Palin's local newspaper, this means that the McCain camp surely didn't. From what I can gather, the Republican lawyers are only now doing the basic background checks. This surely is something of an indictment of McCain's judgement.

Do you really want someone, who is selling himself as a Maverick, making impulsive decisions on critical issues when dealing with Putin's brinkmanship?


McCain can't have any notion of what and who Palin actually is, what she could contribute to the Vice Presidential office, and what it would be like to work together. He doesn't know her and has had no chance to. However, because she fits the marketing pigeonhole, none of that seems to matter. This is why I do not trust the judgment of John McCain or the team surrounding him and why it echos much of what we have seen for the last eight years; it's a choice likely to produce grave consequences, yet based almost exclusively on political expediency.

Quote:

even as Mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin notched up more executive experience, and carried more responsibility, than Obama has thus far.

I was prepared to take you seriously until you wrote that. I cannot and will not take your opinions seriously from here on. Sorry, but that is just so much bollocks.

brickhistory

For all those questioning Palin, two points:

1. You gotta win the White House to have the worry about 'lack of judgement.' I still think Palin was a great choice. Executive experience even if only 'two years.' How many years does one need? The Democratic ticket has how many years actually making decisions between them?

2. How much air time has Obama and Company received since her announcement?

So, again, two non-lawyers with varied life experiences, including time actually spent running something - a business, a squadron, a state, among other things versus two lawyers who went immediately into politics.

Talk about change indeed.

Flypuppy

It's not about Palin...

brickhistory

For those questioning the decision regarding Gov. Palin, I refer to my post #2198.

Flypuppy

I disagree, see post 2197.