+1ShuckOwens wrote:Hank Snow wrote:Popularity doesn't always = good, otherwise American Central Dust would have debuted at #1.ACD RULZ!!!!Tokyo Fan wrote: Shit, I hate it when you make a good point.
Sarah Palin 7/3/2009
-
- Posts: 6665
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 6:02 pm
- Location: South Jersey/Philly
You've got to be shitting me.Thomas_J_Foolery wrote:..... I too am not persuaded that Ms. Palin would have provided the best leadership but again, I'd ask - what makes our current president so much more qualified than her?
It isn't a matter of checking off boxes on a resume. Governor--check. Little state governor---check. Things like having a brain, understanding the issues, having a calm demeanor and being able to speak in complete sentences are also important qualifications.
tinyelvis wrote:I have a serious problem with all lifetime policitians. To me, being a lifetime Washington insider does not magically equal Presidentially-qualified.
Some lifetime politicians are hacks, others are adept and serious about their careers. It's the same with every profession. I know 30 year teachers that are incompetent and I know 30 year teachers that are take their professions seriously and are excellent. I am sure that it is the same in the... is it the computer/IT industry that you work in, tiny?, videography or whatever Shuck's profession is called (no disrespect intended), law enforcement, sales, photography, scuba equipment, music, truck driving, wine, insurance and all of the other professions represented on this board.thomasj.foolery wrote:Agreed. Also what exactly makes one qualified to be president? Was our current president qualified for the job? If so, why and on what basis? I guess one could argue, the ballot box made him qualified and to a large extent that is true. However, I would note that in Palin's case and in Obama's case, the merit of their arguments regarding the issues of the day mattered little to a media that now caters to a nation that prefers to believe boilerplate retorts and characterization over substantive debate - prefers TMZ over real world complexity and issues. I too am not persuaded that Ms. Palin would have provided the best leadership but again, I'd ask - what makes our current president so much more qualified than her? A govenor of an admittedly small populated state, is still a governor nonetheless - a role that one would presume requires some level of competency that many of us on this board have not attained.
Current events and the policies instigated by this current administration prove that ideas do in fact matter.
Anyone that assumes that someone is a master of a profession simply because they spent 20-40 years in it is a fool. Anyone that assumes that someone is to be discounted simply because they spent 20-40 years in a profession is also a fool.
It is equally foolhardy to assume that simply because someone is an 'outsider', that they automatically have some special insight. I know special-certification teacher's whose experience is from outside education that are incompetent and others that are fantastic.
I am sure that we can all share similar anecdotes. Why make silly generalizations?
Last edited by dcarter on Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:34 am
I have a serious problem with all lifetime policitians. To me, being a lifetime Washington insider does not magically equal Presidentially-qualified.[/quote]
Agreed. Also what exactly makes one qualified to be president? Was our current president qualified for the job? If so, why and on what basis? I guess one could argue, the ballot box made him qualified and to a large extent that is true. However, I would note that in Palin's case and in Obama's case, the merit of their arguments regarding the issues of the day mattered little to a media that now caters to a nation that prefers to believe boilerplate retorts and characterization over substantive debate - prefers TMZ over real world complexity and issues. I too am not persuaded that Ms. Palin would have provided the best leadership but again, I'd ask - what makes our current president so much more qualified than her? A govenor of an admittedly small populated state, is still a governor nonetheless - a role that one would presume requires some level of competency that many of us on this board have not attained.
Current events and the policies instigated by this current administration prove that ideas do in fact matter.
Agreed. Also what exactly makes one qualified to be president? Was our current president qualified for the job? If so, why and on what basis? I guess one could argue, the ballot box made him qualified and to a large extent that is true. However, I would note that in Palin's case and in Obama's case, the merit of their arguments regarding the issues of the day mattered little to a media that now caters to a nation that prefers to believe boilerplate retorts and characterization over substantive debate - prefers TMZ over real world complexity and issues. I too am not persuaded that Ms. Palin would have provided the best leadership but again, I'd ask - what makes our current president so much more qualified than her? A govenor of an admittedly small populated state, is still a governor nonetheless - a role that one would presume requires some level of competency that many of us on this board have not attained.
Current events and the policies instigated by this current administration prove that ideas do in fact matter.
Some lifetime politicians are hacks, others are adept and serious about their careers. It's the same with every profession. I know 30 year teachers that are incompetent and I know 30 year teachers that are take their professions seriously and are excellent. I am sure that it is the same in the... is it the computer/IT industry that you work in, tiny?, videography or whatever Shuck's profession is called (no disrespect intended), law enforcement, sales, photography, scuba equipment, music, truck driving, wine, insurance and all of the other professions represented on this board.
Anyone that assumes that someone is a master of a profession simply because they spent 20-40 years in it is a fool. Anyone that assumes that someone is to be discounted simply because they spent 20-40 years in a profession is also a fool.
It is equally foolhardy to assume that simply because someone is an 'outsider', that they automatically have some special insight. I know special-certification teacher's whose experience is from outside education that are incompetent and others that are fantastic.
I am sure that we can all share similar anecdotes. Why make silly generalizations?
Anyone that assumes that someone is a master of a profession simply because they spent 20-40 years in it is a fool. Anyone that assumes that someone is to be discounted simply because they spent 20-40 years in a profession is also a fool.
It is equally foolhardy to assume that simply because someone is an 'outsider', that they automatically have some special insight. I know special-certification teacher's whose experience is from outside education that are incompetent and others that are fantastic.
I am sure that we can all share similar anecdotes. Why make silly generalizations?
what he saidHank Snow wrote:Considering that Biden has been in Washington for a LONG time, and that he has ran for president before, made a fool of himself with the plagiarism scandal, etc. I would be willing to be a lot more people on both sides knew who he was than who Palin was.
To say he was obscure as Palin was obscure because their states have a similar population is kind of silly.
-
- Posts: 2567
- Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 2:31 am
Considering that Biden has been in Washington for a LONG time, and that he has ran for president before, made a fool of himself with the plagiarism scandal, etc. I would be willing to be a lot more people on both sides knew who he was than who Palin was.
To say he was obscure as Palin was obscure because their states have a similar population is kind of silly.
As for being qualified to be president, who really is qualified to be president until they are on the job awhile? Has anyone ever gone in being fully qualified?
To say he was obscure as Palin was obscure because their states have a similar population is kind of silly.
As for being qualified to be president, who really is qualified to be president until they are on the job awhile? Has anyone ever gone in being fully qualified?
I think he is trying to insult me. Disagreement is not welcome by some on this board.danmen wrote:do tellScottZeagle wrote:You realize who you are arguing with, right???danmen wrote:You can call Biden lot's of things, but obscure when announced as running mate was not one of his many faults.TinyElvis wrote:Of course I'm serious. I am just trying to find some consistency here.Tokyo Fan wrote:You're not serious...are you?
Palin on the other hand was essentially unknown by the entire nation outside the extremely large but extremely unpopulated state of Alaska. The entire state has less than 700k people. We are a nation in which public figures live in a fishbowl and before she was announced, it is undebatable that she was "obscure".
The population of Delaware is apprx 800k. Biden was a senator from a very small state both in population and size. I would guess more than half of our population cannot even find Delaware on a map (sad, huh?). Going on that assumption, I would wager that most did not know who he was.
I have a serious problem with all lifetime policitians. To me, being a lifetime Washington insider does not magically equal Presidentially-qualified.
do tellScottZeagle wrote:You realize who you are arguing with, right???danmen wrote:You can call Biden lot's of things, but obscure when announced as running mate was not one of his many faults.TinyElvis wrote:Of course I'm serious. I am just trying to find some consistency here.Tokyo Fan wrote:You're not serious...are you?
Palin on the other hand was essentially unknown by the entire nation outside the extremely large but extremely unpopulated state of Alaska. The entire state has less than 700k people. We are a nation in which public figures live in a fishbowl and before she was announced, it is undebatable that she was "obscure".
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:19 am
- Location: Tampa Bay, FL
- Contact:
You realize who you are arguing with, right???danmen wrote:You can call Biden lot's of things, but obscure when announced as running mate was not one of his many faults.TinyElvis wrote:Of course I'm serious. I am just trying to find some consistency here.Tokyo Fan wrote:You're not serious...are you?
Palin on the other hand was essentially unknown by the entire nation outside the extremely large but extremely unpopulated state of Alaska. The entire state has less than 700k people. We are a nation in which public figures live in a fishbowl and before she was announced, it is undebatable that she was "obscure".
You can call Biden lot's of things, but obscure when announced as running mate was not one of his many faults.TinyElvis wrote:Of course I'm serious. I am just trying to find some consistency here.Tokyo Fan wrote:You're not serious...are you?
Palin on the other hand was essentially unknown by the entire nation outside the extremely large but extremely unpopulated state of Alaska. The entire state has less than 700k people. We are a nation in which public figures live in a fishbowl and before she was announced, it is undebatable that she was "obscure".