|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by coldsteel7
You might be surprised to learn that Quayle surpressed a coup in the Phillipines by ordering the US Air Force to fly cap flights over Philliping aircraft that were attempting to bomb Aquino's Palace. Bush was on a flight to Malta and therefore inable to deal with the issue. You never heard the media report THAT.
I have heard Obama speak unscripted and don't find him to be either articulate or exceptionally intelligent. He is an intelligent man, no doubt. But he does not impress me as being a prodigy. He's a political hack like the rest. People see what they want or are told to see.
Just my humble opinion. I have read ALL of their books...Obama, Gore, Quayle. Although the books are probably edited thoroughly, you can get a pretty good measure of the man from his book. Not one stands out as particularly more capable than the next.
John
|
Jan 29 '09
3:51 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
You are the first person I hear say something nice about Quayle. The media simply reported the moronic statements he made in his undistinguished career, and in my memory of the recent US political scene, his global ignorance was matched only by George W. Bush. Palin, hopefully, we won't have a chance to measure up against these pathetic yardsticks.
The US finally has an articulate president, and the world is cheering. Of course, that won't make him automatically a great president, but it's a good start. I'd rather try to forget Quayle, Palin, and other major national embarrassments.
Vic
|
Jan 28 '09
8:53 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by coldsteel7
I disagree with your assessment of Quayle. He was not an embarassment...he was actually far more intelligent than Biden. I listened to Biden in the debates and he did not seem to me to be the great foreign affairs guy he was painted to be. Kind of dummmmm if you were to solicit my opinion. Quayle was painted by the media to be a gaff-master, but he wasn't. The media shapes peoples opinions pretty thoroughly.
John
|
Jan 27 '09
3:52 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by macresarf1
The differenct is, of course, that Joe Biden has had a long distinguished career, whereas Dan Quayle was a constant embarrassment, a flash in the pan who sank without a trace -- even forgiving his spelling.
Fine essay.
[Macresarf1]
|
Jan 26 '09
3:35 am PST
|
|
Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by coldsteel7
You might want to read "Standing Firm" and find out more about Dan Quayle. His misspelling of potato is "small potatoes" compared to the gaff-a-day Biden.
He was an intelligent and articulate leader who the media laid waste to. They used his middle name (sound familiar) to make him sound elite...funny thing...his grandfather owned a small Indiana newspaper...they were far from wealthy and it was not old money as the news liked to suggest.
Quayle did not have a lot of opportunity to lead, but he did crush a coup in the Phillipines while Bush was en route to Malta to meet with Gorbachev. Quayle was also the co-Legislator on the Americans with Disabilities Act...one more MAJOR piece of legislation than our current President Elect has authored.
John
|
Dec 16 '08
7:01 am PST
|
|
unfortunately, you're right. (Reply to this comment)
by voxpoptart
Well-said and reasonable piece. Gender isn't the only consideration for the Palin selection, obviously -- Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson are highly experienced Republican Senators, for example, and Palin was quite deliberately chosen over them.
But in essence you're right: Palin and Geraldine Ferraro have been the conventionally least-qualified candidates of my lifetime (Dan Quayle had spent at least a decade as an elected representative in Congress, so by experience standards, he wasn't a stretch). Similarly, Clarence Thomas (very much UNLIKE Thurgood Marshall before him) is our least conventionally qualified Supreme Court judge.
Every serious randomized study of hiring practices has made it clear that _in general_, women and minorities are at a powerful disadvantage in terms of hiring, even with affirmative actions in place. Resumes with white-sounding names will get 50% more callbacks than identical resumes with black-sounding names; identical (pre-scripted) answers in job interviews will be scored as far better coming from men than from women. But these big-ticket examples of tokenism don't help fight the problem. If anything, they make it worse.
cheers,
- Brian
|
Oct 20 '08
1:41 pm PDT
|
|
.... (Reply to this comment)
by PacManY2J
Excellent essay. I hope more people feel as insulted by this choice as you do. Her selection is not only an attempt at manipulating women but also of manipulating "regular Americans." Eating mooseburgers does not make you more qualified to help run this country.
Palin and her mean spirited attacks (mocking Joe Biden for being old while she's standing right next to John McCain?!?) are a distraction from the real issues that Americans are dealing with every day. I hope most voters are too smart to be fooled by her winks and "you betcha's." She's dangerously under-qualified to be VP. I hope we get a woman in the White House one day ... just not this one.
Matt
|
Oct 07 '08
6:19 am PDT
|
|
Re: Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by glowsw
HA. I'm a little young to really remember Dan Quayle myself. But I've certainly heard the stories.
|
Oct 01 '08
6:56 pm PDT
|
|
Remember Dan Quayle? (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
Sarah Palin makes him look rather qualified in comparison...Nice essay.
Vic
|
Sep 28 '08
1:23 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Gender is not the only factor... (Reply to this comment)
by glowsw
Fair enough.
And I do have to acknowledge her appeal to the blue collar demo but I also have to be honest and say that I don't understand it. Since when does a membership in the NRA qualify someone to help run the country?
Not that I agree with everything in this article but I do think it's a good counter to that argument: http://www.newsweek.com/id/160080
What doesn't she have in common with the Bush Administration? The only separation from it is because she has nothing to do with the Federal Government at all. On domestic issues such as abortion (as I mentioned), Religion, Environment, Oil... she's right there with them.
And I agree that Gender isn't the only consideration but I do feel like it was a major one.
|
Sep 27 '08
12:09 pm PDT
|
|
Gender is not the only factor... (Reply to this comment)
by duke101
While I would never claim that Palin's gender didn't play a role in her selection process, I don't think it was the primary motivation. What you're overlooking is her appeal to the blue-collar demographic. Here's an article that discusses that very factor:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-02-analysis-palin_N.htm
Second, the selection of Palin has a lot to do with countering Obama's main argument that a vote for McCain would mean four more years of Bush. Say what you will about Palin, but she has nothing in common with the Bush administration.
Had McCain simply wanted to choose a woman for the sake of choosing a woman, he could have chosen someone like Carly Fiorina, who would perhaps lend more economic credibility to the ticket. Therefore, I feel gender was only one of several factors in the selection process.
|
Sep 27 '08
10:10 am PDT
|
|
Re: Maybe... (Reply to this comment)
by glowsw
HA. Now that would hilarious.
Thanks :)
|
Sep 27 '08
9:22 am PDT
|
|
Re: You have an interesting point of view... (Reply to this comment)
by glowsw
Here's a question. Would Palin have been chosen if she were a man?
What's going to change in four years that will make her a legitimate Presidential candidate? Why her and why not one of the other QUALIFIED Republican women who are in office right now?
(And trust me, lack of experience is my biggest hesitation when it comes to Obama as well)
If Palin hadn't been nominated for VP this year, would there be any possibility of her being considered for it in 2016? Would most of this country even know who she was?
I wouldn't necessarily qualify anything I go through as struggles, I think that's probably being overly dramatic. I'm just frustrated by the current nonsensical state of politics in this country and with all of the important, critical issues we are facing I don't understand why we can't be given legitimate candidates who can actually understand and deal with them.
Sexism isn't going away anytime soon, especially in classically male dominated arenas such as politics but things like this are a backward step rather than a forward one. And that too frustrates me.
|
Sep 27 '08
9:21 am PDT
|
|
Maybe... (Reply to this comment)
by jurgrace
if they win, we could swap Tina Fey in for her. No one would know the difference because all women are the same, right? At the very least, it would inject some humor into those congressional deliberations.
You expressed your thoughts very well.
Grace
|
Sep 27 '08
9:19 am PDT
|
|
You have an interesting point of view... (Reply to this comment)
by rgathright
I cannot pretend to know your struggles.
Yet, I want you to think about the possibility that Palin could be ready to run as a presidential candidate in 2016.
|
Sep 27 '08
6:35 am PDT
|
|
|
|
