Katha Pollitt has some questions for Sarah Palin. Fair enough, but I can pick out at least two that I bet, before writing this article, Katha Pollitt could not have answered to my satisfaction. Heck, five gets you ten that neither Joe Biden nor Barack Obama can correctly describe the Fed's main activities. And the first question seems to indicate that Ms. Pollitt is not only unable to reason clearly from some fairly simple first principles, but literally incapable of imagining anyone else doing same. Halfway through I found myself halfway seriously wondering when Ms. Pollitt had started writing for McCain/Palin '08.
I haven't watched the interview yet, but my understanding is that, as I have been predicting (privately to friends, unfortunately, rather than in public where I could take credit), she came out looking like a moron on foreign policy. Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had. But I don't see how you can vote for a candidate without being able to assess their foreign policy reasoning, which is a tad difficult if they have no facts to reason from.
Update A commenter on Marginal Revolution complains that she thought Fannie and Freddie were government entities. I think we have to give her a pass on this, given how many of the world's central bankers made the same mistake.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Megan, given that you don't seem to believe in government, and certainly not in large-scale public policy, what exactly is the point of your discussing it? You don't seem willing to give even minimal credit to people who believe that the state can do some good - and so you review everything they offer with the eyes of a skeptic. Where does this endless display of skepticism end? How are you different from a child sitting in its room, eyes tightly shut, refusing to peek because there might be monsters out there? Aren't you effectively reducing yourself to the classical parody of the skeptic - someone who can neither do nor say, but repeats endlessly to others that neither doing nor saying is the best solution?
Rather than make a statement like "she came out looking like a moron on foreign policy", I would think that you should at least watch the interview.
I like your blog and agree with you, in part, on the Republican party needing to lose an election in order to get back to its basics, away from the party it has become. But the above statement was a bit harse.
All it takes for two people to look like morons on foreign policy is for them to have different goals on what that policy should establish.
Or 50 or 60 years to pass and let history judge which were the morons.
Megan,
I have found you blog probably the most interesting and the least ... not biased, because you do have a bias, but least shrill of anything I have read for the last month.
We all have our own biases (I don't like vegetables much) and you are comfortable with your own assumptions about the world and the lens through which you view it. The thing I like is that the lens you have is uniquely your own.
I may not agree with everything you write, but there is very little of what you write that is not worth reading. Keep it up.
Doug B
It does see that Pollitt hasn't even heard the contrary arguments to her positions.
The Polar Bear listing is predicated on the risk of loss of habitat, rather than on problems that the species is currently having. Polar bears seem to be doing fairly well and are much above their low population points.
The IPCC - oh wow. Just throwing a large number of scientists from diverse fields doesn't get you anywhere. Reasonable positions can include the trend in sunspot activity (warming trends have accompanied a peak in the sunspot cycle), bad modeling, and the small scale of human inputs compared to natural cycles. They may not be right - all of science involves really smart people not being right - but they are important issues that haven't been well handled by the "consensus". There is also the problem that we don't have testable hypotheses, which are the essential part of science, as compared to politics.
Katha, of all people, should not have anything offered to the pubic the week of September 11th. It's the anniversary of the source of her worst mistake. "Put out no flags" has to have been the worst article published in the aftermath of 9-11. She hasn't gotten any smarter in the intervening years.
Wow, I find myself compelled to comment on your blog quite a bit today. Not sure what that means...
Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had.
Can I ask why you think this? Contra Matt Damon (who got this wrong), the basic actuarials on a man of McCain's age show something like a 3.5% mortality rate.
That means that there is just over a 1% chance he'd die in his first 4 months in office. I'll admit that "probably" covers 99%, but... isn't this an awfully big thing to bet on? Even with 100-1 odds? There is a Russian-roulette feel to this.
And you are right: throw in the fact that we basically know nothing about this person, and the gamble grows. We are betting on two separate things: first, that she could be good at this and second, that she will have the chance to be good at this.
Say what you will, but this does really seem kinda scary to me.
I did watch the whole interview, and felt better, because she looked so bad. The truth of who she is, is finally coming out. And that's the most important. For more on her and the interview:
http://whatissarahthinking.blogspot.com/2008/09/not-so-sure-how-i-did-with-charlie.html
Humore required :)
She came off like a moron. A moron who never blinks. Never even thinks about blinking. And learns a buzz phrase and sticks with it without blinking.
It seems to me that we could have used a little more blinking in the White House when the morons decided to invade Iraq.
"A commenter on Marginal Revolution complains that she thought Fannie and Freddie were government entities. I think we have to give her a pass on this, given how many of the world's central bankers made the same mistake."
Since the bailouts have been the major economic news story for the past month or two I'm not willing to give her that benefit.
If Ms Pollitt (or anyone else) has a simple explanation of what the European Union is and does, 490 million people in Europe would love to hear it.
All the FCB's bought GSE paper because, among other things, they knew it would be backstopped by US taxpayers. You can take that to the bank, so to speak. It's the other things which are the mystery.
It's vital to understand that without the stupendous binge of central bank buying of the GSE paper starting exactly 4 years ago the trouble in the real estate market would have started a lot sooner. From 10/04 till today they have bought $750 billion so I think it's fair to use the word stupendous. It's more important to understand that the problems would also have been far less. It's the 05, and 06 vintage paper that is the worst, by far.
There is no way to explain this buying except in terms of a direct desire to keep the real estate bubble going, to keep the credit bubble going. It's logical to assume they undertook this strategy at the behest of Greenspan, the Bush administration and the heads of the great Wall Street firms. It was in all their self interests to keep the game going and stupidly the FCB's fell for it.
Greenspan and Wall Street in the early 90's discovered that the GSE's could provide a wellspring of liquidity for the financial markets and the economy as a whole. The mania went on far longer than I and other critics imagined it could. With each passing year as total credit exploded the potential downside became worse and worse.
Now the Treasury is trying to backstop the losses but they can't do it all. Few people understand how truly momentous this mess is. It's the end of an era. One you might measure from 1950 or 60 or 70 or 80 or 90, whatever. Everything has changed and it goes to the very foundation of Americas relative wealth and strengh in the globe. The financial manias that defined the late stages of the age are best understood as part of Americas imperial over reach.
I agree--the rapists' babies question is a bit brutal. But I'm not convinced Megan knows what she's talking about with these central bankers. Which central bankers thought FM/FM were public entities before the takeover? Cite something, Megan.
How does Pollitt's first question indicate an "inability to reason from first principles"? It's a question for Palin. Pollitt could certainly imagine why Palin might believe abortion in the case of rape should be illegal, but rather than putting words in Palin's mouth, she'd like to hear her answer the question. It's a difficult question for Palin because the overwhelming majority of Americans disagree with her, and it's more than fair to ask her to explain her unpopular positions -- it seems obligatory.
On the Federal Reserve question, my instant answer would have been that its function is to control or massage the money supply in order to fight inflation and to promote full employment, and that it does this by setting the interest rate at which money is loaned to banks, which it does through a system of Federal Reserve banks. I would think Pollitt could do that much. Is that a bad answer? Am I wrong? I'm not going to cheat by checking online sources.
"the rapists' babies question is a bit brutal"
Are you old enough to remember 1988? Michael Dukakis was asked a similar question in a debate, not just a press conference. The very first question was:
Dukakis later said he believed that he knew he had lost the election based on his answer. So what's the big deal about asking Palin about the EU?
"I think we have to give her a pass on this, given how many of the world's central bankers made the same mistake."
What mistake? The CBs are all getting paid, no? Palin did fine, if the media continue harping on the Russian nonsense she will look even better. She stated current policy, McCain's policy, and Obama's stated policy.
"she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had"
She'll "probably" have had 6+ years? Obama's been "boning up" on crucial foreign policy issues for at least that long. Admittedly, being Veep would expose one to more relevant and more detailed information than Obama has had, but c'mon, you think these goofballs would get re-elected?
Why should we murder a baby because his/her father was a rapist?
Let's see:
Bay of Pigs, the Vietnamese War, the takeover of the embassy in Iran, the Beirut massacre of American Marines, Granda, Mogadishu, the Contras, the N. Korean bomb, the Taliban, the first Gulf War, the Cole, the first attack on the WTC, the current Gulf War.
I am glad Presidents have had that foreign policy thing nailed.
THe phrasing of the question "Could you tell . . . " is usually used when you're implying that the respondent couldn't. I disagree with her, but I'm pretty sure that Sarah Palin could articulate a coherent case that wouldn't be totally unsympathetic even to a lot of people who disagree with her.
Your answer to the question is really simplistic and not very accurate, though there's no reason you should know any differently, since that's generally how the activities are covered in the mass media. The Fed Funds rate is the headline target for the Fed's open market operations, but it doesn't do its job by grandly decreeing an interest rate--rather, it buys and sells bonds on the open market in order to manipulate various interest rates, mostly the one at which banks lend to other banks via the Federal Reserve system. It has other tools for liquidity management, such as setting fractional reserve ratios (the amount of liquid assets banks are required to have on hand), lending directly to banks through the discount window, and the new term facilities. It maintains interbank payment systems. And it performs important banking oversight functions, including collecting a great deal of very useful data.
My answer is the one that a presidential candidate actually should know. As should any journalist who wants to make fun of said presidential candidate for her putative ignorance. I'm willing to bet that Pollitt could not have delivered it, at least not before she laid down her challenge.
Please consider the strong similarity between 2008 and 1932. In both years there are charasmatic leaders - Putin in Russia, Hitler in Germany. Both have the same goals. Germany after WW1 was dismembered into many small countries. Russia after the fall of the USSR has been dismembered into many small countries. Both Hitler and Putin lead powerful military machines. Both want to put their countries back together. BOTH NEED TO CONQUER THE SAME COUNTRIES: Poland, the Check and Slovak Republics, Hungary, Bosnia, Herzogovina, Croatia, Ukraine and Georgia. We, in the west had a useless League of Nations, today we have the useless UN. In 1932 our allies were China, Australia, India and Western Europe vs Germany-Italy-Japan. Today we are Japan-Western Europe-Australia-India vs Russia-China-Iran. In both cases our allies will do anything to avoid a fight, while the Axis countries prepare for war.
If you honestly believe we can negotiate Peace in our Times with the Russian-Iranian- Axis, then vote for Obama. He may succeed where Chamberlain failed. He is a very very good talker but he is not a warrior.
Palin's answers tonight concerning Georgia and the Ukraine are the only answers that can prevent WW 3. Putin must be stopped now.
This interview, like political speeches, is going to mostly be viewed by partisan lens of people. I like Megan, HOWEVER, how is the world can she post without viewing the interview her "understanding" that "she came out looking like a moron on foreign policy."
It was outrageous (whether intentional or negligent) for Gibson to misquote what she actually said about U.S. soldiers and a task from God. Transript below:
GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?
PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.
GIBSON: Exact words.
PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.
But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.
That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie.
GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln’s words, but you went on and said, “There is a plan and it is God’s plan.”
What she actually said:
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make
Rob Lyman asks: "Why should we murder a baby because his/her father was a rapist? "
We don't. Murdering babies is against the law in all 50 states. You could even look it up, counselor.
(It seems to be okay to murder them if they're at Afghan wedding parties, though. Your Preznint sez so.)
Finished watching the interview clips I could find. For a first time on the the national stage, I thought she did a competent job. She gave fairly direct answers to a lot of hypothetical questions.
I was watching the local news just a few minutes ago, and the story implied that she thinks we should go to war with Russia to protect Georgia. That is not what she replied, and it was not the question she was answering- she replied that you might have to do so if Georgia were admitted into NATO and were attacked by Russia.
I see online that there is some belief that she did not know what the Bush Doctrine was. Well, there are a lot of policies now included in the "Bush Doctrine". I am extremely well read on current issues and I would have had to ask Gibson to clarify precisely what aspects he was asking acceptance of. She may not have had a clue, but making Gibson clarify it doesn't really demonstrate anything. In any case, the answer she eventually gave is going to be pretty noncontroversial.
She needs more practice at this- the nervousness showed quite a bit, and if I were the McCain campaign, I would send her out often over the next 3 weeks. If she really knew nothing the day she was picked, she is clearly a very quick study.
brooksfoe:
You are right about the Fed. It's about as much as any sane lay person could be expected to know.
zaleriana:
You are right. Obama has been immersed in the FP stuff for years. He has intellectual curiosity(Something that the Boy King does not). Palin has been Governor for less than two years. She has shown no curiosity in learning about FP. Does she belong to CFR or any of those kind of organizations? I don't think so. Obama has been prepping for this for years. Palin, not so much. If you think Palin has as much experience and knowledge as Obama, you, or anyone else, are nuts.
Then why is he so gawdawful at articulating a response to a FP crisis? Take the Russian invasion of SO. The One sounded like he was off in the weeds; he had to hunt around for an answer. If he's that unprepared after "prepping for this for years," I'd say he isn't going to be effective at all in the FP arena.
Rob Lyman asks...
That wasn't me. You might have noticed the absence of the surname.
Considering I have identified comments from your imposters using your exact handle, I expect better.
In fairness, it is the sort of thing I might say.
How can you possibly be more concerned about a potential VP who doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is than a potential President who thinks you should take a Russian invasion of Georgia to the UNSC????
I thought Palin was good, but certianly a little nervous. I thought her approach to the Bush Doctrine gotcha was actually pretty clever. I think when Gibson proposed the question, she had "PALIN SUPPORTS BUSH DOCTRINE" headlines going through her head, which caused the hesitation. Her pivot was awkward but effective. I'm sure they are much happier with the phony moonbat outrage about her not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is as compared to the Palin supports Bush headline. I also got the sneaking suspicion that she actually doesn't support the Bush Doctrine as generally defined.
In the end, not bad for a woman who had just sent her eldest son off to a war zone.
ABC apparently is so embarassed at Gibson being caught misquoting Palin that they are editing it out of later versions of the interview. Great journalism.
"She has shown no curiosity in learning about FP"
I am not sure how you can make that statement, other then the fact that you are a complete hack. How do you know she doesn't read the papers, or blogs, or whatever? I agree that she hasn't opined much on the topic, but that is not the same as not being interested. Her jobs to date have not really required her to be conversant in FP, but that doesn't mean she can't come up to speed in a hurry. I have watched this woman for two weeks, and I certianly don't get the feeling she is not interested. It's not like FP is rocket science anyway, people in the media think its like learning Organic Chemistry or something. If you have a good map, a history book, and some common sense you can become a FP expert pretty quickly.
Rob Lyman writes: "That wasn't me. You might have noticed the absence of the surname.
Considering I have identified comments from your imposters using your exact handle, I expect better.
In fairness, it is the sort of thing I might say."
You're right, it is. But my apologies, anyway, because I should have noticed.
John writes: "Then why is he so gawdawful at articulating a response to a FP crisis? Take the Russian invasion of SO. The One sounded like he was off in the weeds; he had to hunt around for an answer. If he's that unprepared after "prepping for this for years," I'd say he isn't going to be effective at all in the FP arena."
His answer was perfectly fine. You're totally and perfectly unqualified to judge the effectiveness of anyone in this area, since you still think Dumbya & Company have been an effective foreign policy administration. They've been a disaster.
McCain's saber rattling revealed him as the half-crazy old warmonger that he is, and also underscored the sad fact that America these days has no moral authority to condemn aggression. Torture states forfeit such authority. Congrats, John - you and yours have made this country morally impotent.
"she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had"
This point doesn't really compute. In 2003 Obama was against the Iraq war, for exactly the right reasons - he showed better judgment and more insight into the situation than Bush, McCain (or Biden or Clinton). I'd be very surprised if Bush or McCain ever show the depth he had as an Illinois state representative at that time. If Palin had shown similar insight from Alaska, I wouldn't be worried, but the claim that she will start from scratch and far outclass McCain in the next 6 months is implausible at best.
The whole experience argument against Obama is nonsense for just this reason. Experience is a proxy for better judgment, greater depth of knowledge, sound instincts - but Obama is way ahead of McCain on all these axes already.
Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had.
I'm sure the candidate would take strong exception to that. When SP was in Wasilla firing librarians and building hockey rinks , BO was in Russia trying to secure loose nuclear materials.
And speaking as someone who's actually read the interview, (I've "boned" up") I can tell you that Andrew is right. She flubbed it, and there's no indication she has the intellectual curiosity to "bone" up in time to provide a thoughtful solution to an international crisis, only to win a campaign. She's flubbing the former, I happen to think she'll flub the latter too.
My answer is the one that a presidential candidate actually should know. As should any journalist who wants to make fun of said presidential candidate for her putative ignorance.
Well, how about you let Sarah Palin answer Pollitt's question, and see what her response is.
The fact that the Fed actually manipulates the interbank rate not by decreeing it but by buying and selling bonds is one of those background knowledge things I learned a while ago, and then promptly forgot. But you apparently have much more stringent requirement for what a presidential candidate needs to know about this subject than I do. Are you comfortable having the media not ask Palin whether she knows these things? We've heard McCain speak about the economy for 25 years; his level of sophistication on such subjects, such as it is, is public knowledge. Obama has been talking about the economy, and had his top advisers Goolsbee et al talking about it, for years as well. Palin was dropped on us last week. She could dispel these concerns by giving some more substantive interviews focusing on economic issues which would clarify what she meant when she said that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and were costing the taxpayer too much" and that was why these private institutions had to be nationalized.
JBJB writes: "If you have a good map, a history book, and some common sense you can become a FP expert pretty quickly. "
I just had to isolate that sentence in all of its remarkably ignorant glory.
Yup, all you need is "a history book." One book. And you'll be a freaking EXPERT!
And some people wonder why a hopeless goddamn dope like Dumbya ended up as a two-term president. It's because he has plenty of company in the hopeless goddamn dope department.
"A history book." The world indoor stupidity record has been broken again.
How can you possibly be more concerned about a potential VP who doesn't know what the Bush Doctrine is than a potential President who thinks you should take a Russian invasion of Georgia to the UNSC???? - Blue
Man, that one kind of answers itself, don't it?
brooksfoe writes: "Obama has been talking about the economy, and had his top advisers Goolsbee et al talking about it, for years as well. Palin was dropped on us last week. She could dispel these concerns by giving some more substantive interviews focusing on economic issues which would clarify what she meant when she said that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and were costing the taxpayer too much" and that was why these private institutions had to be nationalized."
Hey, brooksfoe, maybe all she needs is an economics book and a really good calculator and she'll be a regular Alan Greenspan in no time.
Hot holy damn!
"Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had."
Alas, it doesn't work that way. You're assuming that Obama just started learning about all this foreign policy mumbo jumbo when he began his run for president, yet he's been able to speak eloquently about foreign policy since before he began his run. He even majored in international relations during his undergrad. I'm not saying that this is qualification for the most powerful office on Earth, but it does show that he's committed a lot of time in his life to thinking about crucial foreign policy issues.
Foreign policy, more than any other area of policy, necessitates big picture thinking. While Governor Palin may have been able to memorize some talking points over the last couple weeks, and might develop some foreign policy cachet if she's ultimately elected to the vice-presidency, it really doesn't seem like these are issues she's considered much throughout her lifetime. She's clearly out of her element. And, personally, I'm far less concerned with her ability to get through an interview than I am with her ability to be a capable leader on foreign policy. So far, she hasn't shown anywhere near the big picture thinking in terms of foreign policy that a good leader needs to have.
Are we so quick to forget how we got into the mess in Iraq? We went in not knowing enough about the country or caring to find out, listening to the advice of supposed "experts", such as Chalabi, who hadn't been to Iraq since his childhood, and the war was an unmitigated disaster for its first three or four years, and may ultimately end in disaster, as we can't maintain a troop presence their indefinitely. Point being, Palin doesn't know this stuff, and hasn't bothered to try to figure it out up until now. Comparing Obama and Palin on foreign policy is just disingenuous.
Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had.
This might be the single most -I'll generously call it "willfully ignorant"- thing I've read from this Magazine to date.
Whitey writes: "Are we so quick to forget how we got into the mess in Iraq? We went in not knowing enough about the country or caring to find out, listening to the advice of supposed "experts", such as Chalabi, who hadn't been to Iraq since his childhood, and the war was an unmitigated disaster for its first three or four years, and may ultimately end in disaster, as we can't maintain a troop presence their indefinitely. Point being, Palin doesn't know this stuff, and hasn't bothered to try to figure it out up until now."
That's okay, Whitey. JBJB is loaning her his book and his map and in no time she'll be Winston Churchill only perky. Yee hah! Or should that be "Mush!," since she's from Alaska and eats huskieburgers and all...
John:
The One? Is this The Matrix? Besides being a condescending tool, can you tell me an example of Obama not knowing what he was talking about?
JBJB:
Have you been paying attention lately? She quotes The Blues Brothers the few times she is on record talking about Foreign Policy(Thanks to YouTube). She's basically said that the Iraqi War is a mission from God(or is it for God?). Are you okay with that? I'm not.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that everyone has the wrong idea about the Bridge to Nowhere. It wasn't a bridge to nowhere, exactly. It ended at Sarah Palin's forehead.
Oh yeah, here is a quote from the interview:
Sarah Palin:
Pressed about what insights into recent Russian actions she gained by living in Alaska, Palin answered: “They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”
And from a commenter at Balloon Juice:
And when I look out my window I can see the moon. Doesn’t make me a fucking astronaut now, does it?
Unfortunately, that's not the case in Illinois. If a baby shows the poor manners of surviving an attempted abortion and is born alive, it is permissible to neglect the child until it cooperates and dies. Anyplace else, that's called (at a minimum) negligent homicide. They tried to fix that deficiency in the law, but State Senator Barrack Obama killed the bill by refusing to let it proceed out of the committee he chaired.
Nice touch! You get to call Palin a moron without owning the slur.
Since you asked so nicely, the facts, from CitizenLink:
Anon Y. Mous writes: "Unfortunately, that's not the case in Illinois. If a baby shows the poor manners of surviving an attempted abortion and is born alive, it is permissible to neglect the child until it cooperates and dies. Anyplace else, that's called (at a minimum) negligent homicide. They tried to fix that deficiency in the law, but State Senator Barrack Obama killed the bill by refusing to let it proceed out of the committee he chaired."
And Anon Y. Mous is Charlie Manson's love child, and he eats stolen fetuses for breakfast, and sometimes he goes out on the town at night and shoots homeless old ladies for fun. Right in the face.
It must be true, because I just said it on the intertube.
comsympinko says: "You made this shit about Anon Y. Mous up out of thin air for absolutely no reason other than to humiliate this...entity."
I resent that! It's all true. I would like to admit that he doesn't eat the stolen fetuses whole, though. He spits out the tiny underdeveloped bones.
Fair is fair.
"Lipstick on a Wing Nut"? That's an interesting metaphor for Katha Pollitt to describe herself.....
Hmmm... Why do you suppose that Obama was debating that bill in the first place? Answer: Jill Stanek, the author of the link you you find so incredible, brought to light the practices at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, IL, where she was employed as a registered nurse.
She was credible enough that legislation was proposed at both the state and federal level, as a direct result of her revelations.
But hey, what the hell, just lay it off as some "intertubes" bullshit.
Why do you suppose that Obama was debating that bill in the first place? Answer: Jill Stanek, the author of the link you you find so incredible, brought to light the practices at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, IL, where she was employed as a registered nurse.
There was a large suspicion Stanek was lying her ass off as she was a TRL zealot and her tale was not backed up by other medical staff.
It wouldn't be the 1st time a nurse with a personal agenda lies and misleads the courts or cops.
In the Terri Schiavo case you had two LPNs who were religious fanatics testifying that they talked and prayed with a fully lucid living corpse, and one saw Michael Schiavo trying to kill her with poison. And a RTL doctor said that lying may be necessary to defend "that holy woman's precious life".
In the Duke rape case a registered nurse with antipathy for men unfortunately happened to be the SANE nurse who checked out the 'ho, and concocted exam details and made false evidence and false reports to the police. Luckily for the accused men and all their hefty lawyer fees, the SANE nurse happened to be a Duke employee and also had evidence that her SANE Supervising nurse covered for her. That was what opened the door to legal damages based on employer malice. Duke was purportedly out 52 million in compensation and damages lawsuits.
And the 'ho behind the false accusations skated free, got a college scholarship supplemented by continuing to pole dance and take 5-6 "Dates" a week. And she is now writing a book. The RN, Tara Levicy, is out of Duke and in limited duties elsewhere..having her financially damaging lies and conduct a major concern with any future employer.
comsympinko, you're being incredibly obnoxious in ways that add nothing to the discussion, and I would recommend you tone it down about 10 decibels or you're certain to be banned.
This is hilarious. No, wait... you guys all get to vote, right? This is a really scary discussion.
It doesn't take much to make *any* politician sound -- or look -- like a 'moron' on foreign policy. When compared with the trouble that the knowledgeable Joe Biden caused with his 'three Iraqs' proposal, "moron", by comparison, is almost complimentary.
He is too knowledgeable; it says so right here on the label. Gaffe-prone, but knowledgeable.
And, may I point out, the Republican bench is fairly deep in the foreign affairs/military realm, and that's true whether you wish to employ realists or idealists. President/Acting-President Pallin can call on Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Robert Gates, William Perry, und so weiter.
I haven't watched the interview yet, but my understanding is that, as I have been predicting (privately to friends, unfortunately, rather than in public where I could take credit), she came out looking like a moron on foreign policy.
Megan, please provide direct quotes.
In the last two weeks this woman has:
1. Gone from relative obscurity to the most talked about woman in America, maybe the entire world.
2. Had a difficult situation with her teenage daughter splashed onto newspapers all over the world.
3. Faced more vitriol and outright hate from Hollywood and the news media than anyone in recent memory.
4. Sent her son off to Iraq...into a real honest-to-God war zone.
And last but not least...gave birth to a child with Downs Syndrome less than 6 months ago.
All that and she seems as calm and in control as anybody I have seen on the political stage in my life.
How man of you people could deal with half of that?
Most of you probably fall to pieces if the pizza takes more than 30 minutes to arrive.
I'm sorry if she didn't dazzle the pants off you with the answers YOU wanted to hear.
I'm sure a five-time college dropout will be able to 'bone up' on foreign policy enough in the next four months to make her ready to face any challenge she might encounter as president.
I know it's elitist to say so, but just because Bush has been president for eight years and we're not all dying and dead, doesn't mean we should be electing people who are far dumber than Bush to the offices of president and vice president.
Rod writes: "And, may I point out, the Republican bench is fairly deep in the foreign affairs/military realm, and that's true whether you wish to employ realists or idealists. President/Acting-President Pallin can call on Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Robert Gates, William Perry, und so weiter."
Or maybe we can avoid the geniuses who are polluted by their associations with Dumbya's inane policies entirely and find a more competent crew.
I would prefer to never see "Condi" Rice and her sour endometriosis face ever again.
And, may I point out, the Republican bench is fairly deep in the foreign affairs/military realm, and that's true whether you wish to employ realists or idealists. President/Acting-President Pallin can call on Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Robert Gates, William Perry, und so weiter.
And Colin Powell was willing to disgrace himself in front of the whole world for George Bush's lies. Hell, even Lincoln Chafee called Palin dangerous.
I'm a programmer and, as every programmer knows, a missing comma or using a period instead of a comma can cause a program to crash or worse, cause 10,000 missles to target Moscow, Idaho by mistake.
This sentence has a period where there should be a comma. It has resulted in 10,000 missives being launched on an American citizen.
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,”
The period after the word "right" should be a comma. One knows this because the second sentence has no verb which means the verb "pray" was intended to govern this clause. The sentence should have been written thusly:
“Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right, also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God.”
Of course, no one should be allowed to take office if he/she uses sentences longer than 5 words with more than 2 syllables so Palin is still disqualified. Biden is exempt under the grandfather rule.
The Fannie and Freddie question, is that de facto or de jure?
Katha Pollitt has some questions for Sarah Palin. Fair enough, but I can pick out at least two that I bet, before writing this article, Katha Pollitt could not have answered to my satisfaction.
Hmmm? Is Katha Pollitt running for VP?
I saw or heard some of her interview and think she's learning to tap-dance around questions with the best of her rivals. I'd like to hear just one of them answer something directly instead of evasively.
One can't arguable say Gov. Palin knows more about FP than does Sen. Obama. On the other hand, one can't arguably say Obama has more administrative experience than a governor in charge of 25,000 employees and a $12 billion budget. I would presume that either team will have expert advisors when they get to the White House?? So, why argue experience instead of instinct and demonstrated abilities? Henry Kissinger has forgotten more about FP than Obama, McCain, Palin, and Biden may ever know, but do we want him advising the President?
I sure would like each candidate to name who they plan to appoint to their cabinet and other top posts such as Joint Chief of Staff of the military, UN ambassador, White House Counsel, etc. But they won't because the media will be off on a chase to discover every reference to God, every 3rd grade eraser-clapping incident, and every romantic pecadillo they've ever gotten into, while ignoring their views on better intelligence gathering, a proper relationship with Saudia Arabia and Israel, and regulation of
mortgage downpayments.
And, may I point out, the Republican bench is fairly deep in the foreign affairs/military realm, and that's true whether you wish to employ realists or idealists. President/Acting-President Pallin can call on Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Robert Gates, William Perry, und so weiter.
In 2000, a close friend of mine made this very same point when discussing GWB: that the sober minds of Cheney, Powell, et al would be a solid basis for any presidency.
He has since expressed some regret.
This has to be one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever seen on the Atlantic's blogs.
First we get this:
"Fair enough, but I can pick out at least two that I bet, before writing this article, Katha Pollitt could not have answered to my satisfaction."
First of all, which two? Second, not answered to your satisfaction because you are a libertarian crackpot, or not answered to your satisfaction because Pollitt is uninformed? And if the latter, on what basis is this assertion made?
Next:
"Heck, five gets you ten that neither Joe Biden nor Barack Obama can correctly describe the Fed's main activities."
That's a bet I'd be happy to make. Just because they're not libertarians doesn't mean they don't understand the basics of the financial system.
Then we end with this bit of jaw-dropping ridiculousness:
"I haven't watched the interview yet, but my understanding is that, as I have been predicting (privately to friends, unfortunately, rather than in public where I could take credit), she came out looking like a moron on foreign policy. Her lack of knowledge worries me rather less than most people, since if McCain dies in office she'll probably have had at least as long to bone up on crucial foreign policy issues as Barack Obama has had. But I don't see how you can vote for a candidate without being able to assess their foreign policy reasoning, which is a tad difficult if they have no facts to reason from."
Shorter McArdle: I'm going to criticize Gov. Palin for being uninformed about the facts based on an interview which I haven't bothered to inform myself about. Oh, and Obama's an idiot too.
Okay, Palin's showing to be completely ignorant, and I was really astounded at the interview, after reading Jack Shafer's account of it in Slate (not going to link, you guys can find it and I don't want this post held up for moderation). Gibson nailed her and let her show how she didn't have a clue about the Bush Doctrine she was supposed to be defending. What a ditz. Hot, but apparently not qualified to be VP.
However, like Megan, I have to give Palin a pass on the Fannie/Freddie comment. She said they got too big and expensive for taxpayers.
Um, the government has incurred a lot of obligations to pay off debt that the GSE's revenues streams might not be enough for. Yep, that counts as expensive for taxpayers, all right!
The worst you can say is that she confused liabilities and expenses.
Palin was Godawful. Period. She came off like the regional manager of Red Lobster. This woman couldn't get her foot through the door of any center-right think tank on her best day. She's not sharp and clearly not ready to be C-in-C.
Obama could have given a better interview 2 years ago in his sleep.
I sure would like each candidate to name who they plan to appoint to their cabinet and other top posts such as Joint Chief of Staff of the military, UN ambassador, White House Counsel, etc.
It's against the law!!! They can't come right out and say it until they get elected. Do you really think McCain wants to name who he might appoint? Obama would have a field day with it as some of them are probably to the right of Bush's gang(especially the FP people).
Here are the actual questions proposed by Pollitt:
§ Suppose your 14-year-old daughter Willow is brutally raped in her bedroom by an intruder. She becomes pregnant and wants an abortion. Could you tell the parents of America why you think your child and their children should be forced by law to have their rapists' babies?
§ You say you don't believe global warming is man-made. Could you tell us what scientists you've spoken with or read who have led you to that conclusion? What do you think the 2,500 scientists of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are getting wrong?
§ If you didn't try to fire Wasilla librarian Mary Ellen Baker over her refusal to consider censoring books, why did you try to fire her?
§ What is the European Union, and how does it function?
§ Forty-seven million Americans lack health insurance. John Goodman, who has advised McCain on healthcare, has proposed redefining them as covered because, he says, anyone can get care at an ER. Do you agree with him?
§ What is the function of the Federal Reserve?
§ Cindy and John McCain say you have experience in foreign affairs because Alaska is next to Russia. When did you last speak with Prime Minister Putin, and what did you talk about?
§ Approximately how old is the earth? Five thousand years? 10,000? 5 billion?
§ You are a big fan of President Bush, so why didn't you mention him even once in your convention speech?
§ McCain says cutting earmarks and waste will make up for revenues lost by making the tax cuts permanent. Experts say that won't wash. Balancing the Bush tax cuts plus new ones proposed by McCain would most likely mean cutting Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Which would you cut?
§ You're suing the federal government to have polar bears removed from the endangered species list, even as Alaska's northern coastal ice is melting and falling into the sea. Can you explain the science behind your decision?
§ You've suggested that God approves of the Iraq War and the Alaska pipeline. How do you know?
I do not find these questions unfair when asked to a candidate for vice president of America. How many layers of kid gloves do you think journalists need to wear when questioning Palin? And why exactly do you think they need to wear any, anyway?
As to the Fed question, my answer to the question would have been that the Fed manages currency growth. This is listed number 4 in the Wikipedia entry:
Current functions of the Federal Reserve System include:[12][14]
1. To address the problem of banking panics
2. To serve as the central bank for the United States
3. To strike a balance between private interests of banks and the centralized responsibility of government
* supervising and regulating banking institutions
* protect the credit rights of consumers
4. To manage the nation's money supply through monetary policy
* maximum employment
* stable prices
* moderate long-term interest rates
5. Maintain the stability of the financial system and containing systemic risk in financial markets
6. Providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation’s payments system
* facilitate the exchange of payments among regions
* to be responsive to local liquidity needs
7. Strengthen U.S. standing in the world economy
But I'm just a private citizen. Shouldn't the candidate for Vice President be able to answer at least as well as I did?
Palin isn't running for vice president of the United States. She's running for chief cheerleader and mascot for the McCain campaign. She can't be expected to hold her own in a press conference or some other silly display of "competence." This is all about feeling good about the good ol' U.S. of A.
You didn't know John Stewart says it is OK to laugh at The One?
More spittle, that's what you need. That just isn't nasty enough.
Certainly, but first I'd like to actually state what I said, rather than accept the words you are trying to put into my mouth. I said he sounded unprepared. It took The One 3 press releases to finally get around to firm talk about Russia. When he did, The One said, quote, we should continue to push for a United Nations Security Council Resolution calling for an immediate end to the violence, endquote. Now that's certainly going to be a useful exercise, since, as you and I know, but apparently The One forgot, Russia is a permanent member of the UNSC, and has veto power over all SC resolutions.
And The One continued, quote, this is a clear violation of the sovereignty and internationally recognized borders of Georgia – the UN must stand up for the sovereignty of its members, and peace in the world, endquote. As above, Russia can prohibit the UNSC from approving any action, even if the UN asks pretty please, so I don't follow the logic in asserting that the UN must stand up for the sovereignty of its members. The UN is not going to be a useful organization against Russian intervention, unless you think that the Blue Hats ought to start pimping underage Georgian girls, and The One ought to know it.
Just for the record I really liked the last question:
§ You've suggested that God approves of the Iraq War and the Alaska pipeline. How do you know?
But I also agree with you:
Halfway through I found myself halfway seriously wondering when Ms. Pollitt had started writing for McCain/Palin '08.
A really good VP candidate would be able to turn these questions around to her/his advantage, which is yet another reason they are legitimate questions to be asked.
Don't you watch Fox News?
Umm, John. What's that got do with District Manager Palin not knowing the basics of a doctrine that her son could quite possible die trying impliment?
Yes, Barack is a mere mortal. So what? Imagine if McCain strokes out before the debate. Is Palin ready to replace him?
I was commenting on a poster's assertion that Mr. Obama has spent years mastering foreign policy. If he can't even understand how the UNSC works and what part of the UN is responsible for keeping the peace, and it appears that he doesn't, well, you tell me why I should think he is prepared?
FWIW, I think it would be foolish in the extreme to admit Georgia to NATO in the foreseeable future. But hey, The One was all for that earlier in the year, so there isn't much to distinguish him from McCain, much less Palin, on that count.
And to your last point, I'd far rather have a reasonably bright hockey mom run the US than an arrogant prick who thinks he is the smartest guy in the room. YMMV.
Katha Pollitt makes me wonder whether Americans are even more dumb than my fellow Europeans think they are.
Here are the obvious answers:
Questions 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12:
that's like asking when did you stop beating your husband.
(In #1, "brutally" is gratuitous.)
Other questions:
#4: see wikipedia;
#5: a definition is not something that one can agree or disagree with;
#6: there is no such thing as the "Federal Reserve";
#8: 5 billion, smartass.
This is supposed to be a test for a VP candidate?
On Fannie and Freddie, Palin called them "quasi-government agencies". How is that inaccurate? Megan, what would you call them?
Lampwick says: "I'm sure a five-time college dropout will be able to 'bone up' on foreign policy enough in the next four months to make her ready to face any challenge she might encounter as president."
I would like to address this for the benefit of the Atlantic readership.
The model educational trajectory for Eastern establishment types such as yourselves is a fancy-pants prep school, four years at an Ivy League college, and then perhaps straight to grad school for a master's or doctorate. For most of you, I suspect, this is done on scholarship if you're a favored minority, or Daddy's nickel if you're not.
Fine. That's how it works on the coasts.
But out here in flyover country, especially out West, we don't see any shame in stopping school to work for a while, or starting your education in a junior college, or following your husband or girlfriend to a new state and new college.
I myself started in a junior college, took night classes at another after I dropped out to work for a year, and finally got my degree from Big State U. And what do you know, I did well enough to get into an Ivy League medical school.
3 schools in 5 years may provoke sneers from the Atlantic's subscribers, but I now have a better job than 95% of them, and no debt from my undergraduate education. My wife actually attended 5 schools as she followed me around the country, and she can hold her own at any dinner party discussion.
Westerners have a natural antipathy to credentialism, and a contempt for wet-behind-the-ears Eastern dudes who wave their Latin-inscribed sheepskins as a badge of superiority. We value frugality and admire those who make their own way in the world, even if it follows a longer and more roundabout path than seems fitting to the kind of people who send their children to pre-schools that require entrance examinations.
I now work with doctors who went to state medical schools or osteopathic schools, some quite undistinguished. One of my partners even went to medical school overseas, since he did not get into a US school. And he is one of the most talented and capable and popular docs in the practice. Luckily, out here in the mountain West, nobody bothers to read his diploma. Like me, like all of us, he can either hack it and prosper, or he can't, and gets the boot.
John McCain did not want or need a foreign policy expert. He wanted balance on the ticket, someone with a demonstrated record of accomplishment in a high executive position, and a warm-hearted populist who could connect with the average voter. With Governor Palin, he has all that in spades.
Her sixteen years of experience in local and state government have been more than sufficient to derail her career if she were truly a dimwit or fanatic. It is plain that she is possessed of great common sense, political acumen, decisiveness, and fearlessness. To me, and I suspect to the majority of the electorate, that is far more important than what college or how many colleges she attended, or whether she has been neglecting her gubernatorial duties to hobnob with the Davos crowd.
Lampwick's sneers aside, I am assured that the ins and outs of foreign policy will occupy enough of her time that she will be well versed with all she will reasonably need to know within six months or so. Like Ronald Reagan, a great President with an undistinguished degree from a cow college in the Midwest, whatever she lacks in credentials she more than makes up for in her other qualities. I look forward with confidence to a successful Palin Vice-Presidency and then Presidency. I think she will bedevil the Left for fifteen or twenty years.