Mountainphan wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Mountainphan wrote:And your proof that she is lacking in "mental horsepower"? How about some substance to back up your vapid posts for once. Or am I getting too serious?

You haven't begun to be serious. Take a very basic marker - educational attainment. Palin: U Idaho journalism degree. Obama: Harvard Law, president of the Law Review.

You're seriously prepared to put her on Obama's level? No, you're not; you're just trolling.

I'm not sure if you're some amalgam of lax, tpie, cshort, and mpmcgraw, or not, but I have to hand it to you - you're more tiresome, faster, than any of them

Again, you fail to provide a substantive response, instead throwing out an accusation of trolling. I guess I didn't fully realize the impact the Palin choice has had on you until now.

your failure to discern substance is both entirely expected and not at all my responsibility.

Palin could make a fine executive. Her nomination improves my opinion of McCain the candidate.

But I offered no assessment in that regard.

I've asserted rather that Obama's intellectual credentials - those outward manifestations of smarts that are broadly acknowledged by people who are capable of and interested in making distinctions on that basis (that is, people other than you) are superior to Palin's. You've come back with - well, nothing, as far as I can tell.

jerseyhoya wrote:No, but Palin could be damn smart, and for doc to say that Obama's clearly smarter because Palin doesn't have the same degrees as he does is weak sauce.

this may not be fair, but in the moments when you're not hitting the sauce you'd probably recognize this isn't the brightest conclusion you've ever drawn

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:No, but Palin could be damn smart, and for doc to say that Obama's clearly smarter because Palin doesn't have the same degrees as he does is weak sauce.

this may not be fair, but in the moments when you're not hitting the sauce you'd probably recognize this isn't the brightest conclusion you've ever drawn

I'm dead sober. I know, I'm as shocked as you are. Getting up at 6 to head home for the weekend. No Phillies game tonight. No reason to drink.

Anyway, don't see what's wrong with what I said. I don't think any of us here really knows how smart Palin is. She does have a lot to prove over the next couple of months, but for you to state flatly that she doesn't have Obama's mental horsepower and quickly reach for the degree comparison is weak. Period.

seke2 wrote:

Mountainphan wrote:

seke2 wrote:I don't think Obama supporters are necessarily contending that he has all this amazing experience. But he has a perspective, a world-view, and he's had about 6-8 years in the public eye to show the world what he wants to do. He's taken a stance on just about every notable issue and people know what he's about.

What I'm not understanding is what kind of perspective or world-view does Obama have that makes him so exceptional or so worth the risk?

Beyond the fact that he went to Harvard Law, I'm sincerely curious what else there is that sets him apart. It's perfectly fair to raise questions about Palin's qualifications, even though she's running for VP. But in fairness, Obama has the same issue that needs to be more adequately addressed.

Frankly, for me, it's his leadership style, his ability to inspire, and his ability to draw people into the political process that otherwise were generally disinterested. I believe that is genuinely good for the country, and exactly what we need right now. I don't think any one person can fix the sort of issues we're up again--I do believe that the sort of movement that Obama has inspired could fix those issues. Hey, everyone has their own perspective, that's just mine.

That's what sets him apart in my perspective. Perhaps Palin could be that same inspirational leader, but she doesn't have time to prove it before the election. It's a very, very perplexing choice that I think does very little to help the Republicans and undermines some of the best arguments they've had against Obama.

Seke, thank you for sharing your perspective - much appreciated.

jerseyhoya wrote:Anyway, don't see what's wrong with what I said. I don't think any of us here really knows how smart Palin is. She does have a lot to prove over the next couple of months, but for you to state flatly that she doesn't have Obama's mental horsepower and quickly reach for the degree comparison is weak. Period.

Then maybe you need a pop, because this is apparently too simple for you to grasp. She may be smart; based on their scholastic accomplishments, odds are that he's the smarter of the two. It's a probability function. I'm sorry you don't have any better comeback than "so you say".

You understand baseball metrics - why should this analog elude you?

steagles wrote:i fear the return of seperate but equal designations.

That's crazy talk.

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Anyway, don't see what's wrong with what I said. I don't think any of us here really knows how smart Palin is. She does have a lot to prove over the next couple of months, but for you to state flatly that she doesn't have Obama's mental horsepower and quickly reach for the degree comparison is weak. Period.

Then maybe you need a pop, because this is apparently too simple for you to grasp. She may be smart; based on their scholastic accomplishments, odds are that he's the smarter of the two. It's a probability function. I'm sorry you don't have any better comeback than "so you say".

You understand baseball metrics - why should this analog elude you?

I think we pretty much agree I guess. It's just the first time you said it ("But no serious person, male or female, would contend she has his mental horsepower.") came across as pretty damn definitive, to the point where it would be foolish to suggest she might be in his league intellectually. If we're just guessing who is smarter, clearly I'd take Barack.

More broadly on the veep selection, I think this was a good pick, and might turn out to be a great pick, but she has work to do. When she takes questions from the press, talking points are OK for a little while, but questions are going to come up that she doesn't have the answer for, and it will be interesting to see how she performs. And by interesting, I mean she really can't afford to make crucial mistakes. Then obviously the debate will be critical. She needs to prove to the public that she is ready to be president if she has to be. If she can do that, I think McCain made his best choice.

And for my lefty friends here who don't venture to conservative websites, the base is positively flippin thrilled over the pick. So it's not just about pandering to disgruntled Hillary voters. For all of you who are hopped up on the McSame crap, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that the Republican base doesn't much like McCain, so having them be really happy over the VP pick was big.

OK, time for bed.

What is it called when you troll, then someone trolls back and you, and you keep trolling back and forth?

A really lame way to spend a Friday night?

drsmooth wrote:

Mountainphan wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Mountainphan wrote:And your proof that she is lacking in "mental horsepower"? How about some substance to back up your vapid posts for once. Or am I getting too serious?

You haven't begun to be serious. Take a very basic marker - educational attainment. Palin: U Idaho journalism degree. Obama: Harvard Law, president of the Law Review.

You're seriously prepared to put her on Obama's level? No, you're not; you're just trolling.

I'm not sure if you're some amalgam of lax, tpie, cshort, and mpmcgraw, or not, but I have to hand it to you - you're more tiresome, faster, than any of them

Again, you fail to provide a substantive response, instead throwing out an accusation of trolling. I guess I didn't fully realize the impact the Palin choice has had on you until now.

your failure to discern substance is both entirely expected and not at all my responsibility.

Palin could make a fine executive. Her nomination improves my opinion of McCain the candidate.

But I offered no assessment in that regard.

Right, you made a rather definitive statement regarding Obama's superior intelligence. When called on to explain, you've had to backtrack somewhat into a more "based on academic credentials, odds are...", which certainly tempers your initial statement on the matter.

Apparently, being a wee bit challenged on this issue has brought out your snippy side as well.

VoxOrion wrote:What is it called when you troll, then someone trolls back and you, and you keep trolling back and forth?

Trolling banjos?

Sorry, that's all I got.

Nothing - not bands, not Apple products, nothing - creates fanboys like politics. On both (every?) sides.

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Anyway, don't see what's wrong with what I said. I don't think any of us here really knows how smart Palin is. She does have a lot to prove over the next couple of months, but for you to state flatly that she doesn't have Obama's mental horsepower and quickly reach for the degree comparison is weak. Period.

Then maybe you need a pop, because this is apparently too simple for you to grasp. She may be smart; based on their scholastic accomplishments, odds are that he's the smarter of the two. It's a probability function. I'm sorry you don't have any better comeback than "so you say".

You understand baseball metrics - why should this analog elude you?

You equated intelligence with being able to lead. I provided an example of an "intelligent" person who was a horrible leader, and you dismissed it with an off-hand comment. I certainly think someone with practical experience is better suited than someone who has spent their entire career positioning themselves to run for higher office.

drsmooth wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:Who thinks she is less qualified than Dan Quayle or Barack Obama?

well, she's over 35 & a citizen. So she's Obama's equal on the basics.

But no serious person, male or female, would contend she has his mental horsepower.

Heck, no. She is miles ahead in understanding the basics of economic and human behavior.

VoxOrion wrote:What is it called when you troll, then someone trolls back and you, and you keep trolling back and forth?

weak sauce

seke2 wrote:I don't think Obama supporters are necessarily contending that he has all this amazing experience. But he has a perspective, a world-view, and he's had about 6-8 years in the public eye to show the world what he wants to do. He's taken a stance on just about every notable issue and people know what he's about.

Perhaps Palin has those same things, and perhaps she's the Republican Obama...but 60 days is a very, very short time for her to convince people that her inexperience doesn't matter. Because obviously, most of Obama's supporters (myself included), are willing to overlook his relative inexperience because of his inspirational leadership abilities and his goals (whether or not he has the prior experience to necessarily make all of those goals a reality).

6-8 for Saint Barry, 13 for Gov Palin. And executive experience, which is totally mising on the Obama CV.

TomatoPie wrote:

seke2 wrote:I don't think Obama supporters are necessarily contending that he has all this amazing experience. But he has a perspective, a world-view, and he's had about 6-8 years in the public eye to show the world what he wants to do. He's taken a stance on just about every notable issue and people know what he's about.

Perhaps Palin has those same things, and perhaps she's the Republican Obama...but 60 days is a very, very short time for her to convince people that her inexperience doesn't matter. Because obviously, most of Obama's supporters (myself included), are willing to overlook his relative inexperience because of his inspirational leadership abilities and his goals (whether or not he has the prior experience to necessarily make all of those goals a reality).

6-8 for Saint Barry, 13 for Gov Palin. And executive experience, which is totally mising on the Obama CV.

Odd... I figured Queen Palin's ass would need to grow at least by an order of magnitude before she hit your radar.

TomatoPie wrote:6-8 for Saint Barry, 13 for Gov Palin. And executive experience, which is totally mising on the Obama CV.

hmmm...the current occupant of the white house had executive experience, what with Governorizing Texas, 'n all. And for a much bigger state than AK in everything but geography, too. And look at the job he's done.

nah, not buying that executive experience is really as big a deal as you're suggesting.

jerseyhoya wrote:I think we pretty much agree I guess. It's just the first time you said it ("But no serious person, male or female, would contend she has his mental horsepower.") came across as pretty damn definitive, to the point where it would be foolish to suggest she might be in his league intellectually.

well, I'm not a serious person, and so routinely discount academic credentials, as you may. I believe there's often good reason to. But we're talking about "serious" people here, who go about these assessments earnestly. People like cshort & mountainpan & tpie.

More broadly on the veep selection, I think this was a good pick, and might turn out to be a great pick, but she has work to do.

I believe it's a remarkably astute political pick - more in tune with the zeitgeist than almost any republican move in the past 4 years, however it actually works out.

She needs to prove to the public that she is ready to be president if she has to be. If she can do that, I think McCain made his best choice.

I think the founders, in determining that the only official criteria for the job should be citizenship & minimum age, gave you all you really need to know about what anyone "has" to have to be president. Hell, we've muddled through monthslong periods where the officeholder was effectively comatose - & I'm not referring to the last 8 yrs either.

seke2 wrote:I don't think Obama supporters are necessarily contending that he has all this amazing experience. But he has a perspective, a world-view, and he's had about 6-8 years in the public eye to show the world what he wants to do. He's taken a stance on just about every notable issue and people know what he's about.

That's exactly the difference. His history and viewpoints are out there, and to at least some chunk of the public he's cleared the threshold based on his views, temperament, and stated aims when in office--against tough intramural competition, I think most would agree.

People who aren't going to vote for him anyway no matter what can disagree with their choice, since all Republicans now lurv and totally admire Hillary Clinton, and are really truly sorry about, y'know, all that... but Democrats made the choice. I wasn't crazy about yours in 2000 either.

Palin and--to take the far sillier example of somebody who was about as self-made as, well, Bush--Quayle, were just sort of plucked into the spotlight with very little known about them ahead of time, and no chance for a large number of American voters to pass judgment on them either way. Many have forgotten, but Quayle later ran for president, like Obama did this year; didn't go so well.

I'm certainly willing to give Palin credit for being "self-made" as well as smart and in earnest as far as being a reformer at the state government level, a judicious manager of a small Alaskan community, etc. I just don't know about who she is to hazard a guess about whether she'd be a credible president--which is entirely a different question than whether she'd be a good or bad one.

To another post... maybe I have made assumptions about McCain's vetting process. I'll certainly be interested in hearing about it when the details come out. But thus far, I haven't seen any other signs of someone who's much into process--as the lack of policy specifics has suggested. If he wins, I sincerely hope his "gut plays" proves a lot more successful than those of the current president.