More Palin Lies

[Sorceress]

Here's an interesting opinion piece by Sam Harris from this week's Newsweek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160080

When Atheists Attack
A noted provocateur rips Sarah Palin—and defends elitism.

Let me confess that I was genuinely unnerved by Sarah Palin's performance at the Republican convention. Given her audience and the needs of the moment, I believe Governor Palin's speech was the most effective political communication I have ever witnessed. Here, finally, was a performer who—being maternal, wounded, righteous and sexy—could stride past the frontal cortex of every American and plant a three-inch heel directly on that limbic circuit that ceaselessly intones "God and country." If anyone could make Christian theocracy smell like apple pie, Sarah Palin could.

Then came Palin's first television interview with Charles Gibson. I was relieved to discover, as many were, that Palin's luster can be much diminished by the absence of a teleprompter. Still, the problem she poses to our political process is now much bigger than she is. Her fans seem inclined to forgive her any indiscretion short of cannibalism. However badly she may stumble during the remaining weeks of this campaign, her supporters will focus their outrage upon the journalist who caused her to break stride, upon the camera operator who happened to capture her fall, upon the television network that broadcast the good lady's misfortune—and, above all, upon the "liberal elites" with their highfalutin assumption that, in the 21st century, only a reasonably well-educated person should be given command of our nuclear arsenal.

The point to be lamented is not that Sarah Palin comes from outside Washington, or that she has glimpsed so little of the earth's surface (she didn't have a passport until last year), or that she's never met a foreign head of state. The point is that she comes to us, seeking the second most important job in the world, without any intellectual training relevant to the challenges and responsibilities that await her. There is nothing to suggest that she even sees a role for careful analysis or a deep understanding of world events when it comes to deciding the fate of a nation. In her interview with Gibson, Palin managed to turn a joke about seeing Russia from her window into a straight-faced claim that Alaska's geographical proximity to Russia gave her some essential foreign-policy experience. Palin may be a perfectly wonderful person, a loving mother and a great American success story—but she is a beauty queen/sports reporter who stumbled into small-town politics, and who is now on the verge of stumbling into, or upon, world history.
The problem, as far as our political process is concerned, is that half the electorate revels in Palin's lack of intellectual qualifications. When it comes to politics, there is a mad love of mediocrity in this country. "They think they're better than you!" is the refrain that (highly competent and cynical) Republican strategists have set loose among the crowd, and the crowd has grown drunk on it once again. "Sarah Palin is an ordinary person!" Yes, all too ordinary.

We have all now witnessed apparently sentient human beings, once provoked by a reporter's microphone, saying things like, "I'm voting for Sarah because she's a mom. She knows what it's like to be a mom." Such sentiments suggest an uncanny (and, one fears, especially American) detachment from the real problems of today. The next administration must immediately confront issues like nuclear proliferation, ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and covert wars elsewhere), global climate change, a convulsing economy, Russian belligerence, the rise of China, emerging epidemics, Islamism on a hundred fronts, a defunct United Nations, the deterioration of American schools, failures of energy, infrastructure and Internet security … the list is long, and Sarah Palin does not seem competent even to rank these items in order of importance, much less address any one of them.

Palin's most conspicuous gaffe in her interview with Gibson has been widely discussed. The truth is, I didn't much care that she did not know the meaning of the phrase "Bush doctrine." And I am quite sure that her supporters didn't care, either. Most people view such an ambush as a journalistic gimmick. What I do care about are all the other things Palin is guaranteed not to know—or will be glossing only under the frenzied tutelage of John McCain's advisers. What doesn't she know about financial markets, Islam, the history of the Middle East, the cold war, modern weapons systems, medical research, environmental science or emerging technology? Her relative ignorance is guaranteed on these fronts and most others, not because she was put on the spot, or got nervous, or just happened to miss the newspaper on any given morning. Sarah Palin's ignorance is guaranteed because of how she has spent the past 44 years on earth.

I care even more about the many things Palin thinks she knows but doesn't: like her conviction that the Biblical God consciously directs world events. Needless to say, she shares this belief with mil-lions of Americans—but we shouldn't be eager to give these people our nuclear codes, either. There is no question that if President McCain chokes on a spare rib and Palin becomes the first woman president, she and her supporters will believe that God, in all his majesty and wisdom, has brought it to pass. Why would God give Sarah Palin a job she isn't ready for? He wouldn't. Everything happens for a reason. Palin seems perfectly willing to stake the welfare of our country—even the welfare of our species—as collateral in her own personal journey of faith. Of course, McCain has made the same unconscionable wager on his personal journey to the White House.

In speaking before her church about her son going to war in Iraq, Palin urged the congregation to pray "that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God; that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan." When asked about these remarks in her interview with Gibson, Palin successfully dodged the issue of her religious beliefs by claiming that she had been merely echoing the words of Abraham Lincoln. The New York Times later dubbed her response "absurd." It was worse than absurd; it was a lie calculated to conceal the true character of her religious infatuations. Every detail that has emerged about Palin's life in Alaska suggests that she is as devout and literal-minded in her Christian dogmatism as any man or woman in the land. Given her long affiliation with the Assemblies of God church, Palin very likely believes that Biblical prophecy is an infallible guide to future events and that we are living in the "end times." Which is to say she very likely thinks that human history will soon unravel in a foreordained cataclysm of war and bad weather. Undoubtedly Palin believes that this will be a good thing—as all true Christians will be lifted bodily into the sky to make merry with Jesus, while all nonbelievers, Jews, Methodists and other rabble will be punished for eternity in a lake of fire. Like many Pentecostals, Palin may even imagine that she and her fellow parishioners enjoy the power of prophecy themselves. Otherwise, what could she have meant when declaring to her congregation that "God's going to tell you what is going on, and what is going to go on, and you guys are going to have that within you"?

You can learn something about a person by the company she keeps. In the churches where Palin has worshiped for decades, parishioners enjoy "baptism in the Holy Spirit," "miraculous healings" and "the gift of tongues." Invariably, they offer astonishingly irrational accounts of this behavior and of its significance for the entire cosmos. Palin's spiritual colleagues describe themselves as part of "the final generation," engaged in "spiritual warfare" to purge the earth of "demonic strongholds." Palin has spent her entire adult life immersed in this apocalyptic hysteria. Ask yourself: Is it a good idea to place the most powerful military on earth at her disposal? Do we actually want our leaders thinking about the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy when it comes time to say to the Iranians, or to the North Koreans, or to the Pakistanis, or to the Russians or to the Chinese: "All options remain on the table"?

It is easy to see what many people, women especially, admire about Sarah Palin. Here is a mother of five who can see the bright side of having a child with Down syndrome and still find the time and energy to govern the state of Alaska. But we cannot ignore the fact that Palin's impressive family further testifies to her dogmatic religious beliefs. Many writers have noted the many shades of conservative hypocrisy on view here: when Jamie Lynn Spears gets pregnant, it is considered a symptom of liberal decadence and the breakdown of family values; in the case of one of Palin's daughters, however, teen pregnancy gets reinterpreted as a sign of immaculate, small-town fecundity. And just imagine if, instead of the Palins, the Obama family had a pregnant, underage daughter on display at their convention, flanked by her black boyfriend who "intends" to marry her. Who among conservatives would have resisted the temptation to speak of "the dysfunction in the black community"?

Teen pregnancy is a misfortune, plain and simple. At best, it represents bad luck (both for the mother and for the child); at worst, as in the Palins' case, it is a symptom of religious dogmatism. Governor Palin opposes sex education in schools on religious grounds. She has also fought vigorously for a "parental consent law" in the state of Alaska, seeking full parental dominion over the reproductive decisions of minors. We know, therefore, that Palin believes that she should be the one to decide whether her daughter carries her baby to term. Based on her stated position, we know that she would deny her daughter an abortion even if she had been raped. One can be forgiven for doubting whether Bristol Palin had all the advantages of 21st-century family planning—or, indeed, of the 21st century.

We have endured eight years of an administration that seemed touched by religious ideology. Bush's claim to Bob Woodward that he consulted a "higher Father" before going to war in Iraq got many of us sitting upright, before our attention wandered again to less ethereal signs of his incompetence. For all my concern about Bush's religious beliefs, and about his merely average grasp of terrestrial reality, I have never once thought that he was an over-the-brink, Rapture-ready extremist. Palin seems as though she might be the real McCoy. With the McCain team leading her around like a pet pony between now and Election Day, she can be expected to conceal her religious extremism until it is too late to do anything about it. Her supporters know that while she cannot afford to "talk the talk" between now and Nov. 4, if elected, she can be trusted to "walk the walk" until the Day of Judgment.

What is so unnerving about the candidacy of Sarah Palin is the degree to which she represents—and her supporters celebrate—the joyful marriage of confidence and ignorance. Watching her deny to Gibson that she had ever harbored the slightest doubt about her readiness to take command of the world's only superpower, one got the feeling that Palin would gladly assume any responsibility on earth:

"Governor Palin, are you ready at this moment to perform surgery on this child's brain?"

"Of course, Charlie. I have several boys of my own, and I'm an avid hunter."

"But governor, this is neurosurgery, and you have no training as a surgeon of any kind."

"That's just the point, Charlie. The American people want change in how we make medical decisions in this country. And when faced with a challenge, you cannot blink."
The prospects of a Palin administration are far more frightening, in fact, than those of a Palin Institute for Pediatric Neurosurgery. Ask yourself: how has "elitism" become a bad word in American politics? There is simply no other walk of life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases. And yet, when it comes time to vest people with even greater responsibilities, we consider it a virtue to shun any and all standards of excellence. When it comes to choosing the people whose thoughts and actions will decide the fates of millions, then we suddenly want someone just like us, someone fit to have a beer with, someone down-to-earth—in fact, almost anyone, provided that he or she doesn't seem too intelligent or well educated.

I believe that with the nomination of Sarah Palin for the vice presidency, the silliness of our politics has finally put our nation at risk. The world is growing more complex—and dangerous—with each passing hour, and our position within it growing more precarious. Should she become president, Palin seems capable of enacting policies so detached from the common interests of humanity, and from empirical reality, as to unite the entire world against us. When asked why she is qualified to shoulder more responsibility than any person has held in human history, Palin cites her refusal to hesitate. "You can't blink," she told Gibson repeatedly, as though this were a primordial truth of wise governance. Let us hope that a President Palin would blink, again and again, while more thoughtful people decide the fate of civilization.

*I added the bold type to emphasize what I find so disturbing about this woman and the half of America that thinks she'll be just peachy as VP.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Zombie

It's funny cos it's true.

Obama's plan is interesting - I am curious to see how it would actually play out.

Well, now that everything as gone to hell in a handbasket thanks to W's administration, I do not see how we can afford to do anything. I mean a trillion for the unneeded war, a trillion to bail out the markets that the admin. turned a blind eye to and that became far less regulated thanks mainly to the R's in 1999, etc. What scares me the most is if we deregulate health care. Perhaps we'll just pay for that R mess with lives instead of trillions, though paying with both is likely.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Sorceress

. . . I believe that with the nomination of Sarah Palin for the vice presidency, the silliness of our politics has finally put our nation at risk. The world is growing more complex—and dangerous—with each passing hour, and our position within it growing more precarious. Should she become president, Palin seems capable of enacting policies so detached from the common interests of humanity, and from empirical reality, as to unite the entire world against us. When asked why she is qualified to shoulder more responsibility than any person has held in human history, Palin cites her refusal to hesitate. "You can't blink," she told Gibson repeatedly, as though this were a primordial truth of wise governance. Let us hope that a President Palin would blink, again and again, while more thoughtful people decide the fate of civilization.

I agree with this. I get that Obama has little experience, but the experience he has is better. Palin ran a relatively unpopulated state for a very short time period. Her implying that she knows about Russia's complicated political dealings because you (not really her mind you) can see Russia from certain parts of Alaska (has she been to any one them?) - defies believe that. How does the ability to see maybe a few miles of frozen Russia tundra qualify her to deal with Russia or any other country on a national and international level? The answer is it does not. Anyone who says differently is deluded unless they can come up with some intelligent link there Conversely, Obama has been on four Senate Committees including:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Clearly his Senate tenure (which is two years longer than Palin's stint as Gov., which began in 06) qualifies him, at the least, more than the statement regarding seeing Russia from some part of Alaska The fact that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004 also qualifies him way more than Palin on promulgating law in the United States.

But, people will blindly defend Palin for the reasons asserts in the article and/or they actually believe that McCain's tax cuts are going to see the light of day (note Greenspan already said we cannot afford the tax cuts without significant cuts in spending. How are these significant cuts in spending to happen when we are likely to spend initially a trillion dollars on these bailouts? Moreover, if McCain's tax cuts see the light of day, it is more than likely that any amount saved in the tax cuts will lost by the taxes, which is exactly what happened to W's tax cuts, which BTW McCain called immoral because we were going to war, but is now for even though we are still at war

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Her implying that she knows about Russia's complicated political dealings because you (not really her mind you) can see Russia from certain parts of Alaska (has she been to any one them?) - defies believe that. How does the ability to see maybe a few miles of frozen Russia tundra qualify her to deal with Russia or any other country on a national and international level? The answer is it does not.

The answer is definitely it does not. But that island arc is one of the most seismically active regions on Earth, & generates surging tsunamis once a year or more.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

. . . But that island arc is one of the most seismically active regions on Earth, & generates surging tsunamis once a year or more.

I know. I was fairly close to it in 05 and was a little unnerved with that knowledge, esp. considering the huge cruise ship was rocking and swaying the whole time in normal water

[strandinthewind]

Palin press may boycott UN conference

Kenneth P. Vogel

NEW YORK – Journalists, displeased with Sarah Palin’s efforts to restrict their access to her, are threatening not to cover her events surrounding the United Nations conference here unless they're allowed more access.

The unfolding boycott is the latest development in a rocky relationship between Palin’s handlers and the press, in which the campaign has sought to tightly control her interactions with the media.

The campaign had originally indicated that the print reporters following her campaign would be among the small group of journalists allowed to attend the so-called “pool sprays” before Palin’s meetings with dignitaries on the sidelines of the U.N. meetings.

The sprays are basically glorified photo opportunities during which journalists can snap photos and film footage and – if they’re lucky – shout a question or two at Palin and her company before she adjourns for private meetings. On Tuesday, those meetings were to include Afghan President Karzai and former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

But the imbroglio began developing Tuesday morning when Palin’s handlers informed the small print press contingent covering her campaign that the print reporter designated to cover the events, Elizabeth Holmes of the Wall Street Journal, would not be allowed to cover the sprays.

The campaign’s reasoning was that there were not going to be questions or statements at the sprays, so they were only appropriate for photographers and cameramen.

The campaign also at first moved to bar CNN, the television network designated for pool duty, from sending its editorial producer – basically a hybrid print/video journalist – though the campaign budged when the network threatened to withhold its cameras as well.

With Palin’s first meeting set to begin at noon, that leaves the print reporters on the outs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...jI1QzfjzfCw5R4

________________________________________________________

Waht is the big deal? She wants to lead the free world (just an expression) and she can't field one or two questions from the press during her introduction to foreign dignitaries and, therefore, political foreigners in general on a national scale (all a month and half before the election mind you) ?

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I know. I was fairly close to it in 05 and was a little unnerved with that knowledge, esp. considering the huge cruise ship was rocking and swaying the whole time in normal water

The only thing you'd have to worry about on a cruise ship would be a storm (with wind-driven wave activity).

I think Governor Palin reminds me of Paula Prentiss. Or maybe Jill St. John.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

The only thing you'd have to worry about on a cruise ship would be a storm (with wind-driven wave activity).

It was so bad that at times my cocktail kept falling over

Originally Posted by David

I think Governor Palin reminds me of Paula Prentiss. Or maybe Jill St. John.

Exactly!!!!!!!!

[Zombie]

Thank you for posting that, Sorceress. Mr. Harris is absolutely right. We really want to elect someone like this as vice president? Reason over faith, people! Reason over faith!

Whenever I think of her, I am reminded of this and I would not be surprised to find out she thinks highly of good ol' Dr. Dino.

Sigh.

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, now that everything as gone to hell in a handbasket thanks to W's administration, I do not see how we can afford to do anything. I mean a trillion for the unneeded war, a trillion to bail out the markets that the admin. turned a blind eye to and that became far less regulated thanks mainly to the R's in 1999, etc. What scares me the most is if we deregulate health care. Perhaps we'll just pay for that R mess with lives instead of trillions, though paying with both is likely.

If we deregulate healthcare, then we might as well all hang up our hats. I have a feeling everything is going to get worse before it gets better, but I would like to see someone try to pull something like that off anyway.

[Sorceress]

Originally Posted by Zombie

Reason over faith, people! Reason over faith!

Or even reason AND faith. Palin is beyond reason. Even the midwestern Lutherans and the Methodists and the reasonable people of any faith or denomination should be very afraid of this woman ever becoming president.

Oh, and that Hovind guy is a trip. Wow.

[Sorceress]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I agree with this. I get that Obama has little experience, but the experience he has is better. Palin ran a relatively unpopulated state for a very short time period. Her implying that she knows about Russia's complicated political dealings because you (not really her mind you) can see Russia from certain parts of Alaska (has she been to any one them?) - defies believe that. How does the ability to see maybe a few miles of frozen Russia tundra qualify her to deal with Russia or any other country on a national and international level? The answer is it does not. Anyone who says differently is deluded unless they can come up with some intelligent link there Conversely, Obama has been on four Senate Committees including:

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Clearly his Senate tenure (which is two years longer than Palin's stint as Gov., which began in 06) qualifies him, at the least, more than the statement regarding seeing Russia from some part of Alaska The fact that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004 also qualifies him way more than Palin on promulgating law in the United States.

But, people will blindly defend Palin for the reasons asserts in the article and/or they actually believe that McCain's tax cuts are going to see the light of day (note Greenspan already said we cannot afford the tax cuts without significant cuts in spending. How are these significant cuts in spending to happen when we are likely to spend initially a trillion dollars on these bailouts? Moreover, if McCain's tax cuts see the light of day, it is more than likely that any amount saved in the tax cuts will lost by the taxes, which is exactly what happened to W's tax cuts, which BTW McCain called immoral because we were going to war, but is now for even though we are still at war

Thank you for clearly explaining the difference in experience. It's important for people not to be distracted by the Republican spin on the topic.

And you're right about the bailout sapping all the money for much of what both candidates are promising. How this all turns out should be very interesting.

[estranged4life]

Originally Posted by Sorceress

Even the midwestern Lutherans and the Methodists and the reasonable people of any faith or denomination should be very afraid of this woman ever becoming president.

who are indeed reasonable people. When I read about the Methodists, Of course I am reminded of a great line from the movie "A River Runs Through It":

"Methodists - Baptists who can read".

Brian "Branson - Las Vegas for people without teeth" j.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Sorceress

Thank you for clearly explaining the difference in experience. It's important for people not to be distracted by the Republican spin on the topic.

And you're right about the bailout sapping all the money for much of what both candidates are promising. How this all turns out should be very interesting.

To be fair, she also was the commander in chief of the 4,00o or so member Alaskan National Guard for a year or so, which is something. However, to my knowledge, nothing significant happened during that time period that required using the guard on any large scale that would have required her oversight (think Katrina) - Also, much of the Alaskan National Guard was deployed in Iraq and the Middle East. In any event:

Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, considers Palin "extremely responsive and smart" and says she is in charge when it comes to in-state services, such as emergencies and natural disasters where the National Guard is the first responder.

But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, he said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.

_______________________________________________________

So, the argument that being the "Commander in Chief" of the Alaskan National Guard is of, at best, limited value on the national stage.

Here is a cool opt ed setting forth the R spin. I think people should read it and judge for themselves whether any of the reasons set forth by the R's overwhelmingly make Palin more qualified than Obama's Senatecommittee experience, his history as a Constitutional teacher, his Harvard Law degree, etc. Moreover, Obama has a family as well. So, that rather makes Palin's "I raised a family" argument moot or or very limited comparative value when equating raising a family to running the nation

In sum, Obama's four years in the Senate seemingly are of greater value than the reasons asserted by the R's in favor of Palin.

Alaska National Guard General: Palin Plays No Role In National Defense Activities Even When They Involve The Alaska National Guard

TED ANTHONY | August 31, 2008 04:56 PM EST |

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Wait, now, say the Republicans. You think that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin lacks experience? You think that at 44, with less than two years running the nation's northernmost state, she doesn't have what it takes yet to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

Pshaw.

What about the fact that she stood up to embattled Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens? What about her oversight of her state's National Guard contingent? Her experience as a mother? And, hey _ what about the fact that she runs a state that happens to be very close to Russia?

Each of these characteristics has been cited by a Republican since Friday as an ingredient in John McCain's conclusion that Palin is qualified to become vice president of the United States.

"She has experience not only in politics but in life," former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee said Sunday on CNN.

None of this suggests that Sarah Palin is not a skilled, competent, multitalented public servant. But it means that, in the face of fierce Democratic assertions that she is too green to be elevated to vice president, the GOP is looking for whatever it can to show that's not the case and to bolster her credentials, particularly in national security.

And in some cases, the responses from Republicans who showed up on the Sunday morning talk-show circuit to promote Palin's qualifications are unexpected, to say the least.

Thompson: "She's a mother of five children. ... And she has more experience than Barack Obama."

Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina: "Governor Palin took on Ted Stevens. If she can take him on, she can take on the Russians." Stevens, a Republican senator, is facing corruption charges and running for re-election.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: "Palin is commander-in-chief of the Alaskan National Guard." The state's Guard has about 4,000 members.

From McCain's wife, Cindy, came a geographic assessment of qualification: "Alaska is the closest part of our continent to Russia. So, it's not as if she doesn't understand what's at stake here."

What these traits say about Palin's ability to serve as vice president or, in an emergency, as president is not entirely clear. But the flurry of comments by leading Republicans hint at a flood-the-zone strategy when it comes to Palin, whose gender, Christian faith and conservative chops infused a lively crackle into John McCain's campaign during the weekend between the two national conventions.

The GOP has also implied that Democratic reactions to Palin's selection are sexist, particularly since, they contend, her time as Alaska's governor gives her the edge over Barack Obama in executive experience. Obama, 47, has spent almost 12 years in office, all of it as a lawmaker _ eight years as an Illinois state senator and nearly four as a U.S. senator. Palin's total is 12 _ she spent 10 as a city council member and mayor, and nearly two as governor.

"If they want to go down that route, in all candor, she has far more experience than Senator Obama does," McCain said Sunday in St. Louis.

Democrats insist sexism isn't at play. "It's not the woman issue at all," former Democratic Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota said Sunday on CNN. "There are a lot of other Republican women who could have filled this role if that is what he was looking for" _ such as Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," saw a kindred spirit in Palin's experience as mayor, despite the fact that her town, Wasilla, has about 7,000 people and his had nearly 8 million when 9/11 happened.

"Maybe it's my own background as a mayor and United States attorney, but this whole idea of executive experience to me would really qualify her," Giuliani said. He dismissed questions about the size of the town she ran. "You know why? She had to make decisions. All Sen. Obama has had to do is talk. That's all he does."

Some of the comments seemed a bit non-sequitur. Russia, for example.

Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, considers Palin "extremely responsive and smart" and says she is in charge when it comes to in-state services, such as emergencies and natural disasters where the National Guard is the first responder.

But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, he said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.

Stephen C. Donehoo, managing director of Kissinger McLarty Associates in Washington, and former military intelligence officer specializing in Latin America:

"No doubt the campaign staff have her hooked up to a fire hose on foreign policy issues," said Stephen C. Donehoo, managing director of Kissinger McLarty Associates in Washington and a former military intelligence officer.

"No doubt they fear a debate with Joe Biden that touches foreign affairs," Donehoo said. "My guess is Graham and (Joe) Lieberman are doing a lot of tutoring."

Republican Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota appears to have no such worries, given what he considers to be Obama's lack of experience.

"The president sets the tone," Coleman said. "The experience issue is on the other side. The No. 1 guy there is the guy without the experience."

Contributing to this report were AP writers Tom Raum, Jim Kuhnhenn, Glen Johnson and Nestor Ikeda in St. Paul and Anne Sutton in Juneau, Alaska.

____________________________________________

and another:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,4238012.story

Sarah Palin as Alaska National Guard commander
The job involves important managerial responsibilities but provides little, if any, foreign policy experience, military officials say.

By Julian E. Barnes
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 6, 2008

WASHINGTON — Seeking to buttress the foreign policy credentials of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Republicans have repeatedly cited the vice presidential nominee's experience as commander of the Alaska National Guard.

As governor, Palin oversees military units whose duties include serving overseas, search-and-rescue missions across the state's vast landscape and manning key elements of the U.S. missile defense system at Ft. Greely.

But foreign deployments of Guard units and the operation of national defense assets like the Ft. Greely missile interceptors are not the responsibility of state governors. Those functions come under the regular U.S. military chain of command.

Commanding the Alaska National Guard is hardly an insignificant job, military officials say. Still, they acknowledge that it provides little, if any, foreign policy experience.

Overseeing a state Guard is a "chief executive role" with real management responsibilities, said Mark Allen, a spokesman for the National Guard Bureau, the federal office that coordinates state National Guards.

"I don't think people should think it is a casual relationship, or is like the king putting on the medals," Allen said. "It is not that at all. But the role of the governor is to use the Guard to help the citizens of a state, as opposed to declaring war on a neighboring state."

The Alaska National Guard is unusual in that its jobs include manning part of the U.S. missile defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion works on interceptor missiles designed to shoot down intercontinental missiles.

Members of the Alaska National Guard also were deployed to Iraq, and Palin visited their unit in July 2007. The McCain campaign has pointed to that experience as an example of Palin's foreign policy background.

"She's been the commander of Alaska's National Guard, who's been deployed overseas," Tucker Bounds, a McCain spokesman, said on CNN in one of several recent references to Palin's gubernatorial responsibility for the Guard. "That's foreign policy experience."

Since governors have no role in overseeing Guard members federalized for service in Iraq, military experts said that should not count as foreign policy experience.

National Guard officials said visits such as Palin's trip to Iraq may be important because state officials can lobby the federal government for better training and more equipment if they are needed. There is no indication that during her trip Palin found major problems with how the Alaska Guard was trained or equipped.

Closer to home, the bread-and-butter duties of most state National Guards are natural disasters. During Palin's 21 months in office, there has been one declared disaster: widespread flooding in June and July this year. Palin quickly signed a disaster declaration, officials said. The Guard's role was limited to providing two water tanks and 30,000 sandbags to local authorities.

The Alaska Air National Guard, with 1,946 service members, is involved in an exceptional number of search-and-rescue missions. Since Palin became governor in December 2006, the Air Guard has flown 521 missions, saving 200 lives and assisting with the rescue of 77 more people, said Kalei Brooks, a spokeswoman for the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs.

"Our rescue squadron is the busiest in the nation," she said.

In recent years, the department has overseen a reorganization of the 1,900-member Army National Guard. Following a U.S. Army restructuring plan, officials have helped assign soldiers to new units.

But training requirements for Guard units are established not by governors, but by the Army, the Air Force and the National Guard Bureau.

"That requirement comes down from the United States Army and Air Force," Allen said. "But that training and that equipment become very important when they are needed within the states."

[Zombie]

Originally Posted by Sorceress

Or even reason AND faith. Palin is beyond reason. Even the midwestern Lutherans and the Methodists and the reasonable people of any faith or denomination should be very afraid of this woman ever becoming president.

Oh, and that Hovind guy is a trip. Wow.

Well, as long as the "faith" part doesn't cancel out the "reason" part entirely, I'm fine. I say "reason over faith" because the reason has to come first to avoid ridiculous situations like electing a Young Earther as vice president, potentially putting her in a position where she may one day have access to the button that launches the nukes.

And yes, Hovind is very...special. He's another Young Earther, and he's got a lot of people that think he's right. He believes man walked with the dinosaurs and that pterodactyls are still alive and well and buzzing around in the skies over Papau New Guinea.

And we want to elect someone with similar views to the vice presidency? I despair. We can do better. We must do better.

[Sorceress]

Originally Posted by Zombie

Well, as long as the "faith" part doesn't cancel out the "reason" part entirely, I'm fine.

Right. I think we're on the same page.