Sarah Palin isn’t ready, but I can’t say why I feel that way

*Updated

That’s a summary of what I read on a political blog earlier this morning.

At First Door on the Left, Len posted a clip of Palin’s interview with Charlie Gibson and stated:

Talk about a deer in the headlights. The McCain people clearly have a lot more work to do here before they turn this lady loose in public. She clearly is not ready. Perhaps in another twelve years or so, but not now. Let her run for Congress and spend a little time learning and gaining a bit of national and international experience. She just got her first passport a year ago. Give the lady some time.

I chose to ignore the glaring inconsistency that if one subscribes to this thinking, then Obama would certainly need several more years experience in Congress as well.  Instead, I asked one question–a rather simple one, in my opinion.

Airtightnoodleon 12 Sep 2008 at 09:23

I’m seeing a lot of insults to Palin in the post, but nothing to really back them up. Can you possbily explain why you think she’s not ready?

Len’s next response didn’t really answer the question at all:

For my right wing friends who are now pleading ignorance, the Bush Doctrine, first stated by George W. Bush in October of 2002, states that the United States has the right to preemptively wage war against any country which it believes may be plotting against it. It has also been called “The Right of First Strike.” And, no, Sarah Palin is not ready for either the vice presidency or (gods forbid) the presidency. Sorry.

So we have a reiteration of the earlier opinion–Sarah Palin is not ready for either position.  Again…why?

So naturally I had to reply again.

Still not seeing WHY she isn’t ready.

Actually, at first the phrase “Bush doctrine” was used to describe the policy that the U.S. had the right to treat countries that harbor or give aid to terrorist groups as terrorists themselves. Later people started using it to refer to preventive war. It’s a phrase that’s been used to apply to a lot of things Bush has said in relation to the war and terrorism.

Len’s brilliant response came quickly (notice there is no mention of what I stated about the Bush Doctrine and still no explanation for WHY Palin isn’t ready):

When it comes right down to it, that is a decision each of us is going to have to make for ourselves. All I can say is… Listen to her, hope the media has the cajones to ask her the tough questions, study her positions and policies. Do the same for the other candidates. Then, if you believe that she and John McCain are the leaders you want for our country and that they will take it in the direction you think it needs to go (basically the direction in which it has been going for the past eight years), by all means vote for her and Johnny.

My mission here is just to have a bit fun, present the facts as I see them, and if along the way I help one or two people to see the light… well, so much the better.

I thought to myself–How are you going to help people see the light if you can’t answer a simple question: why do you feel Sarah Palin isn’t ready for this position?

So, of course, that’s what I posted next.

I don’t really know why I keep posting to the thread.  If you have to keep asking the same question over and over again and the person can’t answer, at some point you just have to chalk it up to incompetence, right?

*Update:

I received a humorous reply from Len:

For heaven’s sake, Airtightnoodle, that’s practically all I’ve been talking about since Senior Citizen McCain announced she had been picked for him. Go back and read in the archives a bit. You’ll forgive me if I don’t really feel like repeating it all here. (You might also read the post on which you have been commenting. Also, watch the video embedded in the post.)

Thank you.

So I replied:

1. I’ve read the post.
2. I’ve watched the video.
3. It took you several replies to finally say something somewhat useful (go back and read the archives).
4. You can expect people to comment and ask questions on something you have already talked about in previous blog posts since often posters find your blog through one particular post.  Don’t be surprised when people don’t want to read all your previous entries to get a quick answer–which, in reality, you still haven’t given.

And…now I’m done with that blog, I suppose.  🙂

Advertisement

Obama and McCain at Saddleback Church

Recently I just do not have much to say about evolution, religion, etc. 

But here is something interesting to share that definitely has an impact on those issues: the upcoming presidential election.

As you may have heard, Rick Warren at Saddleback Church hosted a forum for the presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain.

Rick Warren with Barack Obama and John McCain

You can watch the forum on the CNN website located here.  I highly recommend doing so.

I have to say that I personally am not overly enthused about any of the candidates that have been involved in this current race.  I do not think this forum clearly outlined any ideas, goals, plans, etc, from either candidate, but it is certainly very interesting to watch as it is a much more personal side to the candidates than we usually get to see. 

Carl Sagan on preserving the pale blue dot

A nicely done You Tube presentation of Carl Sagan speaking about the earth.

Contact LA governor about science education

The Louisiana Coalition for Science has posted their open letter to Governor Jindal on their website here. You can use this letter as a resource for drafting your own. You can email Governor Jindal at this site.

Though I am not a citizen of the state of Louisiana, I emailed Governor Jindal as well. Here is the text of my letter (feel free to adapt for your own purposes if you’d like):

Dear Governor Jindal:

As a concerned citizen in one of your neighboring states, I implore you to heed the letter sent to you recently regarding SB 733 from the LA Coalition for Science (http://lasciencecoalition.org). As a religious person and science teacher myself, I stand in agreement with the concerns that this legislation is deceptively seeking ways to bring non-scientific ideas into science classrooms.

I am sure you are in agreement with me that students in our country need a strong background in science. Supporting legislation aimed at teaching the “weaknesses” of theories will not lead to a strong background. To be sure, teachers needs to be showing students how to think for themselves, but at the same time we must provide them with a solid foundation of the facts as we currently know them.

Already creationist/intelligent design groups are trumpeting this bill as a victory for their agendas; they aim to use it to slide their own ideas into our science classrooms, even though their ideas are not scientific. This controversy is not a scientific controversy, but a political and religious one.

I pray you demonstrate your commitment to improving our students’ education by vetoing SB 733.