Chilly Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 That will vary state to state and even city to city. Sometimes there's a County Executive who has more responsibility than a mayor. There are "strong city" models and more county-centric models. In literal terms, the mayor of has power over its residents and is responsible to deliver services, manage budgets etc . The Mayor can only ask for National Guard, the Gov can order them up. You could argue that the Mayor would make the call as to whether they were needed ... and ask the governor. In terms of complexity and ability to impact people's lives, I'd say that a mayor of a city of 600,000 people has to have more creativity, negotiation and management skills because cities all compete for resources which, by the time the state gets them, are already very scarce. And neither one of them deal with the state legislature.
StupidNation Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 If Palin's experience is a question than it throws into Obama all the more. How the libtards can miss this makes it all the more partisan and stupid. Obama has never once commanded any department in any meaningful way. Palin has and that in itself makes her more experience. Being part of any senate seat, whether state or federal, is not even close to the experience of a governor. Secondly, she's not running for president. She makes no decisions whatsoever, Obama does. I don't like McCain and would never vote for the man, but to compare someone who wants to be president with an office that has no authority or ability to control any function of executing the country her experience question is moot next to someone with no executive experience and really no senatorial experience as he was preparing to campaign the moment he was elected senator by his own admission. The man has no experience being a U.S senator. Do you really believe the last year he was getting experience working in the senate? You don't think he was planning his run for the a year before that? The man has ZERO experience, while Palin actively makes decisions day in and out for her state and hasn't been plotting to run for president making his statement in 2006 show the man is a liar. Obama the Liar said that in order for him to run he would need experience for the job he would be applying for. No one is forced to vote for either of those 2. Every libtard trying to defend Obama is worse than any R trying to defend McCain because the man has NO federal experience. If he has show me one piece of meaning legislature he authored and benefited the country, not merely sponsored. At least McCain authored bills (that I highly disagree with).
buckeyemike Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 A country run by Oliver Stone, Ollie North, Olive Oil from Popeye, and Blacuweather guy from Family Guy? I wish. It's a government ruled by the richest persons. I know some would argue that's what we have now, but it really isn't.
Hazed and Amuzed Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 I wish. It's a government ruled by the richest persons. I know some would argue that's what we have now, but it really isn't. Or a government ruled from behind the scenes by elite families. For example: Kennedy's, Bush's or Clintons.
blzrul Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 And neither one of them deal with the state legislature. Mayors have city councils.
buckeyemike Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 Or a government ruled from behind the scenes by elite families. For example: Kennedy's, Bush's or Clintons. ...and the next jump from there is the Illuminati and the Rothchilds and the seven elderly Jewish men who control everything that happens in the world from a cave in Switzerland. There is simply too much random chance in the world to accept either of these theories.
/dev/null Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 ...and the next jump from there is the Illuminati and the Rothchilds and the seven elderly Jewish men who control everything that happens in the world from a cave in Switzerland. There is simply too much random chance in the world to accept either of these theories. Seven Jewish men in a cave in Switzerland More like George Seifert from the Buffalo Airport, JFK from a submarine, Elvis from a baitshop, and Marshawn Lynch from Applebees
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted September 2, 2008 Author Posted September 2, 2008 Seven Jewish men in a cave in Switzerland More like George Seifert from the Buffalo Airport, JFK from a submarine, Elvis from a baitshop, and Marshawn Lynch from Applebees You are having too much fun with these recent topics. I haven't had just deep chuckles in a while from each your successive posts today. Noice!
Hazed and Amuzed Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 ...and the next jump from there is the Illuminati and the Rothchilds and the seven elderly Jewish men who control everything that happens in the world from a cave in Switzerland. There is simply too much random chance in the world to accept either of these theories. I didn't make a jump to there so I don't know what your talking about but an oligarchy is either definition. If you can't see this country is being run by the same people over and over again then you're just turning a blind eye. Do you really think good ole' dubya would have ever been president if daddy wasn't first? I'm not throwing any conspiracy theories around, I don't really believe in them but anyone who thinks this country isn't in control of some of the most elite corporations and families is just not paying attention. The lobbyists make sure this country is not run by who the people really want. Don't you think it's kind of weird that the last 3 elections there has been no GREAT candidate? It's always the lesser of the two evils. Every effing election is the same. Which one is not as bad as the other. This country hasn't had any real leadership in quite awhile. Think about why that really is.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 The problem for McCain here is that he allowed the MSM and the Netroots to define Palin before he/she could. I still think it's a pretty good pick, but with Campbell Brown arguing that she's not experienced enough (No Bias, No Bull . . . riiiiight), it's going to be a hard climb back. Campbell Brown questioned whether Sarah Palin's foreign policy experience as defined by the McCain campaign (and Tucker Bounds didn't even try to refute that) qualified her as ready to assume the presidency if something happened to John McCain. She asked him a simple question; provide a single executive decision she made that would qualify her foreign policy experience. There wasn't any. You can argue that Campbell Brown didn't buy into their argument, but it sure seemed like she went out of her way to let the campaign explain Palin's readiness, and they couldn't. After the interview, McCain canceled a CNN appearance on Larry King Live, stating that CNN had crossed the line with that line of questioning...
Chilly Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 Mayors have city councils. Which is nowhere near the complexity or scope.
Johnny Coli Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 Campbell Brown questioned whether Sarah Palin's foreign policy experience as defined by the McCain campaign (and Tucker Bounds didn't even try to refute that) qualified her as ready to assume the presidency if something happened to John McCain. She asked him a simple question; provide a single executive decision she made that would qualify her foreign policy experience. There wasn't any. You can argue that Campbell Brown didn't buy into their argument, but it sure seemed like she went out of her way to let the campaign explain Palin's readiness, and they couldn't. After the interview, McCain canceled a CNN appearance on Larry King Live, stating that CNN had crossed the line with that line of questioning... They're not going to let anyone interview her either: WaPo political blog [McCain's campaign manager, Rick] Davis demurred when asked when Palin will sit for interviews with major news organizations, pointing out that now would not be the right time given the "combative" attitude the media has seemingly adopted toward Palin. Combative? People ask a simple question like whether she really was properly vetted, or whether people might think she's inexperienced and the media is being combative? What exactly did they think would happen when they vetted her and found out all this stuff they said they knew about? That people and the media would just let it go? Sure, why on earth would they want to know any details about the person chosen by a 72-year-old cancer survivor to succeed him if he can't finish his term? They won't let her near an interviewer, but she's good enough to be a CIC? It's laughable.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 2, 2008 Posted September 2, 2008 Again, whose fault is it that the party of the intellectuals couldn't beat out a buffoon and Dr. Evil? This is stupid and ass backwards... You are smater than this GG. The American voters, they are not intellectuals. If you pander down... You will very likely win. This stuff has been going on since Washington was President and very hotly debated. The very best intellectual will NEVER beat the demagogue... Let alone the best demagogues that money can buy.
Nanker Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 Oh, if ONLY JM chose a Liberal to be his running mate! WTF is wrong with you people?
X. Benedict Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 They're not going to let anyone interview her either:WaPo political blog Combative? People ask a simple question like whether she really was properly vetted, or whether people might think she's inexperienced and the media is being combative? What exactly did they think would happen when they vetted her and found out all this stuff they said they knew about? That people and the media would just let it go? Sure, why on earth would they want to know any details about the person chosen by a 72-year-old cancer survivor to succeed him if he can't finish his term? They won't let her near an interviewer, but she's good enough to be a CIC? It's laughable. I actually agree with this angle, from a readiness standpoint. McCain has had since Mar 8th to vet and prepare a VP candidate. And now his campaign is seemingly totally caught off-guard by his choice. The McCain campaign had half a year to find somebody and get them battle ready, which is an enormous political luxury. It was squandered. Totally squandered.
jimshiz Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 And Campbell Brown admits that McCain has more "experience" than Obama... The GOP should just say "Palin is not going to debate Biden, she'll debate Obama"...
finknottle Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 And he eschewed the opportunity to join a private practice and make big bucks, instead taking his Ivy League degree and using it to help the community he lived in. What a novel idea. But, don't waste your breath here. These people don't care if soldiers die...if children starve...or anything else as long as their taxes don't go up. You mean like when he left Columbia to take a job in finance, helping US companies open operations overseas? They don't mention that part of his resume much...
finknottle Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 Has Obama ever run a business? Palin has. Has Obama ever run a community? Palin has. Has Obama ever run a state? Palin has. By the transitive property of equalities, I am not sure that Obama could run a Starbucks, much less the United States. He worked at a Baskin-Robins one summer. I don't think he was a supervisor though.
finknottle Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 Winguts denigrate small sovereign nations...such as Cuba (pop 11m+), Haiti (pop 6m), Costa Rica (3.5m)...etc, as being too small to be worthy of notice. Alaska's a beautiful place, no doubt about it, but in the grand scheme of things running a city of 9,000 people (2/3 smaller than the town in which I now live) and a state smaller than many smallish cities in America is not particularly impressive. Of course the bar for Repigs is quite low ... I guess only when you compare her with Bush she's almost mildly "qualified". The bar for the Democrats is even lower. Obama came out and ridiculed her experience as mayor, saying she had only 50 employees while he had hundreds of campaign workers. And that is the problem: the fact that he equates the experiences of running a campaign with the experience of running a government or a company.
X. Benedict Posted September 3, 2008 Posted September 3, 2008 He worked at a Baskin-Robins one summer. I don't think he was a supervisor though. He did supervise the Harvard Law Review. That isn't saying much, but it was a step above Scalia, Ginsberg, Roberts, and Breyer when they were on it.
Recommended Posts