Lots of experience and nice resumes...but no action
Washington State Republican Party Chairman Luke Esser commented to the press that "...the Obama-Biden ticket is big on talk, the McCain-Palin ticket is big on results. To truly change Washington, it's going to take a team who has a record of accomplishment in shaking up the status quo. Gov. Palin's experience in doing that for her own state is exactly what is needed in Washington, D.C., and it's the same kind of change we need in Olympia this year."
This about sums up about my concerns with Obama and Biden. Despite all their combined years in Washington, there's not much to speak about. While Obama criticized Clinton and talked up that he didn't vote for the war in Iraq -- he didn't have to make that choice, he wasn't there when we were facing enemies, at a pinnacle time when religious zealots wanted to blow us up.
What's the purpose of the "experience card" when it brings no results? When we talk specifically about Biden or Obama's foreign policy experience, aside from their criticism of everything the United States does on foreign soil, what have they done to contribute? Have they stabilized Iraq by supporting additional troops? No. In fact, Biden's idea of a safe Iraq was to segregate the country instead of unify it. That's like saying let's have the North and South versus a Union. We know how that went. We should attempt to learn from our own history before we start implying we can just segregate a country without consequence.
With all of the years experience, did these two give anything back to their constituents? Were they able to consistently balance state budgets, give money back from oil to their people in their respective states? Were they able to secure a natural gas pipeline for America so we could bring energy prices down or secure supply?
The answer is no to all of these questions.
So where does experience really matter when there's no action? To make the 3:00 AM call about emergency matters from far away lands? How about the normal calls at 3pm? What has that experience brought to us in regards to domestic policy, or common good will to be able to bring back to the general population?
I dare argue that Gov. Palin might be the boldest VP pick in history, but also one of the smartest. Within her short time track record, she has been able to balance budgets, fight people in her own party that were corrupt, bring money back to the people of Alaska, so on and so forth -- and that, in less than two years. What is not impressive is that the previous governors and politicians of Alaska were not able to pull off such results in a short time, while this relatively "new" politician was able to do so.
Perhaps it isn't about "qualifications" and "experience" -- those things do matter -- but about the will to actually change things, not just talk it. Let the results speak, not just your speeches.
P.S. -- Someone might mention Gov. Plain's under an ethics investigation because her staff wanted her brother in law fired for being a state trooper. Why? He was a wife beater and tasered his child. Someone should give her a reward. Only in D.C. politics when doing what's right is wrong. Idiots.
2 comments:
I think the problem with her attempting to have her brother in law removed from his position, is that it was an abuse of her power. Was her brother in law convicted of wife beating or tasering his child? If not, it is not for her to use her position of authority to dish out justice as she sees fit.
I'm not supporting his acts if he did indeed do those things, but that is up for a court to decide, not the governor of the state.
I believe this shows exactly what type of woman she is. Win at any cost. A dangerous characteristic of a potential vice president.
I seriously hope Obama & Biden don't get elected as president & VP respectively, however I also realize that Mccain & Palin is nearly as bad of a choice, if not just as bad. These four people could care less about our founding principles; they all support a neo corporatist policy in this country. So to be blunt, it makes a huge difference that she tried to have him fired. Nevermind the fact that she is clearly biased in this action...
Let the courts handle whether he did beat his wife/child or whatever. She should be prosecuted if there is sufficient evidence she was personally motivated to pursue this action and did so based purely on what she *thinks* he did.
Guilty until proven innocent?
1. The trooper serves in the executive branch of the government. If he is fired by the head of the executive branch of the government, that is the right, not the abuse. In fact, recent findings showed it as such, there was no abuse of power. Was there an ethical violation because it had a personal benefit to Powell's sister? The Democrats say so.
2. Law enforcement officers are held to a higher standard because they enforce the law. The fact that he admitted to those atrocities such as tasering a child isn't an issue with the court, it is an issue with the executive branch of the government to terminate or suspend the employee seeing as he broke the law and broke the standards of law enforcement employees and the standard operating procedure of utilizing a weapon. If it was the IT industry, it's basically a policy violation in which your human resources will need to clear up. In some cases, executives will have to make the final decision if it is a high profile case.
The courts handle criminal and civil justice if the wife of the trooper files charges or the district attorney files criminal charges. That has nothing to do with specific violations of the state trooper's own admissions regarding his violation of the rules and guidelines of his employment.
The idea of innocence until proven guilty is thrown out when you sign that you did those acts.
-Don
Post a Comment