« Prev

Slog

Next »

Experience When it Counts

What is more important: Having an experienced and capable President? Or Vice President?

FiveThirtyEight makes an excellent point:

In a perfect world, we would all like a President who is Ready on Day One (TM); it is not uncommon for a newly-elected president to face a major crisis almost immediately upon taking office. But more commonly, a President takes the Oath of Office under relatively calm waters, allowing them something of a learning curve.

On the other hand, when a Vice President takes over for a president, the nation is necessarily undergoing a crisis, because the death (or resignation) of a president is perhaps as traumatic an event as can reasonably be imagined (in the “best” case resulting from a slowly-developing illness, and the worst, an attack by terrorists or foreign adversaries).


In that light, the GOP’s recent political theater bullshit isn’t just silly. It’s dangerous. I’m totally and completely fed up with Sarah Palin and her personal, professional and political problems. Enough of the notion that deciding to carry a child with trisomy-21 to term makes one capable of leading the nation in a crisis. Enough.

Every single one of these family planning problems have long been solved. I’m willing to bet that Sarah Palin couldn’t make a coherent ethical argument against medically accurate sexual education and contraception, even if you gave her unlimited access to a Jesuit priest and every peer-reviewed medical article ever written. It’s bullshit—pure, unmitigated, willful ignorance parading as a sound ethical position.

I can tell you any couple should have access to the dozens of safe and effective forms of birth control. I can even tell you the precise failure rates of the different methods.

Back when I was in high school—going to school with assholes like this guy—and before the world wide web was really active, I was the source of medically accurate information for a terrifying number of my classmates. Everyone knew my mother was a public health nurse; there was nowhere else to go.

No child in the United States should be so ignorant that they wait until three periods have been missed, all the way to the twilight of the first trimester, before wondering what their choices are. No one should be confused about when and how a couple can get pregnant. No couple should be denied access to—or information about—contraception.

These problems are solved. Long ago solved. Solved in a way that so many of the other problems facing our nation are not solved, are being left now ignored as we debate something that is, in any reasonable sense, undebatable.

Enough of Sarah Palin and the idiotic family planning policies she represents. Enough.

We no longer have the luxury of this debate—with our economy, environment and petroleum-fueled lifestyle all teetering. Her case for herself is centered around her family planning choices. We need our next Vice President—who will only become president during of crescendoing crisis—to be better, more thoughtful and more focused on the actual problems we face.

I’m watching this again, just to bring my brain back up to the serious state needed to start addressing our nation’s and world’s real problems:

Comments (26)

1

Why are you knocking the Jesuit priests?

Posted by star2 | September 2, 2008 12:15 PM
2

I 100% so cannot wait for the VP debates. We're having those this time, aren't we? Because that's going to be like American Idol and Crossfire had a baby. Without Downs.

Posted by Matt Fuckin' Hickey | September 2, 2008 12:18 PM
3

AMEN

Posted by TheTruthHurts | September 2, 2008 12:22 PM
4

star2--

I'm not. By putting Jesuits in the same category as peer-reviewed medical articles, I'm actually praising the priests.

Jesuits are perhaps the only socially conservative Christians capable of mounting a coherent ethical argument against termination of pregnancy and contraception. I might not agree with their conclusions, but at least the Jesuit argument is logically consistent--opposing also the death penalty and providing social services to those who decide to keep a child in difficult circumstances.

I'm too fucking disgusted to look it up, but I suspect Governor Palin is both opposed to contraception and in favor of the death penalty.

Posted by Jonathan Golob | September 2, 2008 12:24 PM
5

Uh oh, the GOP wackjobs will be on here any sec. Seems to be a lot of them lately. And they are extremely sensitive and defensive.

Posted by Wonder why? | September 2, 2008 12:27 PM
6

Heck, with the GOP this year, not only do you get an out-of-control convention where the cops are tear-gassing and beating heads of the media while the Libertarian anarchists destroy property, you get a Twofer with a McSame/Palin double header of incompetence, greed, and lack of morals.

Sad, very sad.

Forty years in the wilderness, this is their fate.

Posted by Will in Seattle | September 2, 2008 12:35 PM
7

Perhaps think of it like a second serve in tennis. If Biden takes over it'll be a good thing that he's a more known quantity and older guy. Obama is younger, newer and less experienced but the entire campaign is focused on judging him, not his veep.

But you can't really convince people of this. Some people want a younger inexperienced VP because they see the spot as a learning/grooming position.

Posted by daniel | September 2, 2008 12:35 PM
8

@5, those people obviously aren't serious posters, just a single bored troll (or possibly trolls)

Posted by Just Sayin' | September 2, 2008 12:36 PM
9

She's got a lot of lernin' to do then, daniel.

Posted by Will in Seattle | September 2, 2008 12:37 PM
10

Hi, my name is Sarah Palin and I believe in abstinence-only sex-education. That's how I raised my daughters - it worked really well with them and... hold on... what's that? Bristol? She's pregnant! Fuck!

My family is off-limits. No further questions. Goodnight.

Posted by Sarah Palin | September 2, 2008 12:38 PM
11

@ Jonathan Golob,


What really pisses me off about pro-lifers is that they seem to also be very pro-military and pro-war, or at least they vote for people who start wars; they don't give a fuck what happens to children after they're born. The cognitive dissonance has made them psychotic.


And all partisanship aside, the McCain campaign has been the biggest political disaster I've ever seen in my young life. I don't think there's even anything remotely comparable in our modern political history.


The man openly talks about how he doesn't know shit about the economy, the environment or how he's gonna pay for the wars he plans to start and his poll numbers go up! Every day, he makes some kind of career-ending gaffe. Unless the poll numbers themselves are pure fiction which is totally plausible at this point.


The McCain/Palin administration is gonna be one helluva an insane ride!

Posted by Original Andrew | September 2, 2008 12:38 PM
12

If someone comes from congress they don't have enough executive experience. If they come from being a governor, they lack foreign experience.

Pick one and shut up GOP.

Posted by elswinger | September 2, 2008 12:39 PM
13

I shouldn't even need to give you the 10 words it would take to make a logically consistent argument for supporting the death penalty and opposing abortion. Let's just say it uses some of the words: crime, conviction, justice, punishment & innocent.

I am diametrically opposite of Palin but arguing that being anti-abortion and pro-death-penalty is inconsistent is facile. It's embarassing for a party that's supposed have rationality on our side and I'm surprised that a smart pro-rational guy like you would bring it up.

I purposely didn't say "pro-life" because sure, there's a moral disconnect there but that's not the same thing as a logical inconsistency.

Posted by daniel | September 2, 2008 12:40 PM
14

@ 10,


The correct term is Ignorance Only education.

Posted by Original Andrew | September 2, 2008 12:43 PM
15

I so hope that "ENOUGH" becomes the rallying cry for this election.

Posted by Mike in MO | September 2, 2008 12:53 PM
16

Daniel---

I'll grant you that one can make a shaky pro-death penalty and con-contraception ethical argument that is logically consistent--provided one starts with the faulty and disproven idea that courts never make a false conviction.

(Please note, I didn't say pro-death penalty and anti-abortion--an easier case to make, but still very shaky.)

Posted by Jonathan Golob | September 2, 2008 12:56 PM
17

@2 - Personally, I think the Prez debates oughta be a bit of a hoot, as well. I'm willing to lay money on McCain having an almost out of body experience at one of them, more or less sealing the whole deal then and there.

Posted by Dribble, dribble | September 2, 2008 12:59 PM
18

Seems like we haven't talked about McCain in days!

Posted by A | September 2, 2008 1:09 PM
19
I shouldn't even need to give you the 10 words it would take to make a logically consistent argument for supporting the death penalty and opposing abortion. Let's just say it uses some of the words: crime, conviction, justice, punishment & innocent.

That is the lamest attempt at a non-argument I've ever seen. You just used 41 words to explain why you couldn't be bothered to offer a perfectly sound 10 word explanation. If you actually had such an explanation, why then not offer it? This statement almost perfectly encapsulates a certain type of "I'm too smart to be bothered to debate you, so I expect you to just take it on my word as a Very Smart Person that you're wrong and I'm right."

Bullshit. If you've got an argument, make it.

Posted by flamingbanjo | September 2, 2008 1:15 PM
20

@20: HAHAHA. That reminds me of that stupid "david wright" person who was on this blog. He kept saying he was an "economist" so he knew more about the credit crisis in this country. When I called bullshit on him, he never responded.

Typical. I also, can't wait for the VP debates.

And Jonothan, great post..per usual.

Posted by Original Monique | September 2, 2008 1:26 PM
21

Jonathan,

I think you're exaggerating. Again, it's a judgement call whether the *inevitability* of innocent death makes the death penalty immoral. What's the connection to abortion which under their premises is murder?

Flamingbanjo, apologies on the poor rhetoric. I was being snarky.

Jonathan is a scientist and he informs his post with facts and figures (thanks!) It is no respect to the discipline to try to stretch that and talk about our and their moral views on life and death as though they were proven or disproven with similar techniques.

Understand their premise: the fetus is a human life. If you want to catch them in a logical fallacy wait until a fetus is convicted of murder.

Until then we'll have to make do with defending our values. And we do not strengthen our case by abusing scientific reason which is generally one of our strong points.

Posted by daniel | September 2, 2008 1:34 PM
22

Dear Jonathan,

All your posts wake up my internal nerdy girl. She has a crush on you.

Posted by Robin Sparkles | September 2, 2008 1:34 PM
23

@4 (Jonathan)

Okay that makes a lot more sense. In my experience, Jesuits have been the most socially liberal Catholics I've ever met. You have to forgive me for being concerned that they were associated with Sarah Palin.

Posted by star2 | September 2, 2008 1:35 PM
24

"I'm too fucking disgusted to look it up, but I suspect Governor Palin is both opposed to contraception and in favor of the death penalty."

This may be true, but why is that more "hypocritical" than being opposed to the death penalty and in favor of abortion?

Posted by Roque Nuevo | September 2, 2008 1:49 PM
25

In a nutshell:

I believe that those who support the death penalty are wrong. I believe that those who oppose abortion rights are wrong.

The search for additional demerits for folks who hold both opinions based on "inconsistency" is both fruit and point less.

Posted by daniel | September 2, 2008 2:03 PM
26

@24: It is only hypocritical if it proceeds from some sort of absolutist position that all life is sacred and taking life is wrong under all circumstances, even under "greater good" conditions (such as arguing that a child will be born into a life of misery.) The major problem is reconciling this supposed absolute respect for life with things like war or the death penalty where the death of innocents is a given.

Posted by flamingbanjo | September 2, 2008 2:19 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.