The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Before I Let Go

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:32:43 -0000

Nuada-

I thank you for your long and well informed response to my comments.

As an initial matter, I see that my earlier statement comparing Quayle and Palin was a bit unclear. I meant that there was a consensus that Quayle was an irresponsible choice. I agree that there is no consensus on his equivalence with Palin, though you are correct that that is my opinion.

As for your dismissal of my comparisons of Palin with Quayle and others, that too is a matter of opinion, I suppose. (Except for the relevant youth of Palin and Quayle, which you neglected to look up. Quayle was 41 in 1988 and Palin was 44 last year.) I remember the Quayle time on the political stage very well, however, and I have a hard time believing that he was more coherent than anyone, before or since. I urge you to look at the following list of things he said: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/quayle.asp I can't think of anything Palin said that approaches these.

And I also notice that nobody has persuasively shown why Agnew was a more responsible choice than Palin.

I appreciate your "vetting" defense for Sullivan, but I think that's not much more than a fig leaf. In the post linked above by TNC, and in many other places, Sullivan has clearly stated that he was concerned about someone like Palin being a heartbeat away. Others on this comment thread have shared that view, which I understand.

My primary point is just that this dynamic, sadly, is not really so uncommon. Palin may differ slightly in degree, but she's well within the ballpark of recent history.

Re: Before I Let Go

Guest — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:12:33 -0000

With respect, you are, of course, completely entitled to state as much of your opinion as you like. Just please be clear that it is only your opinion and not settled fact.

“That's the point. The nearly uniform consensus, from the start, was and is that Quayle was an irresponsible choice for VP. As much, if not more, than Palin.”

I have never read or heard anyone argue that Quayle was a more irresponsible choice than Palin, ever, until you did. As far as I can tell, Quayle was criticized for his lack of legislative accomplishments, his relative youth and his verbal gaffs. Now it is just my opinion but in my opinion, Palin outdid Quayle in all three cases. (I won’t bother to look up Quayle’s age in 1988.) In particular, while Quayle and even Biden made/makes gaffs, neither of them are/were as hopelessly incoherent as Palin is.

In other words, Biden may have a lot of knowledge but he often says things in a very blunt manner that can be politically damaging. (In trying to reassure voters about gun control, he accidently threatens Obama with gun violence; ex. “he won’t try to take your guns, if he tries to take mine, he’ll have a problem”.) Quayle had problems similar to George W. Bush, possibly not as bad in terms of frequency but his victimized look whenever he got in trouble, (“You’re no Jack Kennedy”), made his mistakes seem worse than they really were.

One can usually understand what both men are trying to say when they speak, despite how garbled they might be when they say something. Watch her interview with Charlie Gibson or Katie Couric and tell me that you understand what Palin is trying to say even 25% of the time. It’s like what Charlie Gibson said, a “blizzard of words”. Just say enough buzzwords and platitudes and hope some part of it made sense enough to get you on to the next question. Tina Fey’s parody of Palin’s answer to Couric’s question on the economy was basically what Palin actually said, with the exception of the line about “extra-value meals at McDonald’s”.

But one must be fair to Sullivan. At least during the campaign, his great distress was not that Palin was unqualified as much as she was probably unqualified but completely unknown. Palin had run in only one major political race prior to her selection as VP by John McCain and only two years before. Dan Quayle had been in four major political races prior to his selection in 1988. He was well-known for at least 8 years prior, ever since he knocked off long-time Democratic Senator Birch Bayh in 1980. That’s why those political races were important, it wasn’t because they made Quayle so damned brilliant. They gave the media and the public, if they were interested, to go back at vet Bush’s VP choice.

The fear was, Election Day would be upon the nation and Palin would not be forced to have given a single real interview. Sullivan went so far as to start a running count showing how many days elapsed since Sarah Palin’s pick and her first in-depth interview. He compared her with other past VP selections, I think he started with 1960 and the modern television era. Sarah Palin broke the record; her gap was longer than any other VP nominee in history. For his part, I believe Quayle actually had only a one-day gap.

Yes, objectively speaking I’d say it is pretty safe to call into question George H. W. Bush’s judgment with his pick of Dan Quayle. But in my opinion, it does not come close to the disaster John McCain made with his choice of Sarah Palin.

In addition, your comparisons of Bush, Perot and Romney are not all that valid. Romney was running for President, the voters had the opportunity to make their choice where he was concerned. Perot was the same case. George H. W. Bush was as well, unless you want to criticize Reagan and bring 1980 into this. To Sullivan, that was an extenuating factor against the Palin pick; it worsened the fact that she was she already largely unknown; the first time the American people would have the chance to vote for her would be the general election, for all the marbles.

Again and again, what made Palin’s selection such a troubling anomaly to Sullivan was the lack of vetting. Vetting by the public, the press and the McCain campaign; through elections and investigations, with such little time spent on it or available for it. The sheer unqualified nature of Palin has become the dominant aspect of his Palin coverage since Election Day.

In all honesty, the Trig stuff seemed a bit over the line, at least the line I would have drawn if I was him. But his otherwise fine coverage, coverage he did almost alone in the world of the Beltway media, earns my respect.

Re: Before I Let Go

Ardeth_Bey — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:43:56 -0000

lol

you don't get it, TNC.

Sully can't let go.....because Dr. K, Jonah, Douthat and the rest of GOP elite are planning on bringing her back.

They pretty much told her to go home and read some books until this blows over.

Douthat continues the fake-out that the media has misrepresented Palin....so that she can be refurbished to be used on the base down the road.

Sully and I and the rest of the Medjai will stand with drawn blades at the Gates of Hamunaptra.

Like Anck su Namun, we shall never allow her allow her to return from the City of the Dead.

Imhotep/Douthat cannot resurrect her......our magicks are far stronger than his......

teh magicks of TRUTH!

;)

Re: Before I Let Go

Marcos El Malo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:28:25 -0000

That reference (to the governorship as a title) was quite telling. It was as if she saw what happened to Carrie Prejean, and decided to quit before The Donald (or The Rupert, in this case) fired her for not doing her job. I mean, for speaking the truth.

Re: Before I Let Go

Marcos El Malo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:21:34 -0000

One way that a law degree might help qualify a person for political office is that one can assume they have an understanding of the structure of our government and our system of democracy. On the other hand, one can honestly wonder how much information Palin absorbed from basic high school civics.

Anyway, a law degree is a marker, not a requirement.

Re: Before I Let Go

Marcos El Malo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:11:44 -0000

Penii. Or sausage fest, for the frat crowd.

Great comment, btw.

Re: Before I Let Go

Marcos El Malo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:08:39 -0000

I think Andrew went too far with some of the Trig stuff, but I don't fault him for it. It's a side effect of him being obsessive about his work, which I see as a good thing on the whole. Until I see some real evidence, I'm just going to see accusations of misogyny as a smear.

Re: Before I Let Go

Marcos El Malo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:00:56 -0000

One of the underlying problems that lead to many of the factors you mention above is the ongoing inability or unwillingness of the MSM to do its frikkin' job. The decline of the MSM in the 1990s and 2000s will make for many interesting historical studies someday. It's also telling that as the MSM declined in quality, blogs exploded as a source of news, analysis, and criticism.

Part of the story of the decline of the press will undoubtably cover the way the Bush White House attempted (successfully) to control and manipulate the media. This was always very troubling to me because it showed that, beyond the normal adversarial relationship between the WH and the press, there was a profound DISRESPECT for it as a democratic institution. This is one of the long term doubts I've had about the GOP that led me to quit it earlier this year.

I want to comment on all your points, but I'll do just c. The weird party loyalty you saw was religious fervor, both literal and figurative. I have no other way to explain it. I lost a few friendships for questioning Bush with people I had one thought of as intelligent. They were like zombies.

For some, it was deeply spiritual. The wife of one ex-friend was convinced that Bush was "The One", and she wasn't alone in voicing that claim. (How ironic that many of the same people are sarcastically referring to Obama as "The One" today.) The funny thing is that she wasn't overly religious in 1999, but she experienced an "awakening" sometime between then and 2003.

Re: Before I Let Go

EP — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:30:35 -0000

I think the best counter to the argument that Andrew is a misogynist is his recent series highlighting the complex and moving stories of women who had late-term abortions--stories that the MSM would never touch, and reintroducing the human element of the decision these women and their partners chose to make. This bearing in mind that he takes every opportunity to discuss his 'pro-life' position. He has blindspots (I think, perhaps because of the way/where he grew up, he doesn't 'get' race in the Americas, particularly in terms of Latina/o issues) but I don't think his reporting on Palin's pregnancy is motivated by anything more than rage over the fact that Palin can never get her story straight, refuses to release pertinent records (not only medical, but administrative/governmental), and the MSM is too craven to call her on it.

Re: Before I Let Go

margarita — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:43:38 -0000

Blight's opinion notwithstanding, I'm not sure how Lincoln gave the U.S. Andrew Johnson. Nominees did not pick their running mates then like they do now. Johnson wasn't even in the same political party as Lincoln. They ran on a "National Union" ticket specifically for that reason. Which also underscores the obvious fact that there was a civil war going on. That is an extenuating circumstance not available to John McCain.

If McCain had picked Joe Lieberman in the interest of national unity, he would have come out looking a lot better. Lincolnesque even. The party preferred Palin, and McCain went along. To his discredit.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:24:27 -0000

Yep. It shows that William Safire should have been VP.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:22:24 -0000

In fairness, the bulk of norbizness' post is about how GWB was unqualified as a candidate in 2000 to a similar degree as Palin. So it's false to claim that choosing Palin as VP was some sort of historically anomalous choice that justifies Sullivan's mania.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:18:14 -0000

The only meaningful difference between Agnew and Palin is the law degree. (I don't mean to denigrate a WWII bronze star, but they were sadly very common after that Great War.) As for the differences between Romney and Palin, it's a few years as governor and a law degree.

She may be unqualified, but she's no "clear outlier."

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:13:38 -0000

Please.

"At least George Bush didn't have one foot in the grave like McCain."

What's your basis for this? McCain keeps a schedule that would make a person in their 30s collapse. His mother is in her 90s. The guy is healthy as a horse. Plus, GHWB was 64 when he was elected president. Only a few years younger than McCain was last year. Plus, GHWB came down with Graves Disease during his presidency. Nice try.

"I'd have to say that Bush was also running at a time that was arguably more peaceful and generally chill than right now- we definitely weren't in the middle of two wars during the campaign of 1988."

Er, does the Cold War sound familiar? That was a bit more existential than our current two wars. For that matter, GHWB kept Quayle on the ticket in 1992 even though the country had just been through the Gulf War.

At the very least, the picks of Quayle and Palin are more than comparable. Sullivan's claim that the Palin pick is some sort of historical outlier is not based in truth.

Re: Before I Let Go

wendy davis — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:39:38 -0000

I think you all may be missing one important quality of Palin's that the 71% of republicans identify with: her Christianism. Her "values," her anti-government rants, her anti-abortion, forced motherhood for all, Christian-zionism, and yes, her racism; her "victimization by the Librul Media"--all have roots in her Christianist background and beliefs.

She and others of her ilk are true believers; she is their Joan of Arc, ready to throw herself up on the Cross for the hastening of her brethren to be Raptured. Palin has been assured by her excorcist Preacher that she "has been chosen" to lead the movement. Brrrrr.

We can laugh at the irony of it all, but I assure you, she and the Mike Huckabees and many others are engaged in, what to them, is Serious Business.

Re: Before I Let Go

gem s — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:37:31 -0000

I'm absolutely not a fan of Dan Quayle, but how was his choosing more irresponsible than that of Palin? At least George Bush didn't have one foot in the grave like McCain. I'd have to say that Bush was also running at a time that was arguably more peaceful and generally chill than right now- we definitely weren't in the middle of two wars during the campaign of 1988.

Re: Before I Let Go

gem s — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:25:40 -0000

That's not the point I was making- that Palin is a clear outlier in terms of education and experience, even when compared with supposedly not-so-qualified people. I never said that a law degree means anyone is qualified to be President, only that all the examples above had more educational and political experience than Sarah Palin.

Re: Before I Let Go

Sam L — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:08:05 -0000

I've been thinking about this in the context of the Civil War recently. I was listening to David Bright's podcast lectures, and his discussion of Lincoln choosing Andrew Johnson as V-P in 1864. Bright makes the point that for all the genius and moral leadership Lincoln provides, let's remember that Lincoln gave the U.S. its worst ever president, and that that ain't something you can let go too easily.

Now, McCain is most certainly not Lincoln, but this whole discussion of how the choice of Palin is catastrophic to McCain's legacy should make us think, no?

As a related aside, Johnson was just abysmal. I particularly like how he was so drunk on Inauguration that he had to be put into a side room away from the goings-on.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:59:22 -0000

Did the fact that he had all that experience really give you comfort that he could be president if a crisis occurred?

That's the point. The nearly uniform consensus, from the start, was and is that Quayle was an irresponsible choice for VP. As much, if not more, than Palin.

So the Palin choice is really not that historically anomalous. Republicans have a knack for picking crappy veeps.

Although it can be credibly argued that Biden, for all of his years of experience, has been a massive liability on the campaign trail and in office. Let's put it this way, when the consensus is that your veep should not be allowed to speak in public on weighty matters, it was not a responsible choice for veep.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:54:03 -0000

Both.

Re: Before I Let Go

mrein — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:53:34 -0000

You give a law degree a lot more credit than I do, that's for sure.

I went to law school and I feel no more prepared to be president than I did beforehand.

Watching Schoolhouse Rock is better preparation.

Re: Before I Let Go

wiredog — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:28:32 -0000

Quayle had vastly more experience than Palin. 2 terms in the House, A term in the Senate, re-elected to that seat 2 years before he became Vice President.

Re: Before I Let Go

Juba — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:21:23 -0000

Nittering Nabobs of Negativism was a pretty smart turn of phrase no?

Re: Before I Let Go

gem s — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:49:25 -0000

I don't think Palin really even comes close to having the experience of any of the people you mentioned, no matter how dim some of them might have appeared in public. Dan Quayle had a law degree and was elected twice each to the House and Senate before being chosen. True, Agnew had only been governor two years when he was chosen to run as VP, but he also had a law degree and had won a bronze star in WWII. Romney graduated Cum Laude from Harvard Law School. W is the closest, but even he served two terms as governor of a much bigger (population wise) state than Palin did. I'm just not seeing how someone with a bachelor's degree in journalism and 1.5 years as governor is on the same level as the people you mention.

Re: Before I Let Go

margarita — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:45:04 -0000

To be fair, Palin was a literal beauty queen, not just a metaphorical one. And Sullivan elsewhere made the observation that, in quitting the governorship, she referred to giving up her "title" rather than her office. I think its a valid epithet in this instance.