This is scary. As I've said before, we all need to pray for four years of uninterrupted good health for President McCain.
Meh...most vice presidents have done very little, until recently. But is it an incorrect statement? Article 1 of US Constitution: "The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided." President: noun, 1: an official chosen to preside over a meeting or assembly 2: an appointed governor of a subordinate political unit 3: the chief officer of an organization (as a corporation or institution) usually entrusted with the direction and administration of its policies 4: the presiding officer of a governmental body 5 a: an elected official serving as both chief of state and chief political executive in a republic having a presidential government b: an elected official having the position of chief of state but usually only minimal political powers in a republic having a parliamentary government Besides, Don, it doesn't look like a President McCain but a President Obama.
Sorry Senator, the only part that's Constitutionally mandated is the one in bold. If you're looking at who REALLY presides over the Senate, it's the President Pro Tem. Sarah doesn't have a clue of what the VP's Constitutional duties are, and she's been on the ticket for several weeks now. When I was teaching, it used to take me all of one class period to make this distinction to HIGH SCHOOL SENIORS. This is [or should be] as embarrassing to Republicans as was Bush's belief that the state he was governor of had appointed Supreme Court judges rather than elected ones. Oh, and I'm still sticking with my forecast for a McCain victory.
Palin's handlers apparently spent all of their time making her look as attractive (physically) as possible - and apparently NO time giving her a crash course in her assumed job responsibilities.
That's true Don, those are the only mandated duties the constitution provides the VP. However, I'm not sure if the Constitutional framer's had only those functions in mind for the Vice President, as the role has evolved over time. A bit of history involving the Vice President: http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/his ... sident.htm It wouldn't be without precendent if Palin were to try to exercise more of an influential role in the Senate. It certainly would be controversial depending on how exactly she would try do this, especially since Vice Presidents (including Adams) didn't try to push it too far. I suppose by just showing up more often to the Senate floor would be controversial at this point, since Senate floor proceedings are usually not even fulfilled by the Pro tempore themselves, but by a junior Senator named by the Pro Tempore. http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/rule01.php
Keep in mind that in the early days of Constitutional USA, the VP was the guy who came in 2nd in the Presidential election; i.e., they weren't even of the same party.
Let's not go overboard, here. The idea that Palin would stretch the constitutional limits in her role in the Senate is ridiculous. Why? Because the hardest job of a supposed McCain administration would be to actually get something done. From everything we know about McCain, the last thing he's going to allow is alienation of the Democratic congress. The LAST thing the Dem leadership in congress would want would be to allow McCain to get anything done. So Palin's role would be to negotiate with 'middle road' democrats. And she wouldn't be able to do that if she tried to actually 'Preside' over the Senate.
In the last 200 years of the United States, the daily job of the VP has to breathe and do stuff that the president doesn't want to do. VP Palin has four years of funerals and photo ops with the NCAA Volleyball champions ahead of her. Only in the last eight years has a sitting vice president ever contributed so much to policy and decision-making. I believe that this has been an anomaly, not a trend. Palin will not be a ripple in the course of daily McCain administration activities and she certainly won't be using her vast legislative experience to caucus with House and Senate leaders. McCain himself has all the cachet he'll need for that role.
Actually, what happened in the last 200 years means diddly at this point. I'm not trying to pick a fight.. it's just that each recent VP has contributed according to his field of expertise. You cant convince me that GHWB had nothing to do but pick his nose while he was Reagan VP. He sat in on National Security issues. Quayle, OTOH, who knows for sure. Wasnt advising on Education, that's fer sher. Gore.. cant tell me he wasnt involved in tech and infrastructure. So... we've talked about Palin. Wonder where and what Biden will be doing. My guess.. WONT be advising on Foreign Policy. Not for long, anyway. In fact I believe he would be used to whip those same 'blue dog dems' into compliance with the 'Congressional Leadership'.
Sorry, spencer.... You make no argument. just state the 'facts'. where's your reasoning? The idea that you would cite a laughingstock like Chris Matthews on ANYTHING to do with campaign just destroyed your cred. Absolutely. That's MY facts! I want to make this perfectly CLEAR..; when's the last time you saw me cite Hannity, or Michael Savage. Or even Limbaugh? I can see YOU have a 'tingle up your leg' too
I agree Don. If there's any VP that will steer decision making, it'll be Biden. After all, isn't that why he was chosen? yes, pf screwed this up. Hit edit instead of quote.
Short answer: No Long answer: That's the reason they want you to think he was chosen. He was picked for exactly the same reason Palin was.
That was freakin' brutal and a little hard to watch. Her only saving argument was the one about Biden getting involved with trying to affect policy (BUT informally with his fellow Democrats who already know him as a very experienced legislator.) However, I don't for a second think that is what was meant by Palin. After seeing that video, it becomes completely obvious why PF resorted to the diversionary tactic of attacking your source, while completely disregarding the meat and potatoes of the issue. Palin = BIG, BIG MISTAKE
And the Palin bloodletting carries on: The most serious being back on the Neiman Marcus foof. McCain staffers 'leaking' that Palin went on a 'Hillbilly Spending Spree'. Well, there's concern about that. If that's true, then Palin was lying {not that any Dem ever would do that or lie about it.. NOSSIR!}. But if Palin was lying, then I'm extremely disappointed. And dont want her on a national ticket until she comes clean. And then, there's that Lefty theory that Palin banned books and fired that librarian when she wouldnt stand for it. Nothing there. Or that Trig is actually Bristol's kid. Or Chris {are my lips still brown?} Matthews saying last night that the reason there's no more Republican House members in the NE because Palin was on the Presidential ticket! Are you F2334G kidding me? Do you vote for your local guys based on who's running on the national ticket?!!!!! Are you Dems REALLY that stupid?!!! The main thing I find interesting is that Palin is being talked about at all. I think there's an element of real fear there. Political fear and beltway insider fear... not fear for the country, no matter how the lefties and beltway bandits couch it. Also interesting that alaskans -including state democrats- cant wait to get her back to help push through some Alaska-centric programs. What I want to see is what she does about Ted Stevens. Will she go along to get along? I hope not. Stevens is a true embarrasment.
I disagree; I think her outspoken divisiveness is not now, and will not ever be, what the country needs in its leadership. You want to know who's really an elitist (to use a word that got thrown around some in the runup to yesterday)? How about someone who thinks I'm not a "real American" because my views differ from hers?
Rumor this morning has Stevens being force to resign and Palin running in the special for his Senate seat. She's anticipated to be the favorite if she runs for it.
That's fair.... if you ignore McCain's chances BEFORE he picked Palin. Certainly the VP pick wouldnt have on exit polls {unless maybe it was Romney} otherwise. You cant get exit polled if you dont go vote. I really think you guys want to forget that, dont you? You can sidestep it all you want ... those google trend charts I put up show the effect. jmh... how is pointing out fact {though I would have made the point some other way than 'unrepentent terrorist'} 'outspoken divisiveness'? I dont see you complaining that you're called 'Selfish' if you dont want your taxes to go up. It's only divisive if it doesnt suit YOUR view. All well and good. You can have your 'view', that's what this country is about. But I find it interesting that no one here seems to want to consider exactly how, according to record, UNQUALIFIED Obama is for the presidency. Does that mean there's no expertise in the office now? No. Does that mean he wont make the right decision according to his lights? No. But you have to wonder what that agenda is... and the first evidence is Rahm Emmanuel. Oh, by the way.... I had ignored the obvious on the dirty laundry coming out on Palin. Former {and future} Romney campaign staff who went over to help McCain after the primaries?
