Why I'm Voting for Obama/Biden & Not for McCain/Palin (or WIVOB&NMcCP): First in an occasional series

Okay, people, you watched the VP debate, right?  How anyone can think that Palin won (and there are people who think that and I'm not counting other Republican politicians, Faux News, etc.), I have no idea.  Yes, Palin did better than expected last night, but the expectations for her were incredibly low.  Her main goal was to make less of a very public fool of herself than she has in the recent past.

For a president or vice-president, I want someone who is intelligent in general and knowledgeable in particular about the huge amount of issues presidents or VPs need to know (e.g., foreign policy, domestic policy, history, the Constitution, the legislature, finance, economics, etc.).

Palin is probably a nice person (although, if she's anything in person as she is on TV, I probably wouldn't care much for her) with good intentions, but she is totally unqualified to be aVP or president.  Click here to watch an excerpt from Katie Couric's interviews with Biden and Palin.  She asks them both about Roe v. Wade and Supreme Court decisions.  (There's an ad first, then Biden, then Palin.)  Here's the transcript:

*****

Katie Couric: Why do you think Roe v. Wade was a good decision?

Joe Biden: Because it's as close to a consensus that can exist in a society as heterogeneous as ours. What does it say? It says in the first three months that decision should be left to the woman. And the second three months, where Roe v. Wade says, well then the state, the government has a role, along with the women's health, they have a right to have some impact on that. And the third three months they say the weight of the government's input is on the fetus being carried.

And so that's sort of reflected as close as anybody is ever going to get in this heterogeneous, this multicultural society of religious people as to some sort of, not consensus, but as close it gets.

I think the liberty clause of the 14th Amendment … offers a right to privacy. Now that's one of the big debates that I have with my conservative scholar friends, that they say, you know, unless a right is enumerated - unless it's actually, unless [it] uses the word "privacy" in the Constitution - then no such "constitutional right" exists. Well, I think people have an inherent right.

Couric: Are there Supreme Court decisions you disagree with?

Biden: You know, I'm the guy who wrote the Violence Against Women Act. And I said that every woman in America, if they are beaten and abused by a man, should be able to take that person to court - meaning you should be able to go to federal court and sue in federal court the man who abused you if you can prove that abuse. But they said, "No, that a woman, there's no federal jurisdiction." And I held, they acknowledged, I held about 1,000 hours of hearings proving that there's an effect in interstate commerce.
Women who are abused and beaten and beaten are women who are not able to be in the work force. And the Supreme Court said, "Well, there is an impact on commerce, but this is federalizing a private crime and we're not going to allow it." I think the Supreme Court was wrong about that decision.

Couric Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.

Couric: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?

Palin: Well, let's see. There's, of course in the great history of America there have been rulings, that's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but …

Couric: Can you think of any?

Palin: Well, I could think of … any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

*****

Now, Biden's answer wasn't a dazzling answer, but it was a perfectly acceptable answer in that it answered the question in a cohesive, thoughtful, meaningful way.  Longtime readers will recall that I agree with the Obama/Biden position on Roe v. Wade and abortion in general.  So that's one reason why they have my vote.

Palin's answer (like much of her debate performance) was a non-answer.  She believes there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution, which contributed to the Roe v. Wade decision, but she can't accept Roe v. Wade and she doesn't explain why her acceptance of the right to privacy and her stance on Roe v. Wade are not contradictory.  She does say it's a state issue, but (Carol, correct me if I'm wrong on this stuff) if the Constitution guarantees a right to privacy then the states cannot deny that right to privacy.  They can try, but all it takes is one unsuccessful state version of Roe v. Wade to get challenged and overturned at the Supreme Court level for Roe v. Wade to stand in that state and then it's at least very hard for another state to differ.

Bonus deductions for Palin: She cannot think of a single other Supreme Court decision with which she disagrees. I wager it's bc she's unfamiliar with Supreme Court decisions other than Roe v. Wade.

Instant 147 demerits for winking.  Enough with the winking!  One wink is one wink too many.  I demand an All Winks Left Behind bill!  (And let's hope it's more successful than NCLB.)  You are debating the Democratic vice presidential candidate.  You are not (at least you shouldn't be) flirting with the cameraman nor are you opening a new Hunters' Emporium, for goodness' sake.

Shorter WIVOB&NMcCP: I want a vp (and potential president) who:

• can speak in a coherent, cohesive, informative and meaningful manner;
• can answer a serious question;
• is knowledgeable about the many areas that fall under the VP and president's purview; and

• doesn't wink unless absolutely necessary (i.e., never).

Well, butter my buns and call me a biscuit, but there's an applicable cheezburger cat (actually, there are a few):

Comments

[Gattina]

She would be a cathastrophy in foreign politics ! I am sure her geographic knowledges are limited to the USA and she probably thinks that Shakespeare is the actual prime minister of the UK. She is sooo old fashioned in her religious believes and in general nobody can understand this woman here. To me she looks like one coming out of the last century !

[S.Le.]

I do not like ANYTHING about Sarah Palin! She sort of freaks me out! It's for sure, animal lovers will NOT vote for her. Have you seen the photos of her kneeling over her kills and sitting on the huge bearskin rug draped over her couch? Ugh! Creepy. Gross. She's a twit. (or something with a similar spelling)