AsburySkinsFan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Well I guess it is becoming more and more obvious why the McCain campaign is only letting the starry eyed light weight local news reporters have access to Sarah. The first time she was asked about whether she'd want to be VP, she made a flippant answer about the fact that someone would have to tell her "exactly what it is that a VP does every day." Well it would seem that she still needs someone to tell her what the VP does. "They [VP] are in charge of the United States Senate...." Uh....no Sarah the VP is not "in charge of the United States Senate...not even close.:doh: Maybe she should have just told little Brandon to use Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Senate#United_States "The Vice President of the United States is designated by the Constitution as the President of the Senate. The Vice President holds a tie breaking vote in the Senate and does not usually preside over the Senate. Since its conception, the role of casting a tie-breaking vote in the Senate has been exercised 242 times. The Vice President of the United States with the most tie breaking votes is John Adams with 29. If there is no sitting Vice President then the President pro tempore of the United States Senate or "President pro tem" serves as President of the Senate. The President pro tem also serves in this role in the Vice President's absence, or if the Vice President assumes the office of President of the United States. In practice, freshman senators are traditionally assigned the role of presiding over the Senate in order to learn Senate procedure." Or maybe she could have just used a real encyclopedia to find out what she's going to do if for some horrific reason McCain wins. "officer next in rank to the president of the United States, who ascends to the presidency on the event of the president’s death, disability, resignation, or removal. The vice president also serves as the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate, a role that is mostly ceremonial but that gives the vice president the tie-breaking vote when the Senate is deadlocked." I guess this is just yet another gaffe that the American people should over look. Because I know when I say "in charge" what I really mean is "largely ceremonial with the ability the cast a tiebreaking vote." But, yeah, she's qualified...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogNose Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 :shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 :shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th. :applause:Here! Here! I agree, let's put Tina Fey out of work by electing Obama!!!:applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gracelander Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 :shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th. I'm still holding out hope for a playboy spread. The women of politics issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted October 23, 2008 Author Share Posted October 23, 2008 I know many will pan this as Libral Media...and I know Olberman is the polar opposite of Hannity but, he lays out Palin's multiple erroneous explanations of the Vice Presidency. Put aside the attack the messenger for a moment and listen to the message, Sarah still has no clue what she would be doing in January if elected in Nov. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqBUbHsr070 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogNose Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I'm still holding out hope for a playboy spread. The women of politics issue. Well there's always the porn film coming out called "Nailin Paylin". Yes it's true.....:doh: . Google it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney? Lipstick. That joke still seems to be true. The VP is involved in policy changes? What the hell is she taking about? Everything she says indicates she wants to increase the role of the VP. Even when she tries to explain her way out of it she seems to give herself more powers. Also it's funny when she said that's something her daughter would ask her. You just asked the question a couple months back. She's asking the same level of questions as a 2nd grader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoles11 Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I wonder if she is too stupid to realize she is being used. She is the attack dog for McCain and will be tossed aside as soon as the election is over. She is the one saying all the idotic things at rallies, that McCain doesn't want to say because he still wants a legacy even after he loses this election. She is like the freak side show designed to fire up the ultra right wing base and maybe snag a few undecides that like the way she looks. She may still have a political future in Alaska but I hope like hell that the people of Alaska are smart enough to never elect that woman to the house or senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markmx Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 so much hate??? Yes, the woman is not qualified for the job and wont win any way but this is exactly why I hate politics this time of year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Wow . . . the Senate has been tied 242 times!?!? Jeez . . . that seems like a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 how much better of position would mccain be in if he didn't tote this hot mess around?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_pro_tempore_of_the_United_States_Senate The office of President pro tempore was established in 1789 by the Constitution of the United States. Originally, the President pro tempore was appointed on a daily or weekly basis when the Vice President of the United States was not present to preside over the Senate. Until the 1960s, it was common practice for the Vice President to preside over daily Senate sessions, so the President pro tempore rarely presided over the Senate unless the Vice Presidency became vacant. But as the chamber's presiding officer in the absence of the Vice President, the President pro tempore is authorized to perform certain duties, including ruling on points of order. So, is it really that far of a stretch from being "President of The Senate", to being "In charge of The Senate?" In reality, sure, but technically? (This is the kind of lawyer speak we all will have to get used to if Brother B.O. gets elected) Vice Presidents, if they choose, could sit in daily, and help steer the direction of Senate sessions. Maybe even speed them along, or shame the worthless ****s into actually working to get something meaningful done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution? I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 how much better of position would mccain be in if he didn't tote this hot mess around?? About ....-7 to -8 points The progressives that profess admiration for McCain would ultimately still prefer Obama and he would be w/o his base. Mock her all you want,ignore reality at your own peril:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaddukes Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution?I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go? No way! This is the smoking gun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution?I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go? The rightists will have a field day with the Biden & Obama mis-speaks in the future IMO. Better get use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I don't think this was a misspeak. Now, to be fair, Palin might have been trying to simplify her language to make the job of a VP understandable to a second grader, but she said what she meant. And yes, laughing at our leaders bloopers is almost always funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I don't think this was a misspeak. Now, to be fair, Palin might have been trying to simplify her language to make the job of a VP understandable to a second grader, but she said what she meant.And yes, laughing at our leaders bloopers is almost always funny. Its not a mis-speak, and its not funny. She's said this several times and she means it. If McCain wins the election I'll put big bucks that she will provoke a crisis by attempting to take control over the Senate. Republicans will cheer this because it would increase their political leverage over a Democratic congress. But during the last two administrations the executive branch has done much to free itself from meaningful checks and balances, I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Biden said he didnt even want the job, the VP doesnt do anything on Ellen Degenris' show. How is that better again. He quoted JFK in saying one went into the Navy and one became VP and I never heard from either. vs. In Charge of: (does not usually preside over the Senate.) I give this one to Sarah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Preside over the Senate, in charge of the Senate. What is the difference? :whoknows: There was a great scene in the John Adams mini series. Mr Adams was Washington's Vice President, and he is sitting in the Senate chamber, "presiding" while the Senate is debating whether or not to ratify Jay's Treaty He isn't paying attention, reading a pamphlet, and when the vote is tied, intervenes with some serious theater and votes in favor of the treaty Great scene, and a great way to understand what Mr. Adams thought of the Vice Presidencey (besides it being boring with nothing to do) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all. Then you must be concerned as well by Obama's reliance on Biden http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080827/NEWS/80827069 Biden said in a Saturday interview with Gannett News Service that he would bring “seasoning” and “perspective” to an Obama administration should he be elected in November. “The one thing I’m convinced of is that Barack Obama is actually looking for somebody to be a partner in the sense that, someone who, when the door’s closed, will give him his honest unvarnished opinion and who will support the judgment he makes,” Biden said. Biden’s experience and personality would make him hard to ignore in a No. 2 role, said Robert Guttman, director of the Center on Politics and Foreign Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. “He will most likely overshadow whoever becomes the new secretary of state because of his forceful personality,” Guttman said. “He will run foreign policy out of the (vice president’s) office and whoever becomes secretary of state will most likely answer to Biden and Biden answer to the president.” “Absolutely, positively, unequivocally, Shermanesquely, No. No. No,” he said. “I would not be anybody’s secretary of state in any circumstance I could think of and I absolutely can say with certainty I would not be anybody’s vice president.'' Biden:silly: OOPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Then you must be concerned as well by Obama's reliance on Bidenhttp://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080827/NEWS/80827069 Biden said in a Saturday interview with Gannett News Service that he would bring “seasoning” and “perspective” to an Obama administration should he be elected in November. “The one thing I’m convinced of is that Barack Obama is actually looking for somebody to be a partner in the sense that, someone who, when the door’s closed, will give him his honest unvarnished opinion and who will support the judgment he makes,” Biden said. Biden’s experience and personality would make him hard to ignore in a No. 2 role, said Robert Guttman, director of the Center on Politics and Foreign Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. “He will most likely overshadow whoever becomes the new secretary of state because of his forceful personality,” Guttman said. “He will run foreign policy out of the (vice president’s) office and whoever becomes secretary of state will most likely answer to Biden and Biden answer to the president.” “Absolutely, positively, unequivocally, Shermanesquely, No. No. No,” he said. “I would not be anybody’s secretary of state in any circumstance I could think of and I absolutely can say with certainty I would not be anybody’s vice president.'' Biden:silly: OOPS Can you explain the relevance of this to the subject of the relative powers of the executive vs the legislature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Can you explain the relevance of this to the subject of the relative powers of the executive vs the legislature? Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties? Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that off;) My post was in reply to your concern over the influence and power of the office of VP Quote: Originally Posted by JimboDaMan View Post I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties?Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that off;) My post was in reply to your concern over the influence and power of the office of VP Quote: Originally Posted by JimboDaMan View Post I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all. You do realize that the President, Vice President, and the Cabinet are all part of the executive branch, right? ("Dick" Cheney's preposterous claims notwithstanding.) The alloction of responsibility within the branch does nothing to increase its power or independence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Palin thinks the VP is in charge of the Senate? I mean, seriously, it's a position that has no power. It's like she has no idea how the Senate actually works. The power in the Senate lies with party leaders and individual senators. The VP would cast a tie vote, but that's it. Guess how many days Cheney presided over the Senate? I bet you could count them on one hand, or just a few fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.