Go!

Sarah Palin is in her second year of office as Governor of Alaska. Before that, she was mayor of the small town of Wasilla for eight years, and a member of Wasilla’s city council for four years.

Barack Obama is in his fourth year as US Senator from Illinois. Before that, he was a member of the Illinois State Senate for eight years, and a community organizer for five years.

Weighing the two resumes is tricky, as at each stage you could make a good argument for either’s experience being more valuable. “Community organizer” could mean any number of things, but without knowing the details of Obama’s career as an organizer, I’m inclined to suspect it’s roughly equivilent to serving in the city council of a small town. Either is a solid start to a political career and an excellent way for a non-politician to get involved in democracy, but neither by itself is a strong qualifier for high office.

A state senator in Illinois represents a lot more people than a small-town mayor, but the mayor has much more day-to-day responsibility, as she holds an executive position rather than being a back-bench member of a legislature. Likewise for Governor of Alaska vs. US Senator from Illinois — the Senator represents more people, but holds much less day-to-day responsibility.

It also should be noted that Obama has been a US Senator for two years longer than Palin has been Alaska’s Governor. How much to weigh the portion of that time Obama spent mostly absent from the Senate in order to run for higher office is a difficult question (n.b. Senators Clinton, McCain, and Biden have been similarly absent from the Senate during their campaigns this election cycle, so Obama’s absenteeism isn’t a departure from widespread practice).

Interestingly enough, Biden and McCain are both very experienced in very similar ways — long, influential tenures in the US Senate with significant focuses on foreign policy. All together, it seems both campaigns have similar total levels of experience on the ticket. The difference is that Republicans put the elder statesman at the top of the ticket and made the young, charismatic politician with identity politics appeal the running mate, while the Democrats did the opposite.

[Side note: I voted for Fred Thompson in the Republican primaries, which goes to show that experience is pretty far down my own list of priorities when chosing a presidential candidate]

John McCain has made his vice presidential pick: the Republican contender will tap first-term Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, is the first female governor of the state. She has been a longtime supporter of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who will accept the Republican nomination for president in Minneapolis/St. Paul.

The 44-year-old Palin brings working class roots and appeal to female voters, becoming only the second female vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket and a first for the GOP.

Such the move. Any time I heard someone mention Romney, I knew that person had no idea what he was talking about. Run two wealthy white men against the Rainbow Candidate? Sure death. In fact, when John Hawkins ran his poll of righty bloggers’ predictions on McCain’s choice, these were the numbers (zero-vote-getters excluded) –

Out of the following VP candidates rumored to be on McCain’s short list, which one DO YOU THINK HE WILL TAKE?

Kay Bailey Hutchinson (Senator, Texas): 1 (1.5%)
Eric Cantor (Congressman, Virginia): 1 (1.5%)
Rob Portman (Former Congressman, Ohio): 1 (1.5%)
Charlie Crist (Governor, Florida): 2 (3%)
Joe Lieberman (Senator, Connecticut): 2 (3%)
Tom Ridge (Former Governor, Pennsylvania): 2 (3%)
Sarah Palin (Governor, Alaska): 4 (6%)
Tim Pawlenty (Governor, Minnesota): 14 (22%)
Mitt Romney (Former Governor, Massachusetts): 37 (58%)

– who do you think was one of the four who predicted Palin? Your blogger friend Ron Coleman! I’m good like that — the brilliant prognosticating that I only trot out when it turns out I’m right!

As John explains in another post:

[W]hy would McCain choose Palin? Well, she does have some real strengths.

* The conservative base would love her.
* She would strongly appeal to Hillary voters.
* She would help McCain go head-to-head with Obama on the “change” meme.
* She is probably the best of the women McCain could pick if the rumors about him and Kay Bailey Hutchinson not getting along are true.

What were John’s reservations?

I really don’t think someone with only 2 years of relevant experience (She was elected governor of Alaska in 2006) should be the Vice-President. I also think her selection would undercut McCain’s “not ready to lead” attacks on Obama . . .

He’s in error here, because there are no qualifications or experience required for a job whose main task is attending funerals. And unlike Obama, she is number two on the ticket, not number one. That’s a huge difference. Meanwhile, all the bullet points are huge political positives.

Hurray for America!

Cross-posted on Likelihood of Success.

I worry about the Governor’s experience, which is even weaker than Senator Obama’s, but she’s certainly an exciting choice.

Back in June, the Governor did make this statement, which speaks well of her:

I’m starting to think we should have let Russia die after the Cold War.  Instead of investing billions in aid.  Did we win the first Cold War only to have to deal with a Second Cold War 20 years later?

Is the United States the fox to Russia’s scorpion?

Jay, a reader, recently wrote me a letter about an article in Oprah magazine on the number of female teachers caught having sex with their students, such as Debra Lafave (pictured). The article is “Why Did the Teacher Have Sex With Her Student?”

Jay writes:

My wife and I both had problems with the article, but it was interesting that we had two different problems. Here are some of the offending sentences:

“Most of these women, experts say, don’t go into teaching with plans to seduce a child, the way a classic pedophile does; what leads to their downfall is emotional immaturity.”

“These teachers have a poor concept of boundaries, so they don’t recognize when they’ve crossed the line into inappropriate behavior.”

“In a lot of these cases, the woman thinks she has fallen in love.”

“But most of these women come from conflict-ridden families where they didn’t learn healthy social skills. Many learned to get their emotional needs—for love, attention, approval—met through sexual behavior.”

None of the experts condone the teachers’ actions, but they do have sympathy. “I don’t think she’s a sexual predator,” Schleicher says of Rogers. “I see her as a really hurting adult who needs help. I just hope she can get it.”

My wife sees this as reasons why we should have sympathy for the female teachers, and that what they are doing isn’t really bad, just misguided.

To me, the article seems to be saying that the female teachers are somehow misguided poor souls who are just looking for love, and their fantasy world leads them to find love in the wrong places sometimes. However, the first quote makes it sound as if women don’t plan to seduce children, but men are “classic pedophiles” who want sex with children, and they’ve decided that becoming a teacher is a great way to get access. It’s rather insulting to all the male teachers out there.

Of the male teachers who do have sex with students, couldn’t it be possible that they think they’re in love also? Sex with students is bad, but why should it be the case that for women it’s a case of poor boundaries and for men it’s hardcore brutal predation of the most evil sort?

Now that I think of it, it’s also insulting to women. Isn’t the article really saying that women just have no self control or self awareness? She can’t help herself. She got caught up in the fantasy. She’s just emotionally immature.

The article mentions one woman who is serving an eight year sentence. Is that comparable to the sentences men get? Is there even a way to estimate the average sentence for teachers who have sex with students?

About that woman, the magazine writes:

An impending divorce helped push 27-year-old Pamela Rogers into getting intimate with her 13-year-old student in 2004, says Joan Schleicher, a Nashville forensic psychologist who testified in court on her behalf. “She was demoralized and feeling empty inside, and he was the one to whom she could turn her attention.” As the relationship progressed, Rogers (a former homecoming queen now serving an eight-year sentence) began, as many of these women do, to live in a world of “magical thinking,” Schleicher says. “And she responded to that instead of the rules of society”…

“I don’t think she’s a sexual predator,” Schleicher says of Rogers. “I see her as a really hurting adult who needs help. I just hope she can get it.”

I’ve previously stated that I think that some of the current statutory rape laws are draconian. I think it’s ludicrous that a 19-year-old boy can go to prison for having sex with a 16-year-old girl. However, a 27-year-old with a 13-year-old…well, that’s different.

Glenn Sacks, www.GlennSacks.com

[Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]