Conservatives Say It Should Be Palin vs. Ferraro, Not Obama-Biden
Conservatives watching as the McCain campaign tries to compare the experience of vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin to Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the Democratic ticket, think the focus is wrong. Their view: The McCain campaign should be comparing the first woman GOP veep pick to former Rep. Geraldine Ferraro, the first Democratic VP nominee. Below is one of the E-mail memos to conservatives and the media, this one dispatched by leading public relations exec Keith Appell of CRC Public Relations:
From: Keith Appell
Subject: A Few Words About Palin CoverageAs Gov. Palin prepares for her convention speech tonight the media, unfortunately aided by some well-meaning McCain supporters, has not really touched on — much less fully explored — the true "experience" comparison that Palin's nomination raises. Stacking her up alongside Obama is the wrong comparison, she really should be compared to Geraldine Ferraro who the Democrats nominated to be one heartbeat away from the presidency in 1984.
How would the experience questions that Dems are raising about Palin apply to Ferraro, and how do the two women contrast? When she was nominated to be vice president Ferraro was a three term (six year) Member of the House of Representatives from Queens, New York. She was not a member of the Democratic House leadership, she was one vote out of 435 in the House, and — arguably — her highest priority wasn't national security or even the economy. It was most likely constituent service, making sure her constituents got their Social Security checks and so forth.
By contrast, Palin governs the largest state in the union and while Alaska's population is much less than other states its size it is still a massive state to manage effectively; with thousands of miles of coastline, mountain ranges, the energy industry — all and more that must be managed by many state agencies and their employees. All of whom must be overseen by Palin and her administration. Democrats nominated Ferraro to be one heartbeat away, and I'm sure no Democrat would ever try to convince people that she was NOT qualified or experienced enough to be vice president. Or would they?
Curiously, Ferraro has not been very visible or quoted during this last week except for a few phone interviews on Fox News. At least that's all I've seen. Given that she and Palin are the only women in history to be/have been in this position would it not be newsworthy to find out what she thinks and how she is reacting to both the Palin pick and its fallout?
After I asked if Whispers could post his memo, Appell added this:
Feel free to do so. It's just a little mind-boggling how such an obvious contrast, really an obvious story, is not being covered yet. It's not like she's dead and you can't talk to her, and it's not like it happened in 1884. There was television and videotape in 1984 and plenty of video from that campaign.
Tags: Barack Obama | Joseph R. Biden, Jr. | John McCain | Republican National Convention | Sarah Palin
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (22) | Print
Reader Comments
I am amazed just how hypocritical the Democrats are. Do you think Bill Clinton, governor of a small state had a great deal, if any, foreign relations experience before he was elected President? I don't think so. As stated in the previous article, Geraldine Ferraro did not have experience in foreign relations either. As a woman myself, I am sickened by the petty and bitchy comments that have come from the mouths of Democratic women this week about Sarah Palin. You women are a disgrace!
Comparing Palin Ferraro
Don't miss the focus of the comparison! It isn't necessarily about either person. It IS about how the media protrays them. When Geraldine ran in 84 the press praised her and it was a huge step for women around the country! Palin won't get the kind of praise Ferraro did simply because she is in the wrong party! Frankly I am ashamed of the women supporting dems negative reaction, oh wait, no I'm not!
Largest state in the union?!?!
As the resident of a state with an economy that - if ranked as an independent state - would rank in the global top ten and a population fifty times greater than that of Alaska, I take serious issue with the suggestion that Alaska is "the largest state in the union". It is certainly the most spacious (and the most sparse), but calling it the "largest state" is quite a stretch.
It also bears noting -- although I never hear this from the people who suggest that governing the state with the greatest area constitutes some sort of indication of experience -- that about 65% of Alaskan lands are federally controlled. The 35% of the state that is actually administered by the State of Alaska is still a large swath of territory (about 600,000 square km), but less than the area of Texas.
That said, it remains silly to use territorial size as a means of assessing the "largest state". Can you imagine describing cities in these terms? According to the same logic, Scranton is a larger city than Taipei, Little Rock is a larger city than Calcutta, and Chattanooga is a larger city than Beijing.
advertisement
