She makes Sarah Palin Look "ready".

[joelunchbox 0]

She is incredibly boring to watch, she has no presence on a screen, her comments aren't exactly intelligent or thought provoking, and she certainly wasn't in front of Sarah Palin when looks were being given out. I'm no fan of Sarah, but I absolutely think she runs rings around Ms K. Regarding her use of the phrase "you know", it is highly irritating and if Sarah Palin had to endure a large number of people attempting to dumb her down by making fun of the way she spoke or the things she said, then Caz better have a thick skin !

No presence? So now we want a rock star????

Her worst error.....not planning on something like this happening. GEEZZZ She had all of last year to get rolling.

On the other hand....if she is honest and dedicated to her constituancy, then I would vote for her.

[NickD 203]

She is incredibly boring to watch, she has no presence on a screen, her comments aren't exactly intelligent or thought provoking, and she certainly wasn't in front of Sarah Palin when looks were being given out. I'm no fan of Sarah, but I absolutely think she runs rings around Ms K. Regarding her use of the phrase "you know", it is highly irritating and if Sarah Palin had to endure a large number of people attempting to dumb her down by making fun of the way she spoke or the things she said, then Caz better have a thick skin !

No presence? So now we want a rock star????

Her worst error.....not planning on something like this happening. GEEZZZ She had all of last year to get rolling.

On the other hand....if she is honest and dedicated to her constituancy, then I would vote for her.

One of my daughters picked up that habit, you know, whenever she said that, normally at the end of a sentence, would just reply, if I know, why are you telling me that? I later learned she picked up that habit from one of her teachers, hearing that a zillion times per day, it's just a bad habit, you know.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

She is incredibly boring to watch, she has no presence on a screen, her comments aren't exactly intelligent or thought provoking, and she certainly wasn't in front of Sarah Palin when looks were being given out. I'm no fan of Sarah, but I absolutely think she runs rings around Ms K. Regarding her use of the phrase "you know", it is highly irritating and if Sarah Palin had to endure a large number of people attempting to dumb her down by making fun of the way she spoke or the things she said, then Caz better have a thick skin !0

To be fair though - Palin wasn't criticised because she was boring or lacked presence, but because she said weird things about being able to see Russia from her house - and when given a subsequent opportunity to clarify the comments - compounded the weirdness by suggesting that Russia's proximity to Alaska was a plus when it came to foreign policy credentials.

She also had irritating speech mannerisms ("you-betcha"), but I suspect that those wouldn't have been half as prominent were it not for the other stuff.

[mox 298]

I absolutely don't think Kennedy should be appointed for the sole reason that she has completely avoided any kind of public life since forever. She is a very intelligent woman, she holds a lot of the same values I hold, and she is extremely well read. If she had shown any interest in public life previous to being appointed, I could get behind her completely. I could even vote for her in an election. But not this way.

Having said that, comparisons to Sarah Palin are like comparing apples and Large Hadron Supercolliders. Sarah Palin has absolutely zero intellectual curiosity. She learned about the surge on TV, she couldn't name a single newspaper or magazine that she reads regularly, her understanding of government is grade school level at best, and she quite frankly lies like a rug. (and please, let's not do the "gotcha journalism" defense. John Kerry and John McCain both were victims of "gotcha journalism," and they at least were able to give sane replies.)

I don't believe Kennedy or Palin are fit to hold office, but it's for very VERY different reasons. Regardless of what you think of her politics, Kennedy will be ready someday. If they know what's good for them, the GOP will stick a fork in Palin, because she's done.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I absolutely don't think Kennedy should be appointed for the sole reason that she has completely avoided any kind of public life since forever. She is a very intelligent woman, she holds a lot of the same values I hold, and she is extremely well read. If she had shown any interest in public life previous to being appointed, I could get behind her completely. I could even vote for her in an election. But not this way.

Having said that, comparisons to Sarah Palin are like comparing apples and Large Hadron Supercolliders. Sarah Palin has absolutely zero intellectual curiosity. She learned about the surge on TV, she couldn't name a single newspaper or magazine that she reads regularly, her understanding of government is grade school level at best, and she quite frankly lies like a rug. (and please, let's not do the "gotcha journalism" defense. John Kerry and John McCain both were victims of "gotcha journalism," and they at least were able to give sane replies.)

I don't believe Kennedy or Palin are fit to hold office, but it's for very VERY different reasons. Regardless of what you think of her politics, Kennedy will be ready someday. If they know what's good for them, the GOP will stick a fork in Palin, because she's done.

Thanks mox for saying what I was thinking . Now please send Gov. Palin an Encyclopedia - with pictures of course

[Danno 1,228]

In that respect Sarah Palin was lampooned not because she had irritating mannerisms (and she did of course), but because she flunked the interview with Catie Couric by being demonstrably unable to answer the questions she was asked.

Don't know anything about the prospective candidates - so I can't really comment.

Speaking of.... did anyone notice if this had the "question session", such as the one Sarah flunked?

Or was it all ust all personal (easy) chat about her?

I guess we would have to find the "long version", but at the moment I finally got a little work so I will have to check for that later.....

However I will bet there were not little questions such as; name the differing points of the Bush doctrine (or whatever Palin was asked).

By the way.... who was it, not very long ago in a thread about Kennedy who made the case that

she comes from a political family,.... this and her expensive collage was reason why she is suited where Palins run of the mill collage, left her behind the curve.

* I have nothing against Kennedy being elected, but when a person is selected, it's a different ball game.

Kinda like when Bush offered up that one lady as Supreme Court nominee.

[mox 298]

Speaking of.... did anyone notice if this had the "question session", such as the one Sarah flunked?

Or was it all ust all personal (easy) chat about her?

I guess we would have to find the "long version", but at the moment I finally got a little work so I will have to check for that later.....

However I will bet there were not little questions such as; name the differing points of the Bush doctrine (or whatever Palin was asked).

I haven't been able to find the full thing either. But anyone that knows anything about her (I've read her books, "Profiles in Courage" and "In Our Defense") knows that she's an extraordinarily intelligent and well-read woman. As I said, you simply cannot compare her to Palin. These are two very different types of people.

By the way.... who was it, not very long ago in a thread about Kennedy who made the case that

she comes from a political family,.... this and her expensive collage was reason why she is suited where Palins run of the mill collage, left her behind the curve.

I don't know, but saying someone is better suited to a job because they went to a more expensive university is plain ignorant.

* I have nothing against Kennedy being elected, but when a person is selected, it's a different ball game.

Kinda like when Bush offered up that one lady as Supreme Court nominee.

Comparing the Harriet Meyers nomination to Caroline Kennedy's appointment is a much better comparison, I agree. Both very capable and intelligent people in their fields, and yet both are completely unqualified for the position.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Saying someone who went to a more prestegious university versus a run of the mill one does say something as to their qualifications. Two candidates for a staff accounting position. One matriculated from Harvard and one from Southern Idaho Tech. Who do you think will be more qualified? Now, this is all based on the Harvard grad not receiving entry like Bush and Kerry got into Yale based on the clout of their fathers.

I have made the case that Kennedy has her family name and her celebrity status. Those aren't a skill, but it is a unique quality. She has the ability to get people's attention and make people listen..... just because of who she is and her family's connections. Now whether she is able to convert that into something tangible for her constituents remains to be seen.

[mox 298]

Saying someone who went to a more prestegious university versus a run of the mill one does say something as to their qualifications. Two candidates for a staff accounting position. One matriculated from Harvard and one from Southern Idaho Tech. Who do you think will be more qualified? Now, this is all based on the Harvard grad not receiving entry like Bush and Kerry got into Yale based on the clout of their fathers.

Not to drag this too far off-topic, but there's actually growing evidence that the difference in quality of education at ivy league schools versus less prestigious universities isn't as different as you'd think. If I were hiring somebody fresh out of university, I'd put more emphasis on the interview and less on where they went to school. I'd also want to know what courses they took, what their GPA was, and what non-curriculum activities they were involved in that might make them more or less of a fit.

And as you pointed out, there are a lot of silver spoons who get in because of who they know or who their parents are.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Saying someone who went to a more prestegious university versus a run of the mill one does say something as to their qualifications. Two candidates for a staff accounting position. One matriculated from Harvard and one from Southern Idaho Tech. Who do you think will be more qualified? Now, this is all based on the Harvard grad not receiving entry like Bush and Kerry got into Yale based on the clout of their fathers.

Not to drag this too far off-topic, but there's actually growing evidence that the difference in quality of education at ivy league schools versus less prestigious universities isn't as different as you'd think. If I were hiring somebody fresh out of university, I'd put more emphasis on the interview and less on where they went to school. I'd also want to know what courses they took, what their GPA was, and what non-curriculum activities they were involved in that might make them more or less of a fit.

And as you pointed out, there are a lot of silver spoons who get in because of who they know or who their parents are.

#######. They look at that???????

[mox 298]

#######. They look at that???????

The good ones do. If you're applying for a journalism position, for example, and all you did was take journalism classes without being associated with the school newspaper or some other journalism activity, you're going to be at a distinct disadvantage.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In that respect Sarah Palin was lampooned not because she had irritating mannerisms (and she did of course), but because she flunked the interview with Catie Couric by being demonstrably unable to answer the questions she was asked.

Don't know anything about the prospective candidates - so I can't really comment.

Speaking of.... did anyone notice if this had the "question session", such as the one Sarah flunked?

Or was it all ust all personal (easy) chat about her?

I guess we would have to find the "long version", but at the moment I finally got a little work so I will have to check for that later.....

However I will bet there were not little questions such as; name the differing points of the Bush doctrine (or whatever Palin was asked).

By the way.... who was it, not very long ago in a thread about Kennedy who made the case that

she comes from a political family,.... this and her expensive collage was reason why she is suited where Palins run of the mill collage, left her behind the curve.

* I have nothing against Kennedy being elected, but when a person is selected, it's a different ball game.

Kinda like when Bush offered up that one lady as Supreme Court nominee.

Before you wheel out the old liberal media conspiracy chestnut it really goes without saying that a prospective vice president is more of a high profile media target than a prospective senator for the state of new York...

Don't know who made that comment about kennedys background - I'm pretty sure it wasn't me. Indeed if it even needs to be ppinted out I don't believe in hereditary political appointments or that a person has a right to an appointment simply because of the accomplishments of their ancestors.

As it stands there doesn't seem to be a yardstick for determining who should be given a senate appointment. I actually think that such things should always be awarded by election in these cases, and not by appointment at all.

However, as it is about appointment ms. Kennedy has the same right to apply for the job that you or I do. The difference of course is that its about who you know and how much wheel grease money you have and not about whether you are qualified.

[Niels Bohr 72]

I would hire a Harvard or MIT grad over a normal grad from a four year institution.

However, he or she must show their GPA and transcript. I did look over the MIT OPENCOURSEWARE homepage and checked out many of their engineering courses. I couldn't do some of those problems in my junior year. For example, their course in Signals and Systems. I wouldn't be able to finish their first exam in less than 50 mins. (Signals and Systems aka Signal Processing is a course offered in the Junior Year in most college).

Point being, it's rare for my company to get an MIT grad since the grad are more research oriented.

Edited December 31, 2008 by Niels Bohr

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

politics SUCK, there I said it. If you really believe that some guy will come and fix our problems as if he/she was the "messiah" or God you are totally screwed from up there, the people are the main culprits for everything that's going on, the people are the ones that overused and used the credit negligently.

If we want to blame somebody for not fixing or creating this mess let's start by ourselves first instead of looking for the "best" candidate to serve us

Edited December 31, 2008 by TävôLuDô

[Chica Yeyé 41]

#######. They look at that???????

The good ones do. If you're applying for a journalism position, for example, and all you did was take journalism classes without being associated with the school newspaper or some other journalism activity, you're going to be at a distinct disadvantage.

Dude, you missed the pervy point