So Palin believes that the VP can control policy in the Senate and is basically a 'super-Senator.' This is an expansion of even Cheney's views of the VP role. What are your thoughts about the role of the VP in our government?

10/22/2008 9:22:59 AM

I think Palin's an idiot.

But seriously, I think the VP should be a proxy between the Senate and the President on a day-to-day basis and a state figurehead internationally on around a 50-50 ratio. They should spend most of their time articulating the policies that the President would like to see put in place.

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 9:26 AM. Reason : ]

10/22/2008 9:23:51 AM

The funny thing about Palin's view is that if elected she'd get to learn the hard way, the John Adams did when he was first elected Veep.

Of course, when Adams was Veep, the office was pretty new, and it was still being figured out. Although pretty much what he found was when he started trying to act like a "super-Senator" and speak to the agenda, other Senators told him to just sit down and shut up.

Hilarity.

10/22/2008 9:32:33 AM

Quote :

"They should spend most of their time articulating the policies that the President would like to see put in place."

If, for no other reason, this job description should be why she shouldn't have been nominated.

10/22/2008 9:44:52 AM

If it's Biden...the role is apparantly to warn the populace that the President's lack of experience wil attract terrorist attacks.

10/22/2008 10:15:53 AM

10/22/2008 10:28:03 AM

more relevant than anything to come out of olbermann's shit-spewing mouth

10/22/2008 10:39:03 AM

Hey treetwista, get out of this thread if you're not going to discuss the topic at hand. Palin's views on the VP's functions have been widely criticized. If you're just going to troll please get out of my thread.

10/22/2008 10:43:51 AM

Yeah, Olbermann hit the nail on the head, then treetwista started crying behind his computer and posted some irrelevant shit. Big surprise.

10/22/2008 10:57:47 AM

your obsession with olbermann is sickening, and explains why you're so biased and ignorant on so many political topics

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 11:05 AM. Reason : nm, theres no point in addressing terpball in TSB]

10/22/2008 11:04:13 AM

Can you point out where in that video he is wrong?

10/22/2008 11:05:16 AM

Can you point out where in that video he is wrong?

10/22/2008 11:06:22 AM

i just really hope for yalls sake that you dont take olbermann as a serious journalist

if you acknowledge that he is a partisan clown, then thats fine, but if you think he's anything more, then i sincerely feel sorry for you

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 11:17 AM. Reason : .]

10/22/2008 11:17:22 AM

Can you point out where in that video he is wrong?

10/22/2008 11:19:13 AM

well for starters, he says palin isn't as smart as a 3rd grader...thats laughably false...but i'm sure someone like you actually believes that bullshit since you've repeatedly acted like the video is all true and not some espn reject's anti-right wing hate rhetoric on the MSDNC network

v look who just read this post and realized olbermann is just giving a televised personal editorial

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason : .]

10/22/2008 11:21:23 AM

nvm

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason : Not worth it.]

10/22/2008 11:22:38 AM

Anyway, regardless of any politicians or news hacks views, what is the role of the VP? Aside from breaking ties in the Senate and being the pseudo-official 'super diplomat' and waiting for the President to die/get seriously ill, VP's don't seem to have a lot of official duties.

10/22/2008 11:48:00 AM

Quote :

"v look who just read this post and realized olbermann is just giving a televised personal editorial"

I don't not concur that you have made an accurate assessment, sir. I simply do not wish to quarrel with you at this time since you have made it seemingly obvious that you have no intention of answering the question. Theatrics on the part of Olbermann aside he gave not one but four verbatim answers by Palin herself where she clearly displayed a presumed, and seriously erred, knowledge regarding the post to which she seeks to obtain.

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 11:56 AM. Reason : .]

10/22/2008 11:56:42 AM

Well after Cheney's role over the last 8 years, who is to know what the VP's role is? Also VP's over the years have often had different roles as far as importance. For example, Cheney had a lot more power than Dan Quayle. Despite the blurb about VP in the Constitution, theres not really another concrete set of requirements for the VP. Vice President IS essentially doing what the President wants you to do. Obama would ask Biden to do different things than McCain would ask Palin to do. Not because of ability, but because of how a particular President wants to utilize his VP. Despite what Olbermann would like for everyone to believe, the modern role of VP is not some cut and dry set of responsibilities, hence why his commentary is so ludicrous and painful to subject yourself to, like most of his commentary

10/22/2008 12:06:35 PM

^ Here's the thing, though. As you say, the Constitution provides for a narrowly circumscribed role for the VP. This is what their "official" duties consist of.

Now, if the president makes use of them in some capacity, great. You're correct - different presidents have made use of their VPs to varying degrees, often based on their agenda and their counterpart's abilities.

But these are not the "officially" sanctioned duties of the VP - they're what the president asks of them. They're not really "new" powers or responsibilities. And regardless of Cheney's prevarications, the VP is still a member of the Executive branch.

To put it another way - the Chief of Staff isn't even in the Constitution. But it would be ludicrous to pretend they're not a member of the Executive Branch staff who performs functions at the President's leisure.

10/22/2008 12:12:53 PM

read this and tell me that palin is any more clueless as to the role of VP than biden is

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=89fa8a91-b671-4e56-8666-017b0722e93a

but i don't see olbermann spewing hate about biden

10/22/2008 12:14:09 PM

Biden is clueless, Palin is somewhat more clueless.

Biden's cluelessness is somewhat more benign that Palin's.

Neither of them is exactly passing a Civics exam anytime soon.

10/22/2008 12:19:27 PM

Palin sucks to put it plainly and will be remembered as one of the nails in the coffin of McCain's campaign. Nothing more to say about it.

Secondly, to be fair since Olbermann's name came up, I used to like him but honestly now he gets so fucking self righteous and crazed I can hardly take that show anymore. You know, he's on my team and all but even I get a bit tired of his rants. It's ok to have an editorial show, many do, but jesus christ chill out.

10/22/2008 12:27:22 PM

Quote :

"read this and tell me that palin is any more clueless as to the role of VP than biden is"

Plain displayed ignorance of the constitutional powers, and seems to subcribe to the Dick Cheney model.

Biden seems to have a better understanding of the what the VP really does, despite the hack writer's assertions.

So, I have read it and I will tell you that Palin is more clueless than Biden, and perhaps in a dangerous way.

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 12:33 PM. Reason : .]

10/22/2008 12:31:11 PM

Biden was right when he said Dick Cheney was one of the most dangerous VP's in America's history - He knows what the VP is supposed to do, and knows when a VP is abusing the powers the constitution gives the VP

10/22/2008 12:43:49 PM

10/22/2008 1:05:56 PM

Darth Cheney sucks

10/22/2008 2:40:59 PM

10/22/2008 2:42:16 PM

I don't understand why it is so hard to admit that people are biased.

I have in the past watched Olbermann's show, I even conversed with him via email after the 2004 election. Though sitting through his show is getting a bit rough these days. Rachel Maddow is one of the few non-Sunday shows that I catch on a regular basis. My other being Heroes which is ironic.

However, obviously Rachel is biased, though relatively polite which I deeply appreciate, and clearly Olbermann is a left wing hatchet man. I don't see the problem with admitting that. I still personally like the guy even if I don't always agree with his politics.

10/22/2008 2:56:29 PM

not everyone feels the same way

bill oreilly is the anti christ , and olberman/maddow is solid journalism


theres a problem with this

10/22/2008 2:59:55 PM

You can be a partisan hack and still have a point, which he did.

10/22/2008 3:08:23 PM

^^ Neither is solid journalism, they're both purposefully crafted editorials.

^Yeah, I'm sure I could find some passionate things O'reilly has said that I would agree with. They might be few and far between, but the man does occasionally make a good point. Of course, if you consistently disagree with editorials by a particular personality, why would you watch them right? The purpose of watching things like the Oreilly Factor or The Countdown is the gratifying feeling of being eloquently and/or passionately agreed with. It's a psychological reach-around regardless of which side they reach around to do it.

10/22/2008 5:34:26 PM

I am highly entertained by Bill O'Reilly You might not agree with his right-wing nature but he tends to be more realistic than many conservatives who are caught in idealistic partisan fervor.

10/22/2008 5:41:02 PM

Quote :

"As you say, the Constitution provides for a narrowly circumscribed role for the VP. This is what their "official" duties consist of."

actually, that's not what TT said at all. he said, in effect, that the Constitution barely mentions official VP duties. He then goes on to say that different Presidents have utilized their VPs differently. Now, you could take the strict legalese definition and say the VP can do only the things listed in the Constitution and no more, but I'd wager to say that you would need to apply similar restrictions on senators and congressmen as well.

Quote :

"Biden was right when he said Dick Cheney was one of the most dangerous VP's in America's history - He knows what the VP is supposed to do, and knows when a VP is abusing the powers the constitution gives the VP"

Could it possibly be that Biden just didn't like Cheney, and so Biden will purposefully paint Dick as a bad guy to push his point about Palin? Or, might it be that Biden and Cheney have a difference of opinion about the office of the VP, due mainly to inherently different vantage points? Could it even be a combination of the two?

10/22/2008 5:44:40 PM

nope, I think it is that cheney has been a dangerous vp, on top of any personal feelings anyone may have against him.

10/22/2008 5:47:27 PM

haha. nice rebuttal. "nope, none of your splendid points are true, and I won't say why"

10/22/2008 5:58:34 PM

Quote :

"actually, that's not what TT said at all. he said, in effect, that the Constitution barely mentions official VP duties. He then goes on to say that different Presidents have utilized their VPs differently. Now, you could take the strict legalese definition and say the VP can do only the things listed in the Constitution and no more, but I'd wager to say that you would need to apply similar restrictions on senators and congressmen as well."

Uh, if you checked the very next sentence, I also agreed with TT. In fact, my point was expanding upon his - the VP has very few Constitutionally appointed duties - they are otherwise a warm body.

However, many agents of the President are not listed in the Constitution. Chief among those is, for example, the Chief of Staff. Just as the president assigns tasks or consults with their respective CoS, one can expect the same from the VP.

But it would be likewise ludicrous to pretend either is not a functional member of the Executive Branch, even if one of them hangs out in the Senate during their day job to cast tie-breaking votes. Legislative immunity privileges do not apply to the VP, namely because as VP, they aren't engaged in any legislative speech and debate.

10/22/2008 7:35:49 PM

Maverick & Palin
08

[Edited on October 22, 2008 at 7:38 PM. Reason : L]

10/22/2008 7:38:22 PM

^^ I'm not entirely sure, then, why you would need to throw in the part about the Executive branch, then, as TT said very little about that. Yes, Cheney has been known to pull some bull shit on that, but it really wasn't being discussed here, that I could tell... Or was it?

10/22/2008 8:32:45 PM

Quote :

"^^ I'm not entirely sure, then, why you would need to throw in the part about the Executive branch, then, as TT said very little about that. Yes, Cheney has been known to pull some bull shit on that, but it really wasn't being discussed here, that I could tell... Or was it?"

I'm throwing it out there because it pertains to the larger issue of the role of the VP being discussed in this thread. Cheney has specifically made his office into the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle of Government - "Well, I'm in a state of being in the Legislative and Executive Branches - simultaneously!"

Palin has specifically endorsed Cheney's view of the role of the VP. Ergo, it is perfectly germane to emphasize both the narrowly defined role of the VP (as opposed to being "flexible") - i.e., limited official powers, and what powers do exist (i.e., operating at the President's discretion) still confine them to the Executive branch.

Cheney is wrong in his interpretation of the role of the VP (in terms of what branch they belong to), and he's done so to abuse the legal immunities therein. Palin endorses that erroneous view, and is therefore open to criticism.

10/22/2008 8:37:49 PM

If she tried to "get in there with the senators and help them come up with good policies and stuff", they would laugh her right out.

10/22/2008 9:06:15 PM

^^ aight then, fair enough

10/23/2008 6:52:35 AM

My thoughts? I'm concerned that this doofus is going to be allowed anywhere near the VP position.

10/23/2008 7:01:16 AM

Quote :

"My thoughts? I'm concerned that this doofus is going to be allowed anywhere near the VP position."

Look on the bright side (since that's what's keeping some of us, like me, from going totally insane right now) - Joe Biden as VP would mean that he'd actually have to shut up. At least during his day job.

10/23/2008 11:39:00 AM

^^Nobody cares what you think.

10/23/2008 11:49:38 AM

Quote :

"actually, that's not what TT said at all. he said, in effect, that the Constitution barely mentions official VP duties. He then goes on to say that different Presidents have utilized their VPs differently. Now, you could take the strict legalese definition and say the VP can do only the things listed in the Constitution and no more, but I'd wager to say that you would need to apply similar restrictions on senators and congressmen as well."

Strict constructionism until the women who spews retards from both sets of lips speaks.

10/23/2008 12:24:22 PM