Liz Cheney Splits With Father on Palin Remarks: ‘More Qualified Than Obama and Biden Combined’

The Blaze ^ | July 29, 2012 | Erica Ritz

[Free ThinkerNY]

Former Vice President Dick Cheney told ABC‘s Jonathan Karl Sunday that Senator John McCain’s decision to pick Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008 was a “mistake,” and one that Mitt Romney can’t repeat.

“I like Governor Palin. I’ve met her. I know her. She – attractive candidate. But based on her background, she’d only been governor for, what, two years. I don’t think she passed that test…of being ready to take over. And I think that was a mistake,” Cheney explained.

But now, Liz Cheney– who many respect as a conservative mind independent of her father’s former position– has amicably announced that she disagrees with her father’s position.

“Rarely do I disagree with best VP ever but @SarahPalinUSA more qualified than Obama and Biden combined. Huge respect 4 all she’s done 4 GOP,” Liz Cheney wrote.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Dick can't tell a quail from lawyer. I'm sure Sarah could show Dick a few things about handling a firearm. Dick thinks little of Sarah because he subscribes to the world political elitism of which Sarah is not a member. For all the Dick boot lickers, you are blinded by a smooth talker and you can't see that.

[DesertRhino]

The silly idea that a president should be part scientist, or this deep genius (such as what they claim Obama is) is predicated on the horrifyingly bad idea that we should be a centrally planned society. A society that is centrally planned of course needs such a person.

In an American society, the people who decide the course of their lives should be the educated ones. Thats us. A president only need be deeply honest, moral in his dealings, and dedicated to following a simple set of instructions. (the constitution)

[freekitty]

She gave up being gov because it might hurt Alaska and its people.

[freekitty]

She gave up being gov because it might hurt Alaska and its people.

[DoughtyOne]

If you do not think much of Palin, that’s your choice.  I wouldn't so much call it a choice as a reaction, but it's not worth quibbling over.

But for Cheney to come out and say it was a mistake (because she lacked experience) was wrong.  I don't think she's ready to be president now.  That's my take on it if I'm being honest.  I don't think it was a mistake for McCain, because I don't think McCain thinks of anyone but himself, and picking someone that would be seen as a Conservative, when he certainly wasn't, was a good move for him.  Should he have picked her on qualifications?  I don't think so.  I'm not trying to be mean about it, but I don't consider being a realtively small town mayor and being governor for two years to be enough background for the job.

Cheney, Bush and Rove had all the “experience” one could have.  True, and despite his gravitas, I'm not convinced Cheney would have been the right guy either.  I know damn well Bush, Rove, and Card weren't.  Saying Bush, Rove, and Card are not the right people, doesn't indicate Sarah would be the right person.  It merely means Bush, Rove, and Card weren't.

And Bush’s administration finished with one of the lowest approval ratings in American History.  I agree.  His hand-off to Obama was terrible.  I detest Obama still blaming everything on Bush at this point, but Bush handed off a terrible situation to the next team.  You'll not get an argument from me out of that.

And because of that we got OBAMA.  Absolutely!  IMO, no doubt about it.

How did all that “experience” work out?  It didn't work out well at all.  And frankly, it's part of the reason why I want more experience and visibility for our next Republican nominee and president.  I want better vetting.  I'm not here holding water for Jeb, believe me.

Ted Cruz does not have the “experience” that Dewpiss has.  Okay, but Ted Cruz is not running for the presidency.

How is that lack of “experience” working out so far?  I don't know a lot about Ted Cruz.  He's barely on my radar.  If you're holding him up for purposes of discussion, I'd imagine he's doing good.  If we're talking Congressman or Senator, we're talking about folks that are one of many.  There isn't the rigid demand for qualifications, there is for the presidency.

[nickcarraway]

Reagan picked Bush, which most have caused you to lose any respect for him. (Not to mention some terrible Senators he endorsed)

[mark1973]

Hey Liz,too late. I ain’t buying you and your father’s little,’Good cop/Bad cop’ routine. Your father meant to insult Sarah and when you GOPe types ran it up the flag pole and it didn’t work,they trot you out,to do damage control. It didn’t work.

[DoughtyOne]

The silly idea that a president should be part scientist, or this deep genius (such as what they claim Obama is) is predicated on the horrifyingly bad idea that we should be a centrally planned society. A society that is centrally planned of course needs such a person.

When I took the test above, it wasn't with the idea that our president needs to finish with a high score on such a test.  The topics covered in this test were highly scientific, and didn't really involve anything that a president would have to know, or that your every day individual would need to know to function at top performance.  I didn't touch on that because I thought this was pretty much a given, and I didn't want to put down the idea it would be interesting to take the test and see how well we would do.  It was fun, even if I did miserably on it.

In an American society, the people who decide the course of their lives should be the educated ones. Thats us. A president only need be deeply honest, moral in his dealings, and dedicated to following a simple set of instructions. (the constitution)

I understand where you are coming from, but I'm not sure you're 100% spot on here.

I doubt you want your Conservative president operating by the latest Republican public opinion poll.  He needs to be a Conservative in his core.  He needs to be up to speed so he can instinctively know how to react to Leftists, and Leftist efforts.  He needs to be up to speed on international matters, and be able to react in minutes if a military threat is detected.  He needs to be able to develop and manage a team effectively.  He needs to be tried and tested.  We need to know that if the S hits the fan, he has at least had some moderate to heavy pressure brought to bare before being president.  How did he react to it?  I think that's important.

John McCain wasn't this man.  George Bush wasn't this man.  Bob Dole wasn't this man.

McCain was a Kennedy, Kerry, Feingold, Soros, glad-hander.  He wasn't even close to being qualified to be president.

You see, he should have known better than to chum it up with the likes of these people.  And some of our brightest stars should have known better than to get too deep with him.

When someone cozies it up with him, they're telling me they don't quite grasp Conservatism in their core.  When they advocate for registering illegals so they can stay here and work, it tells me they don't get the brand of Conservatism that most of us have at our core.  Look, it's no my fault they don't, but that's not my problem.  I observe.  I come to conclusions.

[4rcane]

Reagan picked Bush for party unity purposes. Its understood back then that Reagan and Bush don’t share the same view. Bush once attacked Reagan for voodoo economics for believing in tax cuts. Cutting taxes leads to more revenue? Bush didn’t believe it was possible

[DoughtyOne]

Yes he did pick Bush. And on paper Bush was the most qualified individual to become president in our nation’s history.

Was he a good president, a true Conservative? No. He took the Reagan legacy and turned it over to the likes of Bill Clinton. Then Clinton promptly took the Constitution to the Oval Office and took a dump on it.

As his son did, they both handed off to men that polarized the nation to the breaking point, and have been extremely destructive to the cohesive nature of our nation.

I am still taken aback when folks try to make mileage off Reagan, by pointing to things he did so they can feel better about people who aren’t Reagan’s equal at all.

[The Wizard]

Thank you Liz....smarter than Dad on this one

[Christie at the beach]

Her dad is becoming strange.
What side is he on? Unreal.
Some of them will do anything to damage Palin.
I would vote for Palin in a heartbeat.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

When they advocate for registering illegals so they can stay here and work, it tells me they don't get the brand of Conservatism that most of us have at our core. Look, it's no my fault they don't, but that's not my problem. I observe. I come to conclusions.

Look, the trouble is that we’re not going to elect YOU to be president. So we all have to settle for someone who is “good enough.” If we make “better” the enemy of good enough, we end up with a Romney candidacy or a McCain candidacy. And a Clinton or Obama presidency. That’s the thing about these elections; in the end Democrats aren’t ever going to compete for your vote, or mine. We really need a candidate who can win, and who won’t act as if the economy were his own personal infinite source of revenue.

That was my rationale back in January, 2011 when I adopted “DRAFT PALIN” as my tagline. And history has certainly vindicated that decision in my mind. There were all sorts of people in the Republican field, but nobody who was really good in all dimensions. Palin would have been better than any of the others, and I admit she has some things I wouldn’t specify in the ideal candidate. But she struck me as good enough, in that field, and IMHO electable if ANY Republican is electable. Always assuming that she could raise the $$$$. I for one would have contributed much more than I ever did for any prior candidate.

But, not even FReepers could agree, as your postings here amply illustrate. But precisely WHO was your candidate??? They all crashed and burned - and Palin never even entered the lists. The results were precisely what the George Stephanopolises of the world wanted - plenty of internal damage to the Republican Party, and a nominee who is not a conservative leader. In retrospect - and even in prospect, I might add, conservative leaders shouldn’t participate in “debates” which are actually press interrogations designed to embarrass them. We should have drafted Palin into the primaries, and she should have run a campaign which did not include “debates” intended to embarrass her. And just let the chips fall where they may. I honestly don’t see how we could have done worse than we did.

As regards the need for a president with a scientific background, maybe we should nominate Michael Mann. </sarcasm>

[beaversmom]

Even if Dick Cheney truly believes that about Palin, and I have no doubt he does, why say it to the press? Why bash the woman one more time? She’s been beat up by the libs enough to more than cover it for a 1000 years. We don’t need this crap from the right. Reminds me when Babs Bush had to throw in her snarky two cents. Give it a rest people! Whose frickin’ side are you on? I’m not even a so called Palinbot, but she was very well qualified. The woman is extremely smart and a quick study. She would have been a fabulous VP and would have probably outshone McCain. It wasn’t meant to be though. She was running with a dud. Thanks to Liz Cheney for sticking up for Palin. She’s smarter than her dad on this.

[samtheman]

Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president than Romney. Romney is just an empty suit. He has no core convictions at all and the only reason he is where he is is because he had more money than Gingrich and Santorum and everyone else in the field. Sarah Palin knows who she is and she is exactly the kind of person I want to LEAD (as opposed to rule) this nation. Piss on Cheney and everyone on this forum who thinks less of her.

I agree.

[Mach9]

Not only was she governor, she got more done in her two+ plus years than most get done in two terms! And her approval was nearly 90%. I think the combination qualifies as enviable leadership experience—and why does everyone seem to forget her experience as an energy regulator and mayor? And don’t give me—oh, it’s only Alaska. No, she wasn’t mayor of New York, but Tom Daschle was Majority Leader in the Senate with nearly as few constituents!

[Timber Rattler]

This poster (in question) knows exactly what happened up in Alaska after the 2008 election since he has been told over and over again. He was (and remains) one of a few FR PDS’ers who spent their days running her down on this board before she made her decision not to run. Facts do not matter to him.

[Timber Rattler]

There was a time when I actually had high hopes for Sarah.

Well, that's a lie.

You were one of Rabscuttle's cronies who attacked Palin nonstop for the better part of three years. To refresh your memory, go back and review your Palin posting history from 2009 through 2011.

[scooby321]

Lets look at the last few Democratic VP chooses

Plugs Biden

John Edwards

Now Independent Joe Lieberman.

[wny]

I disagree with Dick C. on this....had McLoser selected some moderate-RINO-wuss, he would have suffered a Mondale-like beating. McLoser received 50something million votes...10 million of those voters wouldn’t have crossed the street to shake his hand. I had no intention of voting for him until he picked Palin.