Sarah Palin to resign as Alaska governor

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

ETA: I don't find Palin's college career "creepy," and I don't think I would even if she were a liberal from a comparable era. I'm not trying to make a lot of your word choice, Munchkin, but I think it's kind of interesting that it seems worth talking about to some pundits.

Well, it's worth talking about to me. I suspect that, for reasons not related to political leaning, we would STILL be hearing about it if Obama had done the exact same thing. I know that my credibility in my field would be shot to hell if I played college hopscotch like she did.

4 colleges in 5 years is a lot, especially when you consider that she didn't change disciplines during her college career. It wasn't as if she started out as a chemical engineering major and changed to journalism and decided to transfer to a school where she could actually do more in that field. It doesn't even seem to be financially-related. I will concede that she may have been homesick in Hawaii, but what it indicates to me is that she lacked either the sense of commitment at that time in her life or the intellectual rigor to complete a college education in one place.

ETA: I would be just as hard on a liberal for changing colleges like one would change a pair of socks.

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

Well, it's worth talking about to me. I suspect that, for reasons not related to political leaning, we would STILL be hearing about it if Obama had done the exact same thing. I know that my credibility in my field would be shot to hell if I played college hopscotch like she did.

4 colleges in 5 years is a lot, especially when you consider that she didn't change disciplines during her college career. It wasn't as if she started out as a chemical engineering major and changed to journalism and decided to transfer to a school where she could actually do more in that field. It doesn't even seem to be financially-related. I will concede that she may have been homesick in Hawaii, but what it indicates to me is that she lacked either the sense of commitment at that time in her life or the intellectual rigor to complete a college education in one place.

ETA: I would be just as hard on a liberal for changing colleges like one would change a pair of socks.

agreed on all accounts.

I know people transfer schools at least once during their 4-5 years, but 4 colleges in 5 years?!!

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

Well, it's worth talking about to me. I suspect that, for reasons not related to political leaning, we would STILL be hearing about it if Obama had done the exact same thing. I know that my credibility in my field would be shot to hell if I played college hopscotch like she did.

4 colleges in 5 years is a lot, especially when you consider that she didn't change disciplines during her college career. It wasn't as if she started out as a chemical engineering major and changed to journalism and decided to transfer to a school where she could actually do more in that field. It doesn't even seem to be financially-related. I will concede that she may have been homesick in Hawaii, but what it indicates to me is that she lacked either the sense of commitment at that time in her life or the intellectual rigor to complete a college education in one place.

ETA: I would be just as hard on a liberal for changing colleges like one would change a pair of socks.

I think it's one of those eye of the beholder things. If you think she's an anti-intellectual flake, it appears to be evidence to support that. If you don't particularly care about politicians' academic credentials, and you found her basically normal, this seems basically normal.

I think four colleges in five year is a lot too, but if you look at the kind of schools they were, I don't think it matters a lot.

You and Obama went to serious schools that are hard to get into and have a lot of prestige. There's a reason to stick it out even if you aren't super happy. If you're going to geographical state U and you aren't really feeling it, why stay?

Maybe I know an unusual number of college hoppers in terms of former students. It, in my experience, represents a lack of academic purpose almost always but not a character flaw. Some of us go through college because we're kind of interested in stuff and we want a job that requires a college degree, but at the age of 18-23, it's not quite laid out in front of us like stepping stones. I think that's okay.

(I only went to two colleges as an undergraduate. But I might have gone to others had I not liked the second one.)

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I think it's one of those eye of the beholder things. If you think she's an anti-intellectual flake, it appears to be evidence to support that. If you don't particularly care about politicians' academic credentials, and you found her basically normal, this seems basically normal.

I think four colleges in five year is a lot too, but if you look at the kind of schools they were, I don't think it matters a lot.

You and Obama went to serious schools that are hard to get into and have a lot of prestige. There's a reason to stick it out even if you aren't super happy. If you're going to geographical state U and you aren't really feeling it, why stay?

Maybe I know an unusual number of college hoppers in terms of former students. It, in my experience, represents a lack of academic purpose almost always but not a character flaw. Some of us go through college because we're kind of interested in stuff and we want a job that requires a college degree, but at the age of 18-23, it's not quite laid out in front of us like stepping stones. I think that's okay.

(I only went to two colleges as an undergraduate. But I might have gone to others had I not liked the second one.)

If you're talking about someone applying for a job at a regular company, it's a red flag, but maybe not a fatal flaw.

If you're talking about someone running to be one of the 1-2 most powerful people in the country, then I think it's a much bigger problem. Plus, I think there's a huge difference between transferring from your original school and transferring a number of times, no matter the schools involved.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

If you're talking about someone applying for a job at a regular company, it's a red flag, but maybe not a fatal flaw.

If you're talking about someone running to be one of the 1-2 most powerful people in the country, then I think it's a much bigger problem. Plus, I think there's a huge difference between transferring from your original school and transferring a number of times, no matter the schools involved.

I agree it's a red flag at your initial interview. I don't think it's still a red flag when you've been gainfully employed (such as it is in politics) for a decade or whatever.

In non-political life, I'd be amazed if an employer looked back at the college record of a 44 year old applicant who had been successfully working in the field. So, if you didn't continue to switch jobs like you had switched colleges, I don't think it would really matter.

But I work in a really low pressure field. If you hold the credential needed and graduated from state U, you're good to go.

(But I do wonder if some of this is age based. I think I'm a decade older at least that you and Munchkin, so I don't regard someone's college experience as being as character defining. I believe that Munckin has a pretty awesome job after rigorous college preparation and I know that you are in law school, so I'm not belittling you guys with "in the real world" kind of junk. I just mean that perhaps the more you watch people professionally sink or swim, you realize that outside of a pretty limited number of elite colleges, what someone did in college doesn't mean that much compared with what they do after.)

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I agree it's a red flag at your initial interview. I don't think it's still a red flag when you've been gainfully employed (such as it is in politics) for a decade or whatever.

In non-political life, I'd be amazed if an employer looked back at the college record of a 44 year old applicant who had been successfully working in the field. So, if you didn't continue to switch jobs like you had switched colleges, I don't think it would really matter.

But I work in a really low pressure field. If you hold the credential needed and graduated from state U, you're good to go.

(But I do wonder if some of this is age based. I think I'm a decade older at least that you and Munchkin, so I don't regard someone's college experience as being as character defining. I believe that Munckin has a pretty awesome job after rigorous college preparation and I know that you are in law school, so I'm not belittling you guys with "in the real world" kind of junk. I just mean that perhaps the more you watch people professionally sink or swim, you realize that outside of a pretty limited number of elite colleges, what someone did in college doesn't mean that much compared with what they do after.)

I don't know if it's necessarily age-based; I can't speak for Munchkin (although I believe she's been in the working world for a few years, between full-time and summer work during grad school), but I've been working full-time since 2001 (I worked full-time during college as a preschool teacher, after college in public relations, and I've worked during law school as a law clerk). I'll agree that in many fields there's a point where your professional credentials will have (at least) as much importance as your academic credentials.

As far as the importance of it - I think that going to what works out to be one college per year for four years shows the same types of red flags that it does for someone who changes jobs every couple of months. I think that, barring any significant experience since that point, it's a detriment.

Now, it's true that Palin has served as a mayor and governor since that period. However, she's also running against other people who have served as governors, senators, leaders of industry, etc. That type of experience becomes the baseline, and all other things being equal, switching between several colleges works against her.

It may be acceptable for other professions where you're talking about experienced professionals, but it becomes a bigger issue in this specific context.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I don't know if it's necessarily age-based; I can't speak for Munchkin (although I believe she's been in the working world for a few years, between full-time and summer work during grad school), but I've been working full-time since 2001 (I worked full-time during college as a preschool teacher, after college in public relations, and I've worked during law school as a law clerk). I'll agree that in many fields there's a point where your professional credentials will have (at least) as much importance as your academic credentials.

As far as the importance of it - I think that going to what works out to be one college per year for four years shows the same types of red flags that it does for someone who changes jobs every couple of months. I think that, barring any significant experience since that point, it's a detriment.

Now, it's true that Palin has served as a mayor and governor since that period. However, she's also running against other people who have served as governors, senators, leaders of industry, etc. That type of experience becomes the baseline, and all other things being equal, switching between several colleges works against her.

It may be acceptable for other professions where you're talking about experienced professionals, but it becomes a bigger issue in this specific context.

I think, based on your postings about politics, that you like a certain amount of wonkiness in your politicians. I would be surprised if someone with Palin's education background could deliver what you're looking for.

But I don't know if that's what's really important (although it drives me crazy that so many conservatives look dumb) so I'm likely to use a different standard.

I don't think though it can be said that in other fields that people would go back to your undergraduate transfer record to make a decision about your qualification about employment once you've out of school for 20 years.

People didn't really worry about Biden's academic background at all, and he had a scant five years of experience between law school and the US Senate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

(It seems strange to me that being elected by the people of Delaware would be regarded as a qualification in its own right when you think about it. Because they are repeatedly willing to send him back, the rest of us should regard him as qualified and doing a good job?)

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I think, based on your postings about politics, that you like a certain amount of wonkiness in your politicians. I would be surprised if someone with Palin's education background could deliver what you're looking for.

It's part of the whole package for me, a factor, though not the only factor. This past election is actually a perfect example of that - Pres. Obama had the more impressive academic record, but there was no chance I would have voted for him. The rest of the package (platform, etc.) outweighed his academic credentials in my mind, so I voted for McCain instead.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

You actually have the top part exactly backwards. She vetoed a bill that prohibited giving benefits. She had been advised that the ban was unconstitutional so she vetoed it. It's there in the link you gave if you read it. To me that demonstrates a desire to govern well, rather than with religious bias.

Unless you can find stuff from here Wasilla days, it seems kind of strange to suggest it was important. Even if you can't or don't want to invest the time, list the accusations and I'll look them up. Some people were worried about her banning books, but she never did. She merely asked what the procedure was but never attempted to do it. Personally, that strikes me as okay. If you or your constituents are upset about certain books, having the librarian outline the methods to challenge a book seems fine, especially if you never use it.

As far as religious proclamations, that kind of strikes me as not really being a big deal. I doubt any governor is going to make one unless someone has asked him or her to do so. If we had evidence that she was requested to and then she didn't, there'd be something to talk about, but to say, well she made these meaningless proclamations for these faiths but not these others that she was never requested to make? Not a big deal to me.

I forgot this link, http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=34&type=1 where she speaks out as being against the benefits. This was the one I meant to post. The bill she vetoed supports her position on the constitutional amendment of 1998 (mentioned in the link above). She vetoed bill 4001 because she was told by the Department of Law it was unconstitutional, even though she doesn't believe the benefits should exist, due to the 1998 amendment. Without the link I just provided, the second one didn't make as much sense, and I apologize for that. Either way it is an Alaskan Supreme Court issue, not hers.

I don't understand why one has to be asked to do a Proclamation for a particular group. I'd like to see a politician be inclusive and not have to be asked to acknowledge other groups, faiths, or cultures. Why not take the initiative and just do it? There were Proclamations done yearly for various themes and topics, it isn't good PR to not be inclusive (or what would I have to comment on now).

Unfortunately the Wasilla City Code is "current" and I can't find anything from the past online, and I am sure I'd have to research it at Wasilla City Hall, and well, that isn't going to happen. There are mentions in various newspapers but the government documents are either not online or I'm not searching right. If you read through the information on the Governor site there's a lot of her folksy manner of speaking (and writing) and though it may not bother you, all the God Bless stuff is something I don't want in my politics, even with the best of intentions. And so you don't think I'm picking on her, it really bothers me the Idaho Legislature opens with a prayer.

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I think it's one of those eye of the beholder things. If you think she's an anti-intellectual flake, it appears to be evidence to support that. If you don't particularly care about politicians' academic credentials, and you found her basically normal, this seems basically normal.

I think four colleges in five year is a lot too, but if you look at the kind of schools they were, I don't think it matters a lot.

You and Obama went to serious schools that are hard to get into and have a lot of prestige. There's a reason to stick it out even if you aren't super happy. If you're going to geographical state U and you aren't really feeling it, why stay?

Maybe I know an unusual number of college hoppers in terms of former students. It, in my experience, represents a lack of academic purpose almost always but not a character flaw. Some of us go through college because we're kind of interested in stuff and we want a job that requires a college degree, but at the age of 18-23, it's not quite laid out in front of us like stepping stones. I think that's okay.

(I only went to two colleges as an undergraduate. But I might have gone to others had I not liked the second one.)

I am obviously biased since I hold two degrees from the same University that granted her degree, but I changed schools and that doesn't make me a flake. It makes me someone who made a choice due to family circumstances, and I try to be understanding of circumstances. "The kind of schools they were" is just rude to say, though I don't think you really meant it that way. You attended the University in your state (my current state) as did I and many other people. Maybe she decided to go to school at North Idaho College and the University of Idaho because of money, as she had relatives here and residency, or she went to Matanuska Susitna College for the same reason, or had a sick family member. I mean she graduated, what's the big deal if she went to more than one school?

When I think of amazing Alaskan women, Sarah Palin just doesn't compare to the legacies of Grace Berg Schaible, Elizabeth Peratovich, Flora Harper, Fran Ulmer, Beverly Masek, and all the women who helped build, and still build the state. She stepped down, and that's always going to be a mark against her in my book.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

I forgot this link, http://gov.state.ak.us/archive.php?id=34&type=1 where she speaks out as being against the benefits. This was the one I meant to post. The bill she vetoed supports her position on the constitutional amendment of 1998 (mentioned in the link above). She vetoed bill 4001 because she was told by the Department of Law it was unconstitutional, even though she doesn't believe the benefits should exist, due to the 1998 amendment. Without the link I just provided, the second one didn't make as much sense, and I apologize for that. Either way it is an Alaskan Supreme Court issue, not hers.

I don't understand why one has to be asked to do a Proclamation for a particular group. I'd like to see a politician be inclusive and not have to be asked to acknowledge other groups, faiths, or cultures. Why not take the initiative and just do it? There were Proclamations done yearly for various themes and topics, it isn't good PR to not be inclusive (or what would I have to comment on now).

Unfortunately the Wasilla City Code is "current" and I can't find anything from the past online, and I am sure I'd have to research it at Wasilla City Hall, and well, that isn't going to happen. There are mentions in various newspapers but the government documents are either not online or I'm not searching right. If you read through the information on the Governor site there's a lot of her folksy manner of speaking (and writing) and though it may not bother you, all the God Bless stuff is something I don't want in my politics, even with the best of intentions. And so you don't think I'm picking on her, it really bothers me the Idaho Legislature opens with a prayer.



I am obviously biased since I hold two degrees from the same University that granted her degree, but I changed schools and that doesn't make me a flake. It makes me someone who made a choice due to family circumstances, and I try to be understanding of circumstances. "The kind of schools they were" is just rude to say, though I don't think you really meant it that way. You attended the University in your state (my current state) as did I and many other people. Maybe she decided to go to school at North Idaho College and the University of Idaho because of money, as she had relatives here and residency, or she went to Matanuska Susitna College for the same reason, or had a sick family member. I mean she graduated, what's the big deal if she went to more than one school?

When I think of amazing Alaskan women, Sarah Palin just doesn't compare to the legacies of Grace Berg Schaible, Elizabeth Peratovich, Flora Harper, Fran Ulmer, Beverly Masek, and all the women who helped build, and still build the state. She stepped down, and that's always going to be a mark against her in my book.

Okay, in the first same-sex benefits issue, she personally opposed the benefits but she vetoed a law that prohibited them because she had been advised it was unconstitutional, before the court ruled on it and after it passed the legislature. The case shows that she supports the rule of law over her personal religious beliefs, right? Why isn't that regarded as significant?

With the Wasilla stuff, I was just asking you to name the issues that bothered you, and I'd do the research. What I've found is that sometimes people have impressions of how she governed that aren't accurate in fact.

It's fine if you'd like less religious speech in public life, and you can dislike her for hers. But in my opinion, saying "God bless you" doesn't bring about theocracy. Opening prayers are neither here nor there for me as long as they are open to every religion to give it a whirl. Personally, I'd find it more sincere for them to all pray privately, but it doesn't wind me up as a public symbol as much as other forms of empty rhetoric, but to each her own.

In the second instance, I completely agree that I went to a school of the same quality that Sarah Palin graduated from. I'm satisfied with it for her and for me. I was wondering if her school pattern of attendance mattered more from the perspective of people who had elite educations, and I think I may have downplayed the level of her institutions too much. I apologize if it seems that I was slighting your school.

I didn't mean to hold her out as a model of Alaskan womanhood earlier if it seemed like I did. I just found it unlikely that you were going to find a lot of personally meddling legislation in the background of any successful Alaskan politician.